|
|
Sunday, February 5
Where Has Health Freedom Gone in Iowa? WHO Radio, Feb. 7
by
Linda Thieman
on Sun 05 Feb 2006 07:00 PM CST
 Where Has Health Freedom Gone in Iowa? WHO Radio, Feb. 7
Iowa Health Freedom on Jan Mickelson Show Feb. 7
WHO Talk Radio with Jan Mickelson. Channel AM 1040.
Feb. 7, Tues. 10:00 AM.
Where has Health Freedom gone in Iowa?
Why are Native American Medicine Healers subject to criminal prosecution in Iowa?
Why are
un-licensed herbalists, homeopaths, health food store owners, energy
practitioners and many others subject to criminal felony prosecution
for helping others in Iowa?
How can you participate in the efforts happening NOW to restore fundamental freedoms in Iowa by supporting SF 2095?
Join Jan
Mickelson, Larry Hanus of the Iowa Health Freedom Coaltion and Mark
Raven Hair Pena of the Cedar River Medicine Society as they discuss
these issues and more.
Immediate Action Alert: Support SF 2095
Currently in Iowa it is a crime
for an un-licensed natural health practitioner to assist another person
in healing any type of condition whether with nutritional supplements,
energy work or other methods.
The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled that Vitamins and Nutrients are MEDICINES for the purpose of prosecution for practicing medicine without a license.
Please join in restoring your fundamental freedom right to be free to choose the health care you feel best for you.
SF 2095 will "de-criminalize" the un-licensed practice of natural, alternative, holistic healthcare subject to certain disclosures and prohibitions.
To
create the momentum needed to move this bill into law, please
contact the following Iowa Senate sub-committee members
immediately. Ask them to restore your right to choose and support
SF 2095.
Sen. James Seymour
Sen. David Johnson
Sen. Frank Wood
Sen. Jack Hatch
Also, if you have friends in these districts, ask them to call their Iowa Senator at home or at the Capitol.
Please contact your own Senator as well.
Thank you.
Larry Hanus, Iowa Health Freedom
319-269-6343
For information regarding the Iowa Health Freedom Day at the Capitol Feb. 13, click here.
EPA SAYS ALL IS FORGIVEN FOR SOME ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIORS' AIR POLLUTION SINS
by
Molly Regan
on Sun 05 Feb 2006 02:00 PM CST
 EPA SAYS ALL IS FORGIVEN FOR SOME ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIORS' AIR POLLUTION SINS
This week's IOWA Public TV program "Market To Market" just reported:
"In what's being hailed as a major step forward, the US Environmental
Protection Agency kicked off a landmark program this week that will be
used to determine AIR EMISSION LEVELS near various types of Animal
Feeding Operations or AFOs. When the program is in full swing, an
INDEPENDENT air monitoring company will check the levels of AMMONIA AND
HYDROGEN SULFIDE found in the air around 6,700 farms in 42 states.
"The data will be used in the formulation of AGRICULTURE AIR QUALITY
RULES. Participating farmers receive an AMNESTY of sorts WHERE ALL
THEIR PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT ARE FORGIVEN! THE
AMNESTY DOES NOT MAKE THEM EXEMPT FROM ANY FUTURE VIOLATIONS OF
FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL POLLUTION LAWS.
"In exchange, operators agree to ABIDE BY THE RULES OF THE CLEAN AIR
ACT, PAY $2,500 INTO A FUND FOR AIR QUALITY MONITORING, AND INSTALL THE
BEST AVAILABLE POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.
"Officials with THE SIERRA CLUB stated that the program gives farmers a
free ride on the backs of the public. Pro-industry groups like
the National Pork Producers Council released a statement lauding the
study for its use of 'sound science'(?) to develop practical policies
for pork producers. The project is expected to take 4 years with
2 being devoted to the study of AIR QUALITY, and 2 more spent
developing new rules." End quote…
So, this is a nifty break for livestock producers. Some of them
who have not followed the rules are now being rewarded with a
declaration of amnesty! How special. I don't know for certain who
is hailing this as a "major step", but I can guess. Let's see,
humh, maybe corporate livestock farmers and those with a large number
of animal units (over 1000 units) are happy about this.
And here is that overused bogus term again "sound science." What
is meant by that is scientists will be sought out who agree with the
EPA. So don't remain silent on this. Let the EPA know that
POLLUTERS NEED TO PAY. CITIZENS ARE NOT THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR
FARM OR CORPORATE CLEANUPS.
Let us not forget also to CPR… CONSERVE/PARTICIPATE/RECYCLE
Tampering During Certification Meeting: Jerry Depew's 3rd and Final Report from Monday's Iowa Board of Examiners for Voting Machines Meeting
by
Linda Thieman
on Sun 05 Feb 2006 08:40 AM CST
 Tampering
During Certification Meeting: Jerry Depew's 3rd and Final Report from
Monday's Iowa Board of Examiners for Voting Machines Meeting
by Jerry Depew, Laurens, Iowa
Iowa Voters for Open and Transparent Elections
Rewriting software is not for beginners. But what if your ballot counter is misbehaving? Should you reprogram it? Even in the middle of a public certification meeting?
They did
it Monday in the Iowa Secretary of State’s office. Election Systems and
Software of Omaha was there to gain official approval of its new
equipment. But after they had used the new ballot marking gadget to
mark some ballots for a test election, the ballot scanner made a
mistake in the tally.
The
scanner reads and counts those paper ballots at the speed of light. It
can be quite reliable if the ballots are properly marked and the
scanner is carefully calibrated and correctly programmed. But the
scanner must know the rules for counting and that can be tricky.
Now this
ballot scanner was not really being tested Monday, according to the
folks in the room. It was indeed on the agenda, but it had also been
tested and approved last year before the newest gadget for handicapped
voters was for sale. Today it was needed to read and count the ballots
created by the new gadget because the examiners wanted to see that
those new ballots were actually decipherable by the M100 counter.
So it
wasn’t the new gadget that was tripping up the older scanner, it was
the programming in the scanner. Apparently this particular test ballot
had not been tried during the earlier approval process. So now, what to
do?
Phone
home. The ES&S men called Omaha to see what could be done. It was
decided to “burn new media,” thus reprogramming the scanner on the
spot. The chair of the board of examiners observed, “We’ve never had to
do this before. We’ve never had to reprogram.”
About an hour later the technician stuck a memory card into the M100 and tried the small stack of ballots again. Success.
When I told software tester John Washburn about this by email later, he wrote back:
WHAT!! …REPROGRAMMED WHILE WE WAITED…!!
Calmer now. Pulse returning to normal.
Calm blue oceans.
Breathe in, Breathe out.
This
stark response prompted me to ask another question: Were they tampering
with already certified equipment when they reprogrammed the machine? He
said, “Yes.”
What
have we learned from this? We know the ballot scanner worked on Monday.
It did what it was told by the software it was using. We know that you
can’t really tell what is in the software. We know it is easily changed
if the vote count is not going to your liking.
But we
can also wonder a few things. Do election officials know what
constitutes tampering with their equipment? Who do they trust to mess
with the programming? Do some Iowa counties now have in their
possession brand new equipment that is programmed to improperly count
some ballots?
Just wondering.
Jerry Depew of Laurens, Iowa, runs the non-partisan blog, Iowa Voters for Open and Transparent Elections, and has granted Blog for Iowa permission to reprint his report.
|
|
