Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the blog archives for May, 2014.

ALERT! Bi-state joint letter to be sent to U.S. Senators and Congress against Klamath dams destruction

Federal gov & land grabs, Klamath Basin Crisis.org, Klamath River & Dams, Oregon governments, State gov

PNP comment: This joint meeting and resulting letter by Oregon Klamath County Commissioners and California Siskiyou County Supervisors is huge showing a bi-state alliance standing against out-of-control non-profit organizations, Tribes, federal and state agencies. The “lies and fraud” for control are being exposed by these locally-elected officials. Thank you commissioners and supervisors! — Editor Liz Bowen

May 30, 2014

 

Here are the two joint letters from Siskiyou County and Klamath County with all the Commissioners/Supervisors signatures included. These letters were discussed and basic content agreed upon during the May 5th joint Commissioner/Supervisor meeting in Doris, California.

 

The Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee has a hearing scheduled on Tuesday, June 3rd in Washington D C.  on Wyden’s SB2379. Each member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee will receive their own personalized copy.  Other appropriate House and Senate members will also receive a copy.

 

Tom Mallams, Klamath County Commissioner

To read the letters go to Klamath Basin Crisis.org links below:

 

Letter to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein

http://www.klamathbasincrisis.org/settlement/2014letters/JointLetterFeinstein20140530.pdf

 

Letter to Congressman Tom McClintock

http://www.klamathbasincrisis.org/settlement/2014letters/JointLetterMcClintock20140530.pdf

1 Comment

Congressman LaMalfa comments on resignation of Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki

Doug LaMalfa Congressman CA, Veterans & soldiers

Rep. LaMalfa Comments on Resignation of Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki

Washington, D.C. – Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) today released the following statement regarding the resignation of Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki:     

 

While Secretary Shinseki’s resignation is warranted, his departure will not fix the systemic dysfunction preventing our veterans from receiving the services they have earned. The fact that a decorated and accomplished officer like Secretary Shinseki could not overcome the VA’s problems demonstrates just how embedded the bureaucratic mindset truly  is.

 

Ultimately, the failures at Veterans Affairs rest with President Obama. The President promised six years ago to bring the VA into the 21st century, yet under his tenure we’ve seen a systemic refusal to address veterans’ needs, massive wait times and even deaths due to a refusal to provide care.

 

Make no mistake: the disaster that is Veterans Affairs foreshadows the catastrophe that the President’s health care takeover is becoming. If you want to know how an unfettered, unaccountable bureaucracy behaves, look no further than President Obama’s Veterans Affairs. 

 

LaMalfa has urged that Congress’ investigation of wrongdoing at Veterans Affairs be expanded to include the claim processing system, where whistleblowers recently brought to light an off-books waiting list in which valid benefit claims have languished for years. He also cosponsored a measure, H.R. 4031, cutting the red tape that has prevented negligent VA officials from being fired. The measure was passed on the House floor last week.

 

A video of Rep. LaMalfa’s comments on the House floor regarding Secretary Shinseki’s resignation may be found at the following link:http://youtu.be/LzzIi6T1tz0

 

A video of Rep. LaMalfa’s comments on the House floor regarding whistleblower reports from the Oakland VA office may be found at the following link: http://youtu.be/1iXgQpPfU4s

 

Doug LaMalfa is a lifelong farmer representing California’s First Congressional District, including Butte, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou and Tehama Counties. 

###

No Comments

Body found in Klamath River

Sheriff Jon Lopey, Siskiyou Sheriff's report

          SISKIYOU COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE

      **5/30/2014**

 

            On May 28, at about 2:30 p.m. the Siskiyou County Sheriff’s Office (SCSO) responded to the report of a body found by rafters in the Klamath River near Coon Creek. The SCSO launched a watercraft to retrieve the body. The body was that of an unidentified adult male.  Upon initial investigation the subject’s body did not exhibit any obvious signs of trauma and there were no immediate indicators of foul play. The death investigation will include a determination of the cause, manner, and mechanism of death, pending an autopsy. Identification of the subject is also pending. 

 

            On May 28, 2014, at about 3:45 p.m. the SCSO was notified of possible human skeletal remains located in the area of Springhill Plantation off of Everett Memorial Highway. The responding deputies discovered the skeletal remains located a short distance from an abandoned vehicle and the remains showed signs of possible animal activity. No immediate signs of foul play were apparent during the crime scene investigation.  The investigation is ongoing into the identity of the deceased as well as the manner and cause of death.

                  Sheriff Jon Lopey stated,“ The Department is actively investigating these two deaths and we encourage anyone with information  to please contact the Department at (530) 841-2900.”   

No Comments

Congressman Doug LaMalfa speaks on House floor about Veterans Adminstration corruption on vets benefits

Doug LaMalfa Congressman CA, Veterans & soldiers

In this short 5 minute floor speech Congressman LaMalfa calls on his colleagues to include the VA Benefits Administration in the investigations of veteran deaths, manipulation of records and corruption within the VA system nationwide.  Evidence from Oakland VA whistleblowers has provided more than enough information to show that healthcare issues are just the tip of the iceberg!

If clicking the image above does not start the video use this link:

http://youtu.be/AlXTZfgm6aw

No Comments

California Dredgers: A step closer to getting back in the water

Dept. Fish & Game, Mining, Over-regulations

ICMJs Prospecting and Mining Journal

 

California Dredgers: A Step Closer to Getting Back in the Water

by Scott Harn

 

June 2014

 

At the consolidated court hearings held in San Bernardino County on May 1, Judge Gilbert Ochoa heard arguments from attorneys David Young and James Buchal on behalf of the miners. He had already received all the supporting documents and arguments from each of the involved parties.

 

One of the key questions Judge Ochoa asked of attorneys representing the State of California was if they could provide a date when the current moratorium will end. The answer was, “No, Your Honor.”

 

 

Photo by Ron Kliewer

 

Approximately 120 miners were present to lend their support. Judge Ochoa initially announced he would issue his ruling in about two weeks. However, after most of the miners left the court, the judge called the litigants into his chambers. In a closed-door meeting he ordered the involved parties to participate in mandatory settlement hearings, which he scheduled for June 24, 2014.  The judge also set aside two additional days — June 25 & 26 — if needed.

 

Let me explain why this is good news. Mining law and case law are in favor of the miners.  We’ve always known this, we just needed a judge with the guts to stand up to the State of California and their environmental cronies. There is plenty of case law which dictates that the State of California can regulate mining but cannot prohibit it. The current moratorium is, in fact, a prohibition.

 

If Judge Ochoa was going to rule against the miners he would have left the “about two weeks” schedule in place, or he would have made his ruling on May 1. By ordering mandatory settlement hearings he is providing the State of California with the opportunity to try to at least gain some concessions from suction dredge miners.

 

All the plaintiffs are required to participate in the settlement hearings and must negotiate in good faith. If no agreement can be reached, then Judge Ochoa would have to rule on the merits of the case.

 

We have confidence in PLP and the attorneys representing the miners. They have been down this road before. It’s been nine years since the latest round of court battles began and five years since we’ve been able to dredge legally in California. We should be back in the water soon.

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

1 Comment

Another blow against cops who think they have a right not to be recorded

2nd Amendment rights, Constitution

Another Blow Against Cops Who Think They Have a Right Not to Be Recorded

Three years ago, in Glik v. Cunniffe, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit upheld a man’s First Amendment right to record an arrest on Boston Common. Last week, in Gericke v. Weare, the court upheld a woman’s First Amendment right to record a traffic stop in Weare, New Hampshire. The combination of these two decisions is a powerful rebuke to cops who continue to harass people with bogus wiretapping charges when they dare to capture images or sound of police encounters on their cellphones.

In the 2011 case, Simon Glik was charged with violating Massachusetts’ broad wiretap law, which makes it a crime to “willfully commit[] an interception…of any wire or oral communication,” after he recorded an arrest in which he believed police were using excessive force. The 1st Circuit ruled that “a citizen’s right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public space is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment.” Hence “Glik was exercising clearly established First Amendment rights in filming the officers in a public space.”

In the case decided last week, Carla Gericke took out her cellphone after police pulled over her friend, whose car she was following to his house, and announced that she was recording the stop. The 1st Circuit ruled that the First Amendment right recognized in Glik also applies to traffic stops, although it may be reasonably restricted in that context to protect the safety of officers and the public. In this case, Gericke says police never asked her to stop recording or to leave the scene; they just arrested her afterward. “Based on Gericke’s version of the facts,” the court said, “she was exercising a clearly established First Amendment right when she attempted to film the traffic stop in the absence of a police order to stop filming or leave the area.” 

New Hampshire’s wiretap statute, unlike the Massachusetts law, applies only to situations in which the people who are recorded have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The 1st Circuit noted that police officers performing their duties in public have no such expectation, especially when the person recording them announces her intention to do so. Furthermore, because of a technical glitch, Gericke did not actually capture any video of her friend’s detention. These facts help explain why local prosecutors ended up dropping the charges against Gericke. The cops who arrested her were so keen to punish her perceived disrespect that they not only violated her constitutional rights; they misapplied the statute.

What’s especially significant about both of these cases is that they allowed lawsuits against the police officers themselves to proceed. The court decided that the officers did not qualify for immunity because the rights they violated were clearly established at the time of the arrests. Cops who continue to mistakenly believe they have a right not to be recorded while on duty should understand that they cannot hide behind their real or professed ignorance of what the Constitution requires.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/05/29/another-blow-against-cops-who-think-they

No Comments

Montana advances 100-wolf quota for landowners

cattle, Threats to agriculture, Wolves

Published: May 23, 2014 8:56AM

Capital Press

The proposal significantly expands the circumstances under which wolves can be killed without a hunting license.

 

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Montana landowners could kill a combined 100 gray wolves annually if the predators are perceived to pose a threat to humans or domestic animals, according to a rule that received initial backing from state wildlife commissioners Thursday.

The proposal significantly expands the circumstances under which wolves can be killed without a hunting license.

The Montana Legislature passed a measure last year requiring the change. The legislation didn’t define what qualifies as a “potential threat” so the Fish and Wildlife Commission didn’t detail it either, spokesman Ron Aasheim said.

Previously, landowners were largely limited to shooting wolves that had attacked or were attacking livestock. Under the new rule, shooting wolves would be permitted whenever they pose a potential threat to human safety, livestock or domestic dogs.

Critics say the proposal is excessive and equates to a year-round wolf-hunting season.

A final vote is scheduled for July.

Between 2005 and 2013, landowners killed 69 wolves in response to livestock attacks. Over that same time period, hundreds of the animals were shot by government wildlife agents.

Separately, commissioners on Thursday tentatively approved hunting regulations for the 2014-15 wolf season.

The annual wolf quota would be reduced from four animals to three in an area near Yellowstone National Park, and trapping for wolves would be allowed for the first time in several wildlife management areas.

Gray wolves were exterminated across most of the Lower 48 states last century before being reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in the mid-1990s.

The population has since grown exponentially, and there were 627 wolves counted in Montana at the end of 2013.

The animals were removed from the endangered species list in 2011.

http://www.capitalpress.com/Livestock/20140523/montana-advances-100-wolf-quota-for-landowners?utm_source=Capital+Press+Newsletters&utm_campaign=56e8c057a6-Livestock_Weekly_Update&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4b7e61b049-56e8c057a6-69631317#.U4eU1CiCebU

No Comments

Alaska: Bear mauled victim remains in hospital

Wildlife

10 days after bear mauling, JBER runner remains in hospital

 

 

cmedred@alaskadispatch.comMay 28, 2014

Anchorage Daily News.com

Ten days after a runner was mauled by a grizzly bear on the trails of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on the edge of Anchorage, she remains hospitalized at the Alaska Native Medical Center in the city.

“She’s recuperating,” U.S. Army Alaska spokesman John Pennell said Tuesday.

Military officials have refused to release the woman’s name or age, but Pennell said the Army hopes she will agree to an interview soon.

“The reason that she’s not talking is her choice, not ours,” he said.

The woman is described as a “military dependent” who was out jogging with her husband prior to the bear attack. After he ran ahead on the trail, she apparently surprised a sow with a cub or cubs and was attacked. Details remain sketchy.

“Ultimately,” U.S. Air Force spokesman Jim Hart said in an email Tuesday, “(base wildlife officials) weren’t able to determine the number or age of the cubs.”

BEARS FREQUENT BASE TRAILS

Wildlife biologists say the age of the cubs often has an effect on the behavior of sow grizzly bears. They tend to be far more protective of small cubs of the year than they are of older yearlings. Alaska grizzly cubs generally stay with their mothers at least two summers.

During that time, the animals roam home ranges that vary from tens to hundreds of square miles. Chance encounters with these bears are possible anywhere in the Anchorage area or the surrounding Chugach Mountains.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game bear biologist Sean Farley studied grizzly bears about a decade ago on what were then Fort Richardson and Elmendorf Air Force Base, now combined into JBER. As part of that study, he radio-collared and satellite-tracked many bears. He discovered the animals used base trails much as humans do.

“And they didn’t really preferentially use these at night only when people weren’t there,” he warned those on base in May 2008. “You can go down there, and it’s very easy to find day beds.”

“Day beds” are where bears curl up on the ground to nap. These beds are not unusual along trails anywhere on JBER or in Anchorage’s Far North Bicentennial Park. Bears that Farley tagged on JBER regularly roamed into that park, and Farley found about 20 bears using Bicentennial Park regularly.

MOOSE DANGEROUS, TOO

That knowledge and the JBER attack has left local wildlife biologists warning people they should be “bear aware” wherever they travel on trails in the Anchorage area. It is a warning that probably should now be extended to being “wildlife aware,” given that moose attacks have begun in the area. A mountain biker in Kincaid Park this week recorded what appears to be this year’s first video of someone coming close to getting stomped by a protective mother moose.

Several people were seriously injured in moose attacks in the park last spring, though moose seldom do as much damage with their hoofs as bears do with fangs and claws.

http://www.adn.com/2014/05/28/3490758/ten-days-later-jber-runner-mauled.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1

No Comments

Voters in California contemplate forming new state

JEFFERSON DECLARATION

Associated Press

May 28, 2014

Found at the top of “Drudge Report.com”

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Residents of California’s largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties long ago got used to feeling ignored in the state Capitol and out of sync with major urban areas.

Go to:

www.JeffersonDeclaration.net   for full article

No Comments

GUN owner gets last laugh for illegal arrest

2nd Amendment rights

 

Permit holder accosted by cops for following law

 Bob Unruh

 World Net Daily.com

A Colorado man is $25,000 richer after the city of Thornton compensated him for his arrest by police officers for legally carrying a gun.

That’s right. Legally.

It happened during the social hurricane energized by Second Amendment opponents in the immediate aftermath of the 2012 Aurora, Colorado, theater shooting by James Holmes in which 12 people were killed and five dozen wounded.

Days later, on July 29, 2012, Jim Mapes, who holds a concealed carry permit in the state, openly wore a holster with a handgun in a movie theater.

The movie was stopped, police descended and Mapes was arrested for having a “dangerous weapon in a liquor or beer establishment” and “brandishing” a weapon.

The charges were dropped, and he filed a lawsuit against the city.

Mapes’ attorney, Robert Wareham, noted to Denver’s KMGH-TV that Coloradans, “with the exception of Denver, have had the right to openly carry firearms since 1865.”

He said the city didn’t admit any “wrongdoing” in the payment.

“They got to apologize to him in the form of a nice, healthy check,” he told KMGH.

The Guns Save Lives blog reported Mapes said he had worn his sidearm to the movie theater several times without conflict, but this time was different.

“The movie stopped and the lights came on. Someone said, ‘I just got a call from my friend who said there’s someone in the theater with a gun,’” Mapes said.

Mapes said he told moviegoers he had a concealed carry permit.

Then came the arrest.

Guns.com explained Thornton city ordinances prohibit the carrying of weapons only in designated municipal buildings.

Maples said that contrary to claims he was “brandishing” a weapon, his gun never left the holster.

“No threats, no shots, no violence. Just a man doing what [is] protected under the Colorado Constitution,” he said.

The report noted it’s not the first time a Colorado city has been forced to pay a man arrested for legally carrying a gun.

In 2013, Colorado Springs paid $23,500 to a man who was wrongfully arrested for openly carrying a firearm in a city park. Guns.com said the officers arrested him under a law that had been repealed nearly a decade earlier.

James Sorensen was leaving a park event when an officer stopped him for openly carrying a .40 caliber handgun. Sorensen was detained and arrested on the grounds he violated a state prohibition on carrying guns in parks.

The law, however, was repealed in 2003.

The encounter was captured on video (Be aware of objectionable language):

In the Sorensen case, the city also insisted the payment didn’t constitute an admission of any liability or wrongdoing.

Authorities later admitted that the officers’ “cheat sheet” on various laws was incorrect.

Media obtained a copy of the settlement through opens records requests.

Guns.com cited similar cases in Washington and Wisconsin in recent years, with payments of $15,000 and $10,000, respectively, for wrongful arrests.

No Comments
« Older Posts