Category: Politics

  • Vaccine Choice Attorney Alan Phillips Jailed

    Alan Phillips, J.D. is a nationally recognized expert and presenter on vaccine policy and law, and is the nation’s only attorney whose practice is focused solely on vaccine exemptions and legislative activism. He works with clients, attorneys, legislators, and activists throughout the U.S. concerning vaccines required at birth; for daycare, grade school, and college enrollment; as a condition of employment; for military members and families; for immigrants; for children of parents in child custody disputes; for international travel; and various subsets of these categories.

    Attorney Phillips is a friend of Health Freedom Idaho and participated in our video interview regarding
    Healthcare Employee Right to Vaccine Exemptions

    Overview of Alan’s Case

    North Carolina Attorney Alan Phillips Jailed for Maintaining Attorney-Client Privilege

    Attorney Alan Phillips was sent to jail on Monday, April 29, 2019 for contempt of court for refusing to provide the North Carolina State Bar confidential client files. With no evidence of wrongdoing, and completely ignoring the sanctity of attorney-client privilege, the Bar secured a court order for his client records. Who knows what the motivations of the NC State Bar might be, but one thing is clear, this fishing expedition is unethical and requires an independent review of the NC State Bar. 

    After Attorney Phillips refused to reveal his privileged client records, the judge found Attorney Phillips in contempt of court and sent him to jail, telling him he’d remain there for 48hrs. Attorney Phillips was told that, once released, he’d have ten days to comply with the court order, or he’d face additional jail time.

    Here’s how you can help – Act Now!

    1. CONTACT NC MEDIA: Contact as many reporters as you can, asking them to look into this case, here’s some talking points.
    2. CONTACT NC LEGISLATORS: Contact as many reporters as you can, asking them to look into this case, here’s some talking points.
    3. DONATE to Attorney Phillips’ legal defense.

    Detailed Background of Alan’s Case

    For a more detailed background of how this has all transpired, please see the below resources:

    Here’s how you can help – Act Now! 1) Help Contact the NC Media

    Please take just a few minutes to a) download our television media contact spreadsheet, b) email as many reporters as you can, asking them to look into this issue (here’s talking points), and c) please copy OAMF on your email(s), our email is: complaint@ohioamf.org.

    2) Contact the NC Political Officials

    Contact the NC State Governor’s Office, the NC State Attorney General’s Office, and as many NC State Representatives and Senators as you possible can (here’s talking points). Please copy OAMF on your email(s), our email is: complaint@ohioamf.org.

    3) Donate to Alan’s Legal Defense Fund

    Alan’s Legal Defense GoFundMe campaign was removed by GoFundMe. However, donations can be made using PayPal. All donations are made directly to Alan’s PayPal account and will be used for his legal defense (court fees, transportation to and front court is several hours each trip, court records requests aren’t free, etc). You can donate directly to Alan by visiting PayPal at: https://barwatchonline.org/donations/

    Talking Points for Media and Legislators

    • Attorney Alan Phillips is currently in jail for protecting his client’s privacy during a NC State Bar fishing expedition.
    • With no evidence of any wrongdoing, the NC State Bar is demanding that Attorney Alan Phillips reveal years of client records.
    • NC State Bar has ignored at least three complaints that Attorney Alan Phillips has submitted against Bar attorneys for their conduct and a number of other complaints that organizations nationwide have submitted regarding the same.
    • Attorney Alan Phillips is not the only attorney who has recently faced disbarment by the NC State Bar under unethical circumstances.
    • If they’d like further information, ask them if you can email them additional background information on this case, If so, here’s the latest press release from Attorney Alan Phillips.
    Reposted from OhioAMF
    UPDATES available here: 
  • Trump says People Should Get Vaccinated Citizens Respond with Nationwide Call To Action

    President Donald Trump on Friday urged people to get vaccinated for measles, saying it’s “so important” amid the worst year for the disease in the U.S. since it was declared eliminated from the country in 2000. Ironically in 2000 there were 86 cases of measles.

    So far in 2019, 695 cases of measles have been reported in 22 states. The outbreak has caused cities to declare public health emergencies, ban unvaccinated students from schools and implement fines for facilities that do not comply with vaccination rules.

    A measles quarantine was ordered Thursday at two universities in California. More than 200 students and staff may have been exposed. Those who have been quarantined have not been vaccinated or cannot verify that they are immune. California has strict vaccine mandates which should make the vaccination rates in the state the highest they have ever been. 

    “They have to get the shots. The vaccinations are so important. This is really going around now. They have to get their shots,” – President Trump

    This statement came days after his comments about campaign contributions from the Pharma industry at an event on drug addiction in Atlanta.

    “We are holding big Pharma accountable. I don’t want their money.They have to do what is right.” – President Trump

    Encouraging people to get vaccinated marks a reversal for Trump. Below is a screen shot of @realDonaldTrump twitter account.

    I’ve seen people asking why President Trump would say everyone should get their shots when that’s not in keeping with what he has said about vaccines in the past. I think we are missing the more important question. The question that we should be asking is ‘what are we going to do about it?’ – Miste Karlfeldt Executive Director Health Freedom Idaho

    ❗❗CALL TO ACTION❗❗

    Light up the phones at the White House to #POTUS, tweet @realDonaldTrump and email every peer-reviewed article on the MMR, the articles of the Constitution and your dissent to his present stance!

    WE THE PEOPLE DO NOT CONSENT! Make vaccine manufacturers liable again before making a blanket statement to the American people about getting vaccinated! 

    Citizens it’s time to #RiseUp Its time to take action!

    Call the President
    PHONE NUMBERS
    Comments: 202-456-1111
    Switchboard: 202-456-1414
    Email: whitehouse.gov/contact

    Learn Measles FACTS to share with our President.

    Health Freedom Idaho’s Collection of Measles Information
    Green Med Info on Media Marketing and Propaganda

    Learn more about Measles from Ashley Everly’s Measles Presentation Fact vs Fear


    here are her slides: https://bit.ly/2JCBbdL

  • URGENT STOP H122 Preserve Access to CBD and Hemp Products

    When HB122 was heard and passed by the house, then it was amended (gutted) in the Senate committee. Voted upon April 1st as amended. The amended bill is a STEP BACKWARDS in liberty. THIS BILL MUST BE STOPPED!

    Rep. Dorothy Moon, R-Stanley, says she and 25 other co-sponsors of HB 122, the hemp legalization bill, are withdrawing their co-sponsorship out of concern over the Senate amendments, and Moon says she’ll vote against concurring with them — even if it means the hemp bill dies for this year.”

    It’s disappointing to see the Senate gut and change a good bill at the 11th hour. However, it is encouraging to see principled legislators take action and remove their names from the newly amended bill.

    Under the amended bill the transportation of HEMP products and CBD would by definition would not be allowed to be transported except by permit throughout Idaho. Permits don’t have to be issued for a year. That means our hemp products would not be accessible for some time, if this passed. 

    Law enforcement was against industrial hemp.  At the Senate hearing, some of the law enforcement testimony was deceitful and clearly inaccurate, especially regarding available testing and their negotiations with our legislators. The police felt their dogs wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between the two types of cannabis plants. Joel, with Global CBD explains that Officers can easily download an app on their phones that can test THC content and they don’t have to rely on the dogs to make a determination. <see video below>

    According to an email response from Senator Burgoyne

    HB 122 bill has had great difficulty this session.  It was introduced on February 11, but held for over a month in House Agriculture Affairs.  Finally, on February 15 it was reported out of the committee to the full House for a vote.  It passed the House on March 18.  In the Senate it became clear that the bill could not become law without amendments.  Law enforcement was adamantly against the bill as written, and the Governor was likely to veto it.  The amendments negotiated save the bill from a veto and create a prospect for legalization of hemp, including hemp based CBD Oil, next January.  – Senator Burgoyne Co-Sponsor H122

    Miste Karlfeldt talked with Representative John Green about the Department of Agriculture putting together a plan for the USDA. This step of the process DOES NOT REQUIRE the legislature. However the Senators appear to believe it was so. 

    Only in theory would the original bill have legalized hemp and hemp based CBD Oil before it would be legal with the amendments. First, Idaho has to have a hemp plan, approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).  USDA will not be able to accept and consider Idaho’s plan until at least November 1, 2019, and it might be later than that. – Senator Burgoyne CoSponser H122

    47 other states have a hemp industry operating or under development. This billion dollar opportunity for Idaho has been forced out in the cold by the disingenuous actions. It is a shame! Hemp is a positive opportunity for farmers, producers, manufacturers, researchers, construction, healthcare and many other productive benefits for Idaho! Now laid wasted in the amended bill. – Hari Heath

    TALKING POINTS:

    We want a bill that allows for Idaho to compete in the newly opened industrial hemp market. This isn’t it.
    We want a bill that expands freedom – not one that strips away freedom and regulates the industry to death before it has a chance to flourish. This isn’t it.
    We want a bill that protects access to CBD oil. This isn’t it.

    Do you use Hemp based products? Tell them! Do you use CBD products? Tell them! Would you farm a new product with 1000’s of uses? Tell them!
    Tell them NO on the amended H122!!

    The bill will be heard in the Agriculture Committee ASAP (Link to quick copy and paste list)
    The House Agriculture Committee:
    Chair: Judy Boyle jboyle@house.idaho.gov
    Vice Chair: Caroline Nilsson Troy cntroy@house.idaho.gov
    Thomas Dayley tdayley@house.idaho.gov
    Ryan Kerby rkerby@house.idaho.gov
    Thyra Stevenson tstevenson@house.idaho.gov
    Christy Zito czito@house.idaho.gov
    Kevin Andrus kandrus@house.idaho.gov
    Priscilla Giddings pgiddings@house.idaho.gov
    Bill Goesling bgoesling@house.idaho.gov
    Gary Marshall gmarshall@house.idaho.gov
    Tammy Nichols tnichols@house.idaho.gov

    If it passes committee it will make another vote FULL HOUSE:

    Email all of the Representatives know you DO NOT WANT THIS VERSION of the Hemp Bill. 

    We want the benefits of Industrial Hemp and CBD in our state! This does the OPPOSITE!

  • HB 122 Hemp Farming For Idaho

    With the passage of the 2018 U.S. Farm Bill, Congress made clear that hemp and hemp-derived products, such as cannabidiol (CBD), are not considered controlled substances. Congress lifted all restrictions on industrial hemp cultivation and product sales.

    Idaho Farmer’s, merchants and Idaho as a whole needs and deserves to benefit from the soon to be trillion dollar American hemp industry. This industry will not wait for any State to catch up. It is a burgeoning industry that is going to flourish and grow exponentially regardless of who stands fast with out dated laws. It’s time Idaho benefits with the rest of the nation by passing HB122.

    Please consider:

    • Hemp is not marijuana. Hemp-derived CBD is neither “medical” nor “marijuana.” While both hemp and marijuana are members of the cannabis family, they are uniquely distinctive plants, much like lemons and oranges are both citrus fruits.

    • Hemp products do not produce a psychoactive “high.” By scientific and legal definition, hemp is an agricultural commodity that contains less than 0.3% of the intoxicant THC,

    • Last year, both the Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization recommended that CBD not be controlled as a drug because it has been proven by scientific study as safe and non-addictive.

    • One very important and completely overlooked fact is, all ingestible hemp food products contain trace amounts of THC. This is very clearly defined in the case of the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) VS the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), where the DEA attempted to ban all ingestible hemp products in the United States due to the trace amounts of THC found in all hemp products. The HIA won this case in the 9th Circuit Court which has been upheld in subsequent cases. All of the big chain giants, Walmart, Sam’s Club, Costco, as well as many small retailers throughout Idaho sell ingestible hemp products that in fact, contain trace amounts of TCH. Although Idaho’s forensic labs don’t have the capability to detect these very low amounts of THC, there are high tech labs that have the capability of testing products which contain levels of THC down to 4 parts per million or 0.0004%, and if the hemp products sold in Idaho are tested by one of these high tech facilities they will indeed produce positive results for THC. 

    We respectfully ask for your support in aligning our state law with new federal law by supporting HB122. Further, we ask that now as you understand hemp products are absolutely different than marijuana products that you embrace the hemp industry in Idaho and help our great State benefit from this extremely lucrative industry.

    This article was contributed by Dennis Hansen

    More Information on HEMP

    THC and CBD

    Let’s Talk about CBD Oil, Marijuana, Cannabis and Hemp

  • Parent’s Opinions are Valid…Only When They Conform To the Government’s View?

    The well-publicized measles outbreaks In Washington, New York, and Texas have inflamed the debate over vaccines. Regardless of vaccination rates measles disease outbreaks cycle every 2 or 3 years as they did BEFORE the vaccine. (more about measles cases pre/post vaccine) Pro-vaccine advocates use this as an opportunity to introduce legislation that eliminate exemptions and mandate vaccinations. 

    In Early March 2019, the Federal Government hosted committee meetings in both the House and the Senate. The Senate meeting titled “Vaccines Save Lives: What is Driving Preventable Disease Outbreaks?”  was, as the name suggests, primarily a pro-vaccine hearing that focused on the effectiveness of certain vaccines. It featured five witnesses, four of whom were either licensed medical doctors or have decades of medical experience. The fifth was Ethan Lindenberger, a high school student who has captured the attention of the media for getting vaccinated against his mother’s wishes. All five testified in favor of vaccines.

    Much of the discussion between the committee members and witnesses focused on the benefits of vaccines and possible ways to increase vaccination rates, such as funding for vaccine education programs and solutions to make expensive vaccines more readily available.

    Think about it – when was the last time that there were hearings in both the House and the Senate on the same topic within 6 days of each other?  This is a coordinated effort by pharmaceutical industry PR and astroturf organizations.  They are laying the ground work to push for federal vaccine mandates – which will maximize their markets.  – Children’s Health Defense

    There is currently no bill in Congress that would mandate vaccines. But conversations are happening, and many are not favorable to parental rights. 

    Senator Alexander: “Internet fraudsters who claim that vaccines are not safe, are preying on the unfounded fear and daily struggles of parents, and they’re creating a public health hazard that is entirely preventable.”

    This is unsurprising, because, despite relatively poor coverage of most vaccines in the adult population (since most weren’t on the schedule until the mid- to late 90s, or after 67% of the current population was past childhood vaccination age), they like to pretend that ‘herd immunity’ could possibly exist in the population as a whole.

    While no one suggested mandating vaccines from the federal level, the tone of the hearing was clear: the committee members and witnesses believe vaccines are an unequivocal societal good and anyone who disagrees poses a threat.  

    A threat to health? Perhaps not.

    Here are the Senators that sat on the federal committee last week. The numbers next to them is the amount of money they got from the pharmaceutical companies last year. (Research provided by Melanie Yaun Durity)

    • Sen. Bob Casey ($532,859)
    • Sen. Bill Cassidy ($156,600)
    • Sen. Patty Murray ($111,414)
    • Sen. Tammy Baldwin ($110,443)
    • Sen. Johnny Isakson ($68,000)
    • Sen. Lamar Alexander ($62,700)
    • Sen. Elizabeth Warren ($61,448)
    • Sen. Pat Roberts ($27,500)
    • Sen. Maggie Hassan ($20,163)
    • Sen. Rand Paul ($20,000)

    Source  https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php

    And the “Witnesses” gigantic amounts of money that each of the “witnesses” stand to gain upon their favorable propaganda of the vaccine areas they were requested to speak upon. Here are my findings based upon sources as noted:

    1. Dr. Omer: Emory University (tied with Emory Healthcare on ALL financials) has recently received a grant from the CDC to evaluate children in recovery from traumatic brain injury (sources: https://news.emory.edu/…/wright_mild…/index.html, http://president.emory.edu/…/Annual-Report-of-the…)
    2. Dr. John Boyle – Immune Deficiency Foundation received $3.689,176 in grants from the National Institute of Health from the time period of 2010 – 2018 (source: http://grantome.com/grant/NIH/U24-AI086037-06) Note: there are no dollars listed for 2018, could he be looking for a grant for 2019
    3. Dr. John Wiesman: Washington State Department of Health receives federal funds, over 46% of the WSDH budget is from federal sources. Also, he is requesting funding from Congress for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials. He has concerns “about the nation’s public health system, which has suffered as a result of chronic underfunding as the population continues to grow” (sources: https://thehill.com/…/431537-washington-state-health…, https://www.doh.wa.gov/…/PublicHealthSystemReso…/Funding)
    4. Dr. Jonathan McCullers: owns at least 2 vaccine-related patents: 1) “Live, attenuated Streptococcus pneumoniae strain and vaccine for protection against pneumococcal disease”, patent # US20140314812A1, and 2) for “Methods and compositions for preparing a universal influenza vaccine”, patent # WO2008048984A3. (sources: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2008048984A3/en, and https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140314812)

    No one was seemingly interested in what may make some parents “vaccine-hesitant,” just in how to make them less so. ParentalRights.org

    Not a single doctor, scientist, lawyer, or vaccine injured person/parent was allowed to speak on the risks associated with vaccines. 

    Dr. Janet Levatin: “If our government seriously wanted to investigate what is behind continued outbreaks of viral infections, the seriousness (or lack thereof) of these outbreaks, and why ‘vaccine hesitancy’ is mushrooming across our country, they would hold balanced, unbiased hearings where multiple points of view could be expressed by credible professionals who hold different points of view from the pharma-based, pro-vaccine ‘professionals’ called to provide singular testimony at this hearing. They would hold the Hearing in an adequately sized room, where all could attend and participate. They would hear from doctors, scientists and parents and concerned individuals, including their constituents.” Read more articles like this from Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center – TIMC 

    I️nstead 100’s of families opposing mandates and censorship showed up and were shoved into overflow rooms and hallways. Shut Out. Shut Up. The HELP Hearing


    The Hearing left out very critical pieces of information:

    • ️They also failed to mention the $4 BILLION that’s been paid out for injury/deaths caused by vaccines. (Outside of Rand Paul)
    • ️They failed to mention HHS was sued and has zero records of any safety studies in the last 33 years, even though they were supposed to be conducting them every 2 years.(ICanDecide.Org)
    • ️They failed to mention the fact that manufacturers cannot be sued for injury or death of a child.(NVIC No Liability No Mandates)
    • ️They failed to mention 13.1 of every insert states they have NOT been studied for carcinogenic or mutagenic potentials. (tinyurl.com/13cancer)
    • ️They failed to mention we are giving them to women in pregnancy without any safety studies. (FDA Admits No Safety Studies Vaccines In Pregnancy)
    • ️They failed to mention a double-blind saline placebo is NOT used when testing va€€ines. Vaccine Safety in the US
    • ️They failed to mention that 160 cases of measles across the country not a single person has died.

    The Committee communicated that parents’ opinions are only valid so long as they conform with the government’s. This was a show… meant to scare the public and further their agenda. This was and has been all about the money for decades.  

    FURTHER READING ON THE HEARINGS:

    Children’s Health Defense: What’s Really Driving This Hearing?  

    Shut out of the Hearing Video 2 Parents Shut Out of Hearing

    The Vaccine Reaction

    EXCERPTS: “The very title of the hearing tips the committee’s hand. “Vaccines save lives” is a conclusive statement that preemptively answers the question that follows, making it clear there would be no divergent exploration of the question of what is driving preventable disease outbreaks. Even further, while it is true that some vaccines may save some lives, it is also true that vaccines are not studied for their unintended long- and short-term effects on the body, and that many people’s bodies respond to vaccines in ways that prove harmful to them.” http://ow.ly/RDHw30nXZBt

  • A Strong Defense for Health Freedom

    A group of citizens came together to form Health Freedom Idaho out of desperation. Several of us had made attempts to influence legislation on our own and found that our well-constructed arguments fell on deaf ears. We decided to form as a group of concerned citizens in order to educate the public and grow membership so that we can show the legislature how very important health freedom and parental rights are to their constituents.
    In order to ensure that our principles and rallying cries were well-founded, we set out to educate ourselves on our Constitutional Republic and how to defend it. We researched to find the legislators that support liberty and created relationships with them. As a result, we have earned their trust by providing strong, defensible, and accurate information. Through that. we have emboldened these legislators to stand for health freedom because they know that they have sound facts and a community of supporters behind them.

    Miste Karlfeldt
    Executive Director & Founder, Health Freedom Idaho

    This article originally appeared at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkVbpXXVYko.
  • First Do No Harm

    An encouraging letter from a state Senator Dennis Linthicum regarding the proposed mandatory vaccine legislation introduced in Oregon. 

    Tech giants like Facebook, Google, Pinterest and others are out to stop the so-called anti-Vaxxers. They are actively removing and demoting information simply because people are voicing honest disagreements with policy mandates.

    I, too, am against the mandatory vaccine legislation and I think there has not been enough testing on the various vaccine-combinations. I hope you will see the validity of my assessment as I explain my position.

    I realize there are pragmatic difficulties in staging realistic epidemiological studies due to the outrageously unique and utterly complex nature of our God-given humanness. Not to mention that we daily experience innumerable outside variables woven through the places, times and circumstances of our lives.

    Intuitively, we are all well aware of these details because we each know of friends or family members who different from us. They each react differently to any number of food, drink, lotion, or medicinal items. Additionally, when you visit the doctor’s office, they invariable hand you a clipboard where they want you to describe allergic reactions that you may have experienced. This includes, common things like, eggs, fish, milk, tree nuts, peanuts, shellfish, wheat and antibiotics.

    In the same way that the tech giants are demoting what they consider to be misinformation, they are promoting stories that are crafted to help the vaccine mandate crowd. Their web-crawlers are out looking for old pro-vaccine news that can be put to good use.

    The Associated Press (AP) is digging up any tidbit of vaccine news so that a story can be twisted to fit today’s statist agenda. Like putty in the hands of a master-scaremonger these stories provide great fodder for promoting unfathomable governmental intrusions into our private lives.

    In light of the recent push for, what I’ll refer to as, the “coerced injection act” (HB 3063) and the formidable campaign against the “consensual vaccine information act” (SB 649) the AP dug-up an older story about an unvaccinated child. The child was “hospitalized for two months for tetanus and almost [died] of the bacterial illness after getting a deep cut while playing on a farm.”

    Forty-seven states allow non-medical exemptions

    47 States Allow non-medical exemptions

    The AP article proceeds to quote Dr. William Schaffner, an expert in infectious diseases, as being “flabbergasted.” The story highlights the exorbitant costs and the near-death experience of this young boy in an effort to persuade readers that mandatory vaccines will save the “herd.”

    Except, C. tetani is not an infectious disease. Tetanus isn’t transmitted person-to-person by sneezing, coughing, or unsafe sexual practices but instead comes from bacterial spores that exist nearly everywhere in the soil.

    In an open-letter to legislators considering vaccine mandates, Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych, who earned her Ph.D. in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did post-graduate work at Harvard, writes, “People who have not received the vaccines […] pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have.”

    For example, with a 95 percent vaccine compliance rate a school of 1,000 children, would have 950 vaccinated students and 50 unvaccinated students. If the vaccine had a 90 percent effective rate, then potentially 95 fully vaccinated students would be susceptible to an outbreak compared to 50 unvaccinated students.

    This also creates an interesting concern for those in compliance – Why didn’t the vaccine protect these children? Were they sold a product that didn’t work or is the result due to variations in important cellular processes, metabolism or genetic makeup?

    However, my real question is, why are we experiencing this all-out barrage against consensual free-choice?

    A foundational tenet in clinical medicine is – first do no harm. This means, when physicians face choices between uncertain benefits and possible harm, they must err on the side of safety.

    This is similar to the “precautionary principle,” in the environmental sciences. Arising from concerns for environmental safety, the “precautionary principle” asserts that when faced with suspected harm, or uncertainty, the prescribed course should be caution. By implication, proceeding without caution might lead to long-term cumulative environmental damage. Or, it might not, but caution dictates that those natural resources will still be available for others in the future.

    All vaccines should be carefully evaluated, both individually and in long-term studies, and then, synergistically, for toxicity with other vaccine combinations.

    The Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) childhood vaccine schedule recommends all children receive 69 doses of 16 vaccines with 50 doses of 14 vaccines given between the day of birth and age 18. In the U.S. today, the majority of children receive 3X as many vaccinations as children received in 1983, when Diane and I started having children.

    I realize there are real difficulties associated with performing extensive tests of this magnitude but aren’t our children worth it? Doesn’t it bother you that food allergies have increased by 20 percent in the last 20 years? Don’t you find it troubling that the number of Ritalin prescriptions has risen over 150% in the last ten years?  Haven’t you wondered about the inexplicable increase in autism in our lifetimes?

    In closing, my concern is that Oregon’s legislators will be adopting a policy that will ostracize those who don’t have the correct paperwork or pox mark on their arms. Is this really the policy we want to adopt in our fight for freedom and tolerance? Is this what we mean when we praise our schools for being free from discrimination? Will we resort to feeding our collective fear and appetite against our neighbors who are faced with protecting their families with free-choice and the comfort of being true to their consciences?

    Our inability to muster the political courage to demand more thorough testing is our failure. However, this has nothing what-so-ever to do with negating peoples’ rights to control their own destinies and the destinies for their children. We must ensure government defends and protects parental rights and their freedom to make their own family’s medical choices.

    Remember, if we don’t stand for rural-Oregon values and common sense – No one will!

    Senator Dennis Linthicum signature

    Dennis Linthicum
    Oregon State Senate 28

    Website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/linthicum

  • Is buying or selling CBD Oil LEGAL in Idaho? Idaho police say “NO”

    Recently the owner of a store in Pocatello was under investigation for selling CBD oil in her shop. The police confiscated the oil without a search warrant and tested it in their labs. They claim the oil contained THC and is therefore is considered a controlled substance and illegal in Idaho. While the owner wasn’t arrested, the police issued a warning to all residents of the city “anyone possessing or selling CBD oil can result in criminal charges.” According to the local news station police said under Idaho law, the presence of THC, in any amount, is illegal to sell, possess, or consume. They say it is the police department’s policy to actively investigate reports of illegal activity and pursue criminal charges when warranted, including businesses or individuals who may have purchased illegal products. 

    Citizens of Idaho, I suggest that you start to educate yourselves. You may find that you don’t have access to the products that you currently use and enjoy. -Miste Karlfeldt Executive Director of Health Freedom Idaho

    This editorial written by D. Hansen is intended to start an educated dialogue about issues regarding CBD and hemp products in Idaho that have recently surfaced. The author says, 

    “Since I’ve gained interest in the hemp and CBD industry I have educated myself on literally every aspect that I have found available regarding this topic. Throughout my research I have discovered, unequivocally, the most significant stumbling block when it comes to hemp and CBD in Idaho and most other states is the lack of education on this subject!

    It is imperative that one does not just accept what anyone tells them as fact, law or accurate information when discussing this topic. I urge each and every individual who intends to engage in this conversation to educate themselves before doing so. 

    To help with this I have attached documents prepared by the nation’s leading authorities on this matter, as well as provided links to pertinent information available on the internet. This conversation is not intended to point fingers, lay blame or single out any individuals. The sole and monumentally important purpose of this dialogue is to immediately educate everyone so we can effectively and justly resolve the significant problem that Idaho now faces.”

    To every citizen in the state of Idaho.

    This document is written in response to the Post Register article that was released on the morning of 11/01/2018, titled “POCATELLO Police warn that possessing or selling CBD oil can result in criminal charges” as well as recent developments with regards to CBD oil in Idaho. Although the article contains inaccurate information, it serves as the perfect catalyst for this discussion. 

    Quite frankly I am saddened by the fact that our elected officials, news media and many others continue to weigh in with inaccurate information and opinion on an issue as monumentally important as CBD oil without first educating themselves thoroughly. This document’s intent is to bring to the forefront exactly how misunderstood this issue is and to provide supporting documents that accurately represent current laws and provide a vehicle for education on this issue.

    2014 Farm Bill

    First I am going to open with facts regarding the 2014 Farm Bill officially titled, The Agriculture Act of 2014 P.L. No. 113-79. 
    The 2014 Farm bill is the law that governs many federally subsidized programs e.g. food stamps, crop insurance etc. The hemp act, officially titled section 7606 – Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research, is just one section of the many within the bill.

    The Hemp Act section 7606

    The Hemp Act section 7606 does in fact contain language rendering the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA) non applicable to Industrial Hemp. It also defines Industrial Hemp as any part of the cannabis plant, including the flowering tops so long as it does not exceed more than 0.3% tetrahydorcannabinol (THC), thus effectively removing industrial hemp from the purview of the CSA.

    The next item I want to point out is the Post Register article comment stating: 

    “..hemp plants are only legal in the United States if they comply with the 2014 Farm Bill, which legalized the growing and cultivation of industrial hemp for research purposes in states where growth and cultivation is legal under state law.” and “however, growth and cultivation is limited to an institution of higher education or state department of agriculture. This carve-out was intended for purposes of agricultural pilot programs or other academic research.” 

    The Farm Bill says, States that choose to participate in the hemp act agricultural pilot program and comply with all of the provisions therein, have the ability to grow industrial hemp for the purposes of study, cultivation, and marketing. State departments of agriculture are also allowed to contract out or license out, their authority under the Farm Bill to private growers and firms.

    Initially, there was resistance from federal agencies toward pilot program participants with respect to sales of their products into interstate commerce. This was resolved with the passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (the “Omnibus Law”), which states that federal money cannot be used to interfere in any way with the hemp act. This prohibition against interference specifically applies to intrastate and interstate transportation, processing, sales, and use of industrial hemp grown or cultivated pursuant to the Farm Bill.

    The statement indicating Epidiolex is the only legal form of CBD at the federal level is, well I don’t even have words for this!

    Idaho Statute title 37, Chapter 27

    Finally, I would like to dissect Idaho’s definition of marijuana form Idaho statute title 37, chapter 27.

    “Marijuana” means all parts of the plant of the genus Cannabis, regardless of species, and whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds or resin.

    It does not include the mature stalks of the plant unless the same are intermixed with prohibited parts thereof, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds or the achene of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks, except the resin extracted therefrom or where the same are intermixed with prohibited parts of such plant, fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination.

    Evidence that any plant material or the resin or any derivative thereof, regardless of form, contains any of the chemical substances classified as tetrahydrocannabinols shall create a presumption that such material is “marijuana” as defined and prohibited herein.

    I have separated the definition into its 3 parts. 

    1. First is the definition of marijuana which is very clear, in short is states that all hemp is marijuana. 
    2. The second part is the exemption for non-psychoactive hemp, which is the same as the CSA and is what has allowed for imported hemp and products made from it to remain legal in the U.S. The third section of the definition is what adds a very confusing twist to Idaho’s law, in that it completely contradicts the exemption right above it by stating any THC constitutes marijuana.
    3. Let’s examine this further. If lawmakers truly want the law to read as it does, all they would have had to do is strike the exemption (the second part) from the law and it would have the exact same meaning without adding the last sentence.

    This is very confusing and contradicting, it raises the questions. 

    Did lawmakers actually understand the law when the last sentence was added or was the third sentence added to make the law ambiguous?

    Regardless of the reasons why the law is written as it is, it does not change these facts. 

    The 2014 Farm Bill is a law which removes industrial hemp from the purview of the CSA. Idaho claims that the hemp act of the 2014 Farm Bill does not apply, yet Idaho receives all federal subsidies from the Farm Bill just like all other States that it does apply to. 

    Finally, if Idaho maintains its position that “under Idaho law, any substance that contains any amount of THC is illegal, even if the concentration is so small that it has no psychoactive effects on the user”, the tens of thousands of individuals that are purchasing, using and selling CBD is just a very small portion of the epidemic problem that exists within the state. Because, ALL PRODUCTS MADE FROM HEMP CONTAIN TRACE AMOUNTS OF THC, not only CBD products. Therefore all of the hemp food, hemp cosmetic, hemp clothing and the thousands of other hemp products that line store shelves throughout Idaho are illegal.

    As ridiculous as this seems, this is where we are at today! Education is paramount so we can have meaningful discussions and resolve this issue immediately! Industrial hemp derived CBD oil is not going away. In fact, it is changing the entire landscape as we know it and it is far bigger and widespread than many people can imagine. If you have not heard of how CBD has miraculously changed someone’s life I assure you that you will soon.

    Attached you will find documents that validate the statements in this letter as well as explain in detail the laws that are applicable to this issue. I urge you take the time necessary to thoroughly familiarize yourself with the documents I have attached and become knowledgeable. Please DO NOT take what someone else says about this as being accurate, that is why we are where we are now!

    Finally, it is paramount that everyone absolutely understands the following information! Even though the 2014 Farm Bill did not physically change the wording in the controlled substances act with regards to non- psychoactive hemp, it unequivocally redefines hemp as any part of Cannabis Sativa L with a THC level of no more than 0.3% which absolutely does remove it from the purview of the CSA.

    Point: The 2014 Farm Bill does supersede and effectively remove industrial hemp from the CSA making it federally legal and legal in all 50 states.

    Omnibus Law

    To add clarity and eliminate confusion as well as strengthen the fact that the 2014 Farm Bill does apply to all 50 States, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (the “Omnibus Law”)? The Omnibus Law protects agricultural pilot programs established pursuant to the 2014 Farm Bill. The “Omnibus Law” makes clear that no agency can expend monies authorized by federal law to interfere with or otherwise frustrate duly registered agricultural pilot programs. The prohibition against interference extends to intrastate and interstate transportation, processing, sales, and use of industrial hemp grown or cultivated pursuant to the 2014 Farm Bill.

    In light of all of this, it absolutely impossible to dispute the fact that industrial hemp is exempt from the CSA?
    Congress could not or would not pass a law that states a schedule 1 controlled substance can be shipped, processed or sold everywhere in the United States and no federal agency can interfere with this illegal activity!

    RESOURCES: 

    Here is a link to the Post Register article.

    https://www.postregister.com/news/crime_courts/pocatello-police-warn-that-selling-or-possessing-cbd-oil-can/article_2718743f-d6d0-5e96-bef1-ed6daf2b58bc.html

    Another Article UPDATE: https://www.postregister.com/news/crime_courts/pocatello-police-warn-that-selling-or-possessing-cbd-oil-can/article_2718743f-d6d0-5e96-bef1-ed6daf2b58bc.html?fbclid=IwAR1wLGOsvvbv50NjF7MohnXnHSAMd6ncuJozxSHKoulaHQFtf3JUcrPc9A8

    Legal Opinions on CBD oil: 

    Opinion on Federal Legal Status of CBD oil

    Evolving Law and Regulation of Industrial Hemp

    Legal Opinion of Interstate Trade of Industrial Hemp

    An important article by one of the nation’s leading cannabis law firms.

    https://www.hoban.law/media-center/press-releases/2018-06/media-alert-cbd-not-controlled-substance-source-rule-applies

    HIA vs. DEA brief article.

    https://www.thehia.org/Hemp-Legal-HIA-vs-DEA

    Important resources on this discussion.

    https://hempsupporter.com/resources/

  • One thing You Can Do To Make An ENORMOUS IMPACT

    Are you worried that we are fighting Goliath? Are you concerned that what we say or do doesn’t make enough of a difference? What if I told you there was ONE thing that you could do that would make a enormous impact on our health freedom. Would you do it?

    The primary elections are coming up quickly. Voting for someone who will protect our personal liberties in the State House and State Senate IS THE KEY. If we help elect the right people, by spreading information, voting or even helping them campaign, our fight becomes dramatically easier and possible. This is a big part of why we are here – to vote the best people into office that will represent us by voting for health freedom. THIS IS CRUCIAL. We can’t change everybody’s mind, but if we have freedom loving representatives, we don’t have to! 

  • Protect Your Parental Rights When CPS Investigates

    There’s nothing quite like the adrenaline rush and flood of shame that hits when you open the door to find someone from Child Protective Services (CPS) on your doorstep. It’s horrifying. It’s embarrassing. You immediately start to remember every CPS horror story you’ve ever heard and you begin to worry. Since more parents are experiencing a visit from CPS than ever before, and since sometimes those visits have resulted in the quick removal of children – despite no grounds to allegations of harm or abuse – it is critically important for every parent to have a good idea of how to respond to a CPS visit.

    Parents have been ‘reported’ to CPS for some reasons that have nothing to do with neglect or abuse:

    • Loving parents who refuse a recommended medical treatment for their child can be reported by a doctor who might fear losing his license to practice medicine.
    • Neighbors or estranged family members may report a family despite the lack of grounds to support any allegations of abuse.
    • Parents with a sick child seeking a second opinion have been reported to CPS by a hospital or medical authorities.

    The fact of the matter is that over 80% of the calls that are called in to CPS are false and bogus. But CPS says, all calls have to be investigated. In Idaho statistics reveal that almost 80% of the children removed from their parents are returned to their parents. This calls into question the validity the government agency traumatizing the children and their parents with this forced separation, however that is a discussion for another post. 

    The reality is any visit by CPS should be taken VERY seriously.

    The most significant mistakes made by parents are usually in the very first encounter. If you can understand how to handle the very first encounter with CPS, you can increase your chances of maintaining your family’s rights and freedom.

    CPS will often seek to take a family by surprise. Be prepared.

    1. Be polite & SAY AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
    2. Do NOT let them in your house. Continue to be nice but STAY FIRM.
    3. Ask permission to ask THEM questions. “I realize you are just doing your job. Would it be ok if I asked you a couple of questions?” Record the conversation. Investigator’s contact information. The supervisor’s contact information. Details of the allegations.
    4. Close the conversation telling them you will speak to your attorney and get back with them. 
    5. Close the door. 

    Realize that closing the door will not close the investigation, but will allow you preserve your rights, gather your support and contact your attorney.

    1. THE KEY: Be polite & SAY AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE. 
    You might be terrified inside. You might be frightened and angry if you feel there is injustice going on, but the number one thing you can do is stay calm and be polite. Anything you say can be twisted. Do NOT DEFEND YOURSELF and do NOT volunteer information.

    Most CPS referrals are very vague. They only know what was reported to them and usually, that information is not very specific. If you jump in and defend yourself, anything you say could be used against you later.

    Once a CPS investigation has begun, they will investigate every aspect of your family. (Take a look at the CPS manual – the social worker doing the investigation is suppose to ‘know’ the answers to questions that involve parental self esteem, job security, discipline practices…) Even if the allegations against you are false, they will be paying attention to other items of concern and can begin investigating other allegations based on their findings.

    The best defense? A closed mouth.

    2. Do NOT let them in your house. 

    Continue to be nice but STAY FIRM. Have one statement ready and repeat it over and over “I know you are just doing your job, but my main obligation is to my children and to help them avoid unnecessary trauma.” If they do not have a warrant and there is no apparent emergency, they are not allowed access to your home. If a police officer is with them, they all know it is illegal to enter a home unless you CONSENT, or unless they have a warrant, or can hear an emergency situation going on.
    DO NOT CONSENT.

    Do not even open the door to allow the CPS agent look into your home to see your children: they can see something that creates an “emergency situation” even if it is not true. 

    Be FIRM. You should not waiver nor give in to thinking: “What’s the harm?” There is no compromise here: no exception. If you invite a CPS investigator social worker into your home, you have just waived your Federally-protected fourth amendment constitutional protection. 

    3. Ask permission to ask THEM questions. 
    “I realize you are just doing your job. Would it be ok if I asked you a couple of questions?” 

    Record the conversation. Idaho recording laws: At least one party must give consent in order to record an in-person conversation. Idaho Code Ann. § 18-6702.> If you need to get your cell phone, close the door and say, “I need to get something.”

    • 1. Get a copy of their ID.
    • 2. Supervisor Information.  What are the name and phone number of your supervisors?
    • 3. “What are the exact allegations that have been made against me? Federal law requires that I should be informed of any allegations against me.” If they say something vague, like “child abuse” or “environmental neglect,” demand specific answers. You have the legal right to this information!
    • 4. Ask them if they have a warrant. Be direct. “Do you have a warrant to search my home or speak to my children?” If they produce a warrant make sure it is signed by a judge and dated. Ask for time to review the warrant. Read it over thoroughly.  Tell them you want your attorney to review the warrant.

    Without a warrant, they must gain your consent to enter your home or speak to your children. They are doing their job. Their supervisor has instructed them to make this visit and they will use whatever tactic they feel will be effective to GET MORE INFORMATION AGAINST YOU. They may alternate between: trying to be nice, being firm, threatening or trying to bargain with you. Stay immune to every tactic. Be Nice, but know your rights. Do not get caught up in their games. Don’t engage them in any discussion, except on the questions above.

    If either CPS or police try to enter your home, ask what the emergency is and inform them you will be video recording once they enter the home. Without a warrant, they cannot take your children unless they feel they are in imminent danger.

     Idaho Code section regarding imminent danger: §16-1608(1)(a). A declaration of imminent danger can be made “only where the child is endangered in his surroundings and prompt removal is necessary to prevent serious physical or mental injury to the child or where the child is an abandoned child . . .”https://isc.idaho.gov/cp/manual/Idaho_CP_Manual-3rd_Edition.pdf

    If the police do force themselves into your home, do not physically resist. Allow them in, state that you object to their violation of your rights and state that you wish to have an attorney present. These statements may assist you in a later court hearing.

    4. Worried you might look ‘guilty’ by not letting them in? 
    The close the conversation with this: “I’d like to have this conversation with you after I have had a chance to speak to my attorney. Is this the number you can be reached to schedule a time for that conversation?” Then simply close the door.

    Once the door is closed take a deep breath, hug your kids tight and begin to prepare in defense of your family.

    The minute you become aware that your family is being investigated, YOU MUST find an attorney who has experience in fighting CPS.

    Juvenile Dependency courts are worlds unto themselves. Your most seasoned and experienced lawyers when first stepping foot into a Juvenile Dependency courtroom are totally dumb struct. Most lawyers –even experienced Family Law attorneys– who are not experienced with CPS mistakenly think that it is their job (as it would be in any other court setting) to find out what CPS wants and then communicate all the details to their clients. Shockingly, doing exactly that often leads to total disaster and the loss of your children.

    If you are accused of physical abuse, immediately have your doctor give your child a thorough physical exam.

    Ask your doctor to write a letter stating that there are no bruises or injuries observed, nor any other health-related issues that would raise any concern or suspicion of child abuse or neglect. Obviously, go to a doctor whom you trust. If a CPS or DCFS social worker suggests a doctor for you or suggests that they know where you can see a doctor at NO CHARGE (as attractive as that may be), NEVER visit with a doctor recommended by CPS. What you may not know is that these doctors are a regular part of the CPS system and they are commonly called as expert-testimony witnesses by CPS as a witness against the parents.

    Create a list of relatives and friends who are willing and able to care for your children if CPS takes them.

    If your children are removed from your home, or the court is demanding that your children must soon leave your home for some period of time it is always better that your children are taken in by relatives or friends. Having your kids in foster care is simply adding one more level of stress and complexity to your plate.

    RESOURCES FOR YOU:

    Idaho Parents CPS Manual: https://isc.idaho.gov/cp/manual/Idaho_CP_Manual-3rd_Edition.pdf

    Corruption in CPS: https://www.liftingtheveil.org/reports2.htm

    YOUR RIGHTS: IT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR CPS TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION AND INTERVIEW A CHILD ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES OR PROBABLE CAUSE.

              The decision in the case of Doe et al, v. Heck et al (No. 01-3648, 2003 US App. Lexis 7144) will affect the manner in which law enforcement and child protective services investigations of alleged child abuse or neglect are conducted.  The decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found that this practice, i.e. the “no prior consent” interview of a child, will ordinarily constitute a “clear violation” of the constitutional rights of parents under the 4th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.  According to the Court, the investigative interview of a child constitutes a “search and seizure” and, when conducted on private property without “consent, a warrant, probable cause, or exigent circumstances,” such an interview is an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the rights of the parent, child, and, possibly the owner of the private property.

              The mere possibility of danger does not constitute an emergency or exigent circumstance that would justify a forced warrantless entry and a warrantless seizure of a child. Hurlman v. Rice, (2nd Cir. 1991)  A due-process violation occurs when a state-required breakup of a natural family is founded solely on a “best interests” analysis that is not supported by the requisite proof of parental unfitness. Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255, (1978)

    http://www.parentsinaction.net/english/Legal/KnowYourFamilyRights.htm

     CPS does not have a legal right to conduct an investigation of alleged child abuse or neglect in a private home without your consent.  In fact, removing a child from your home without your consent even for several hours is a “seizure” under federal law.  Speaking to your children without your consent is also a “seizure” under the law.  If CPS cannot support a warrant and show that the child is in imminent danger along with probable cause, CPS cannot enter your home and speak with your children.  Remember, anonymous calls into CPS are NEVER probable cause under the Warrant Clause.  And even if they got a name and number from the reporter on the end of the phone, that also does not support probable cause under the law.  CPS must by law, investigate the caller to determine to see if he or she is the person who they say they are and that what they said is credible.  The call alone, standing by itself, is insufficient to support probable cause under the law.  Many bogus calls are made by disgruntle neighbors, ex spouses, someone wanting to get revenge so CPS needs to show due diligence as do police to get sworn statements.

    ACCESSING YOUR CHILD’S RECORD

    Your children’s records are protected by FERPA and HIPAA regarding your children’s educational and medical records.  They need a lawful warrant like the police under the “warrant clause” in order to seize any records.  If your child school records contain medical records, then HIPAA also applies.  When the school or doctor sends records to CPS or allows them to view them without your permission, both the sender and receiver violated the law.

    http://www.parentsinaction.net/english/Legal/KnowYourFamilyRights.htm