Flavor Flav Domestic Dispute: New Details Emerge

via MTV: 

 

 

Flavor Flav was arrested at his Las Vegas home on Wednesday after a domestic dispute, and now a police report has revealed further details of what took place before officials were called in.

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police told ABC News Action 13 that the altercation took place around 3:30 a.m. Wednesday, and they responded to a call from a woman who said that she had been in a fight with her fiancé, who also threatened her son.

Police said that when they arrived, they could still hear an argument going on inside Flav’s house on the 7800 block of Via Venture Court. His fiancée, Elizabeth Trujillo, explained that a fight between the couple started after an argument over his infidelity and things spiraled out of control. Trujillo says that she was thrown to the floor twice during the argument, and when her 17-year-old son tried to defend her, he was also threated.

The rapper, born William Drayton Jr., reportedly began to wrestle with Trujillo’s son and eventually grabbed two knives from the kitchen, chasing him upstairs where he locked himself in bedroom. At this point Trujillo says that the former Public Enemy rapper kicked in the door and continued to threaten her son.

Flavor Flav has denied chasing the teenager in the midst of the fight with his fiancée, but police say two knives were found on the kitchen floor, and he sustained a cut from one of them.

He was arrested and taken to the Clark County Detention Center, where he was later bailed out with $23,000 and then appeared in court early on Thursday (October 18). Flav is facing felony assault with a deadly weapon and misdemeanor domestic violence charges.

Newsweek to cease publishing print magazine

via Columbian 

LOS ANGELES — Newsweek will print its final edition at the end of this year. After nearly 80 years of publication, the news magazine will shift to a digital-only format, available online and on tablet computers, editor-in-chief Tina Brown said on the magazine’s website Thursday morning. Its last will be the Dec. 31 issue.

“We are transitioning Newsweek, not saying goodbye to it,” Brown said. “We remain committed to Newsweek and to the journalism that it represents. This decision is not about the quality of the brand or the journalism — that is as powerful as ever. It is about the challenging economics of print publishing and distribution.”

The digital-only publication, supported by paid subscriptions and dubbed Newsweek Global, will be aimed at a “highly mobile, opinion-leading audience who want to learn about world events in a sophisticated context,” Brown said.

Newsweek’s announcement marks a significant transition for the magazine, which was founded in 1933 and has been undergoing its own identity crisis and financial turmoil in recent years. Its problems are emblematic of the disruptions faced broadly by the print media industry, as readers shift online and away from the most valuable advertising.

In 2010, Newsweek and The Daily Beast announced they would merge, jointly owned by Sidney Harman, an audio equipment magnate who died last year, and IAC, the media and advertising company run by Barry Diller, chairman and senior executive.

Brown cited a Pew Research Center report that found 39 percent of Americans get their news from an online source.

“In our judgment, we have reached a tipping point at which we can most efficiently and effectively reach our readers in all-digital format,” she wrote. “This was not the case just two years ago. It will increasingly be the case in the years ahead.”

Brown said the shift would entail “staff reductions,” though she didn’t elaborate.

Romney’s empty ‘binders full of women’

via CNN: 

 

Editor’s note: Maria Cardona is a Democratic strategist, a principal at the Dewey Square Group, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton and former communications director for the Democratic National Committee.

(CNN) – Mitt Romney showed up Tuesday night talking about“binders full of women” being brought to him when he was governor. Sounds kind of kinky and certainly not something you want to be touting.

The phrase was part of Romney’s answer to a question from an audience member at the second presidential debate about how he would “rectify the inequalities in the workplace.” Referring to when he took over as Massachusetts governor, he said, “I had the chance to pull together a Cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men,” he said. “I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ and they brought us whole binders full of women.”

The “binders” moment went viral immediately on Twitter, spawning @RomneysBinders and @womaninabinder Twitter handles. As of Wednesday morning, almost 300,000 people had supported aFacebook page about what a politically dumb statement it was. Romney may soon say it was “inelegant” phrasing or he didn’t finish his statement or some other excuse, but the comment shows why voters, especially women, don’t trust him and don’t believe he has their back.

CNN Money: Bindersfullofwomen.com snapped up in 90 seconds

Maria Cardona

In fairness, “binders” was most likely a slip of the tongue. But Romney said it in an effort to obfuscate and pivot from the issue at hand: equality for women. He avoided the real question, and that, and his remark, spoke volumes.

Even as a slip of the tongue, this odd phrase betrays Romney’s true lack of understanding, knowledge and comfort level on women’s equality. And besides the binders comment, there are several problems with the story Romney told Tuesday night.

Become a fan of CNNOpinion

Stay up to date on the latest opinion, analysis and conversations through social media. Join us atFacebook/CNNOpinion and follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter. We welcome your ideas and comments.

First of all, it is not true. The “binder” of women’s résumés was prepared before the election by the Massachusetts Government Appointments Project, a coalition of nonpartisan women’s groups. When Romney won, the women — not in binders — gave him the résumés.

Romney told that story in an effort to demonstrate how well his administration had done in hiring women. Except it didn’t. A study by the University of Massachusetts and the Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy shows that the percentage of women in senior positions during his tenure actually declined. It went from 30% when Romney took office to 27% when he left and up to more than 33% after the new governor took over.

Did Romney undo gains with women?

Also, it boggles the mind that throughout his decades-long career in business, Romney had not come across any qualified women he could appoint to his Cabinet. The Romney campaign points to longtime aide Beth Myers, but she was not in the Cabinet.

The more reasonable explanation is that diversity of gender, or any kind of diversity, was never an important tenet of corporate leadership for Romney. Which is why he did not proactively seek out the “binders full of women”: Women’s groups, in fact, came looking for him.

All of this goes to the heart of why Romney has had such a hard time winning over the women’s vote. He answered the audience member’s question from the standpoint of a detached CEO who knew that he had to find qualified women to serve in his administration come hell or high water, given the vast disparity between men and women holding management positions. He must have known he would be blasted if he didn’t do it. In this day and age, this should be a no-brainer. You should not ask the American people to give you a medal for hiring qualified women.

The dissonance when it comes to the governor and women went even further at the debate. Romney not only couldn’t answer the question about women’ equality, he could not even answer a question about outlawing AK-47s without bringing up single mothers. Saying he did not believe in changing gun laws, he seemed to equate children raised by single parents with the “culture of violence.” I may be wrong, but I don’t think that is a good strategy to get struggling single moms to vote for you.

Tech: Social world thumbs through ‘binders full of women’

President Obama, in contrast, answered the equality question not just from a personal standpoint as a father but also as a commander in chief who signed a bill into law that guaranteed women could receive equal pay for equal work, the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Romney conspicuously never said whether he supported that act. The president’s approach was much more in synch with what women want to hear and with what all Americans know to be fair.

The binders comment was even more unfortunate for Romney in that he said it in the midst of Obama’s very strong showing. The president clearly showed that he had the fight, the passion and the commitment to continue to work for middle-class voters — on jobs, on health care, on taxes, on education, on immigration and, yes, on women’s issues.

This all underscores Romney’s inability to really connect with voters. Although he seemed to win a little more favor among women after the first debate, I predict binders of polling data as to why that movement stopped after Tuesday night.

 

GUTSY: Expedia’s Gay Marriage Ad Is Narrated By A Homophobic Father

via Business Insider: 

 

Expedia is publishing a series of videos under the rubric “find yours” which focus on why Americans make the journeys they do
.

Sounds dull, right? In fact most of the videos in the series have received fewer than 10,000 views on YouTube.

The latest video, however, got more than 2.2 million views since Oct. 2. It’s an unexpectedly moving tale told by retired business owner Artie Goldstein, who describes the less-than-enthusiastic reaction he had to his daughter Vickie’s announcement that she was going to marry another woman. “That startled me. I told her, this is not the dream I had for my daughter,” he says.

He books a plane ticket anyway, and the ad follows him on the trip. At one point he drives past a church, and the shot is delivered in silence.

(Of course, the ad has a happy ending when he sees his daughter in her wedding dress.)

The spot — made by agency 180LA for Expedia clients senior marketing director Vic Walia and vp/gm Joe Megibow — is unexpectedly subtle, for a major brand.

Gay-audience targeted campaigns are commonplace in advertising these days, and they already have their own set cliches (smiling whitebread couples in spotlessly tasteful homes, rough-housing with their adorable kids, etc.).

What makes this ad worthy of note is the fact that it’s told entirely from the point of view of a member of a generation that, frankly, isn’t entirely on board with the whole equal rights thing.

The ad thus addresses its supporters and critics at the same time — which is what makes it so clever. Take a look:

 

Celebrities Called Out Romney On Twitter During Tuesday’s Debate

via Business Insider: 

 

It was clear who won the presidential debate last night in Hollywood.

 

Celebs were not kind to Governor Mitt Romney during the second live presidential debate last night.

For the most part, Romney received criticism for his stammering, his five-point plan, and, of course, his mention of women in binders, among other things.

(Sidenote: If you haven’t stumbled upon the bindersfullofwomen tumblr, check it out.)

Unlike the first debate, Obama was praised for his comeback after a lackluster first debate.

Moderator Candy Crowley was also better received than VP debate moderator Martha Raddatz.

The only person who really gave Obama a tough time last night was Donald Trump, calling him “no Bill Clinton.”

Here’s how the celebs tore Romney apart on Twitter:

Calling him a bully:

 

@billmaher / Twitter

 

 

On birds:

 

@ElizabethBanks / Twitter

 

 

@billmaher / Twitter

 

On gun violence:

 

@ElizabethBanks / Twitter

 

 

@katewalsh / Twitter

 

Everything else:

 

@billmaher / Twitter

 

 

@billmaher / Twitter

 

 

@elizadushku / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@pattonoswalt /Twitter

@pattonoswalt / Twitter

@pattonoswalt / Twitter

 

 

@katewalsh / Twitter

@aishatyler / Twitter

@EvaLongoria / Twitter

 

And, then there were the binder comments:

 

@BrooklynDecker / Twitter

@NIckKristof / Twitter

 

 

They were much more in favor of moderator Candy Crowley …

 

@jessetyler / Twitter

@joyvbehar / Twitter

@chrissyteigen / Twitter

@RyanSeacrest / Twitter

@SarahKSilverman / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

 

… and, Obama …

 

@MiaFarrow / Twitter

@MMFlint / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

@elizadushku / Twitter

@SherriEShepherd / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@NickKristof / Twitter

 

 

@NickKristof / Twitter

 

… unless you were Donald Trump:

 

@realDonaldTrump

 

However, this was the zinger:

@realDonaldTrump / Twitter

 

 

Economists Reinhart And Rogoff Took A Huge Shot At Mitt Romney’s Economists Today

via Business Insider: 

 

Last night, Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff published a white paper showing the recovery could have been a whole lot worse.

They argue that the U.S. did not experience a normal crisis, but rather a “systemic financial” one.

That’s only happened four other times in our history: 1873, 1892, 1907, and 1929.

So compared with those crises, our recovery looks pretty rosy:

Today in Bloomberg, the pair double down on their argument by taking issue with economists who’ve signed on to Mitt Romney’s campaign and have argued our recovery is different, and worse:

…a few op-ed writers have argued that, in fact, the U.S. is “different” and that international comparisons aren’t relevant because of profound institutional differences from one country to another. Some of these authors, including Kevin Hassett, Glenn Hubbard and John Taylor – who are advisers to the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney – as well as Michael Bordo, who supports the candidate, have stressed that the U.S. is also “different” in that its recoveries from recessions associated with financial crises have been rapid and strong.

we have to take issue with gross misinterpretations of the facts

Since they’re looking at the wrong kinds of benchmark crises, Team Romney ends up using the wrong metrics, they say. Instead of focusing on years to return to normal growth, they’ve fixed on rate of recovery.

But for post- World War II systemic crises around the world, it’s taken about four and a half years to fully recover. In 14 Great Depression episodes around the world (including the U.S.) it took 10 years on average.

Team Romney misses this point:

Taylor, for example, appears to show the recovery from the Great Depression as the strongest in U.S. history, even though it took about a decade to reach the same level of per capita income as at its starting point in 1929.

No doubt, this will likely come off to many as a partisan response to another partisan assertion.

But it seems like it’s impossible to avoid that kind of thing these days.

(Via FT Alphaville)

Michael Bloomberg Has Set Up His Own Super PAC, And Is Dumping $15 Million Into The 2012 Election

via Business Insider: 

 

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has one aspect of his post-mayoral life finally worked out.

Raymond Hernandez of the New York Times reports that Bloomberg, one of the country’s most prominent independent politicians, just filed for a brand-new, as-yet-unnamed Super PAC, which he plans to use to dump portions of his fortune into races across the country.

Irrespective of party, Bloomberg is reportedly planning to support candidates who support three of his biggest policy initiatives: same-sex marriage; tougher gun laws; and overhauling schools.

To that end, Hernandez reports that Bloomberg expects to spend between $10 to $15 million on competitive state, local and congressional races this month, including Angus King, the former governor of Maine who is mounting a leading bid for the Senate as an independent, is one identified recipient of the mayor’s largesse.

Hernandez reports that the Super PAC will target Democratic Congressman Joe Baca of California, whom Bloomberg considers to be weak on gun control.

Here’s Where Marijuana Could Be Legal After Election Day

via Business Insider: 

 

While the national races dominate media attention, this year is also a fundamental turning point for marijuana legality in the United States. 

This year, six different states and four cities will vote on initiatives that have to do with marijuana.

These are three types of laws on the ballots:

• Medical marijuana laws
• Decriminalization, which makes marijuana possession or sale an infraction punished by fine rather than a misdemeanor warranting possible jail time
• Legalization, which would make marijuana legal to buy, sell, and use like any other commodity

No state has successfully made marijuana wholly legal, but many have come close — and several may succeed in doing so this November.

The end result could be a radically different landscape for marijuana availability in the United States. Here’s a rundown of all of the places that are putting pot to a vote.

 

Washington votes on Initiative 502 to legalize marijuana statewide

Jake Dimmock, co-owner of the Northwest Patient Resource Center medical marijuana dispensary in Seattle.

AP

Washington has one of the boldest ballot initiatives on the table.

Initiative 502 would legalize the taxation, sale, and consumption of marijuana in the state of Washington.

It would allow anyone over the age of 21 to purchase up to an ounce of marijuana, sixteen ounces of marijuana-infused products, or 72 ounces of liquid marijuana-infused products.

It would also allow producers to grow marijuana, the liquor board to regulate the sales, and the state to tax the sales (initially an excise tax of 25% wholesale price).

The initiative bans the public use of marijuana and the act of driving under the influence of marijuana. It allocates all of the money collected from the cannabis taxes toward state health and education services.

Source: Washington Secretary of State

Polling on Initiative 502 is very positive and it will probably pass

Survey USA

Survey USA has been conducting repeated polls in Washington, and it seems that support is consolidating around Initiative 502.

A poll published on July 18 indicated that 55% of respondents would vote yes on the initiative with 32% voting no. 13% were undecided, with men supporting the measure more than women by a somewhat significant margin.

Another poll carried out September 7-9 showed 57% of respondents supporting the initiative, 34% voting no, and only 9% undecided.

Colorado, already a cannabis oasis, votes on Amendment 64 to legalize marijuana statewide

A discount medical marijuana dispensary in Denver.

Wikimedia Commons

The Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act — Amendment 64 — if approved by voters would immediately allow for the legal possession of up to one ounce of marijuana for anyone over the age of 21.

The amendment would also allow for the cultivation of marijuana plants, the manufacture of marijuana products and the retail sale of cannabis at approved and regulated locations.

It allows municipal governments to prohibit these locations if they so choose.

The act also requires the Colorado Assembly to enact excise taxes on marijuana and to annually use the first $40 million collected from these taxes towards state public schools.

Source: Regulate Marijuana

Coloradans are poised to approve Amendment 64 in a tight race

Denver Post

According to a Denver Post & Survey USA poll, 51% of Coloradans planned to support the measure and 40% opposed it.

Significant for Colorado is the state’s longstanding relationship with marijuana. Most people have already made up their minds about it after years of ballot efforts and dispensaries on street corners.

Support and opposition has been consolidated there years longer than many other states with marijuana on the ballot this year, so polls shouldn’t budge too much. Women, especially in this election, are the swing voters.

Oregon votes on Measure 80, the Oregon Cannabis Tax Act Initiative to legalize marijuana statewide

Paul Stanford at his marijuana growing facility in Portland, Ore.

AP

Oregon has one of the most contentious — and ambitious — marijuana legalization laws on the ballot this November.

A “yes” vote allows commercial marijuana cultivation and sale in the state of Oregon. The stores would be state-licensed and could only sell to adult. All adults would be allowed to cultivate and use marijuana without a license.

The measure would continue to ban the use of marijuana in public and possession by minors.

Supporters estimate that the subsequent taxes on marijuana would raise $140 million, 90% of which would be earmarked for the state’s general fund.

Source: Ballotpedia

Oregon’s legalization is in the tightest race of any cannabis ballot measure

Survey USA

A July 5 poll from PPP shows that 43% of Oregonians think marijuana should be legal while 46% believe it should be illegal.

A second poll published on September 18 from KATU-TV and Survey USA found that 37% would vote yes on Measure 80, 41% would vote no, and a full 22% were undecided, from a sample of 552 likely voters.

Also interesting in that poll is the fact that women are again the swing vote, with 27% of female voters still undecided.

Massachusetts votes on Question 3 to legalize medical marijuana

AP

In November, the Bay State will vote on Question Three, a measure to legalize the use of medical marijuana.

According to the text of the measure, the proposed law eliminates all state criminal and civil penalties related to the medical use of marijuana.

The cannabis could be sold to “patients meeting certain conditions” and produced and distributed from centers regulated by the state.

The measure also allows patients to grow marijuana in “hardship cases.”

The official argument for the measure was written by Linda Brantley, the President of the New England Coalition for Cancer Survivorship, arguing that the passage would alleviate the pain of thousands of Massachusetts’ residents. The official argument against, by Dr. Jay Broadhurst of Vote No On Question 3, argues that medical marijuana needs tighter restrictions.

Source: Massachusetts Secretary of State

Massachusetts is poised to “overwhelmingly” approve medical marijuana

AP

A survey of 502 likely voters by the Boston Globe showed 69% supporting Question 3 and 22% opposed.

A majority of both registered Republicans and Democrats supported the measure.

57% of Massachusetts Republicans surveyed planned to support Question 3 and 76% of registered Democrats planned to back it.

Two thirds of independents planned to vote yes.

Arkansas votes on the Medical Marijuana Act of 2012

AP

Arkansas will be the first southern state to vote on legalizing medical marijuana.

Sponsored by a group called Arkansans for Compassionate Care, the measure would made marijuana legal for medical use and set up an infrastructure for cultivating and selling it to qualifying patients with a prescription.

Patients could also possess up to six plants. The measure got the requisite 100,000 signatures in late August.

Source: Arkansas Secretary of State

There has been next to no polling on the Arkansas measure

Data from Talk Business, Chart by Walter Hickey/BI

There has not been any statewide polling on the issue by an established firm, so it’s difficult to project how it will do.

But a Talk Business poll conducted by Hendrix College before the measure was on the ballot found voters evenly divided on the issue.

In the poll, 47% of Arkansans said that they would vote for a referendum allowing medical marijuana while 46% said they would not. 7% were undecided.  The poll was conducted among 585 likely voters and had a margin of error of ±4%.

Since the act didn’t make the ballot until late August and this poll was conducted a month earlier, it’s not clear whether this support or opposition has continued.

Montana votes on Initiative Referendum 124, which will determine accessibility to medical marijuana.

Getty Images

This ballot measure would repeal Montana’s 2004 voter-approved medical marijuana law, which created a medical marijuana program for eligible patients.

In 2011, the Montana Legislature passed Senate Bill 423, which repeals Initiative 148 and replaces it with a new system.

That bill limits marijuana providers to three patients each, prevents marijuana providers from accepting anything of value in exchange for products, and places government oversight over doctors who certify marijuana for more than 25 patients per year.

But in order for the 2011 bill to overturn the 2004 vote, voters must approve Initiative Referendum 124 this November.

In this case, a “no” vote is a vote for the initial initiative, and a “yes” vote is a vote for the Senate bill.

Source: Project Vote Smart

Montana is a tight race, with voters favoring the tighter regulations on medical marijuana

Data Mason Dixon, Chart Walter Hickey/BI

One of the only recent polls on Initiative Referendum 124 is from Mason Dixon Polling on behalf of Lee Newspapers taken in mid-September.

In that poll, 44% of Montanans surveyed planned to vote yes on the measure, which would replace the 2004 initiative with the 2011 marijuana plan passed by the legislature; 31% were against the measure, preferring that the original initiative remain in effect over the Senate plan.

A whopping 25% of Montanans were undecided, understandable on a vote where “yes” and “no” mean unexpected things.

Something to note: Ballot initiatives must get at least 50% of the vote to pass so abstentions could kill the measure.

In Michigan, the cities of Detroit, Flint, Grand Rapids and Ypsilanti will all vote on marijuana too

Foxtongue/Flickr

There is a handful of local races voting for the local decriminalization of marijuana in several cities in Michigan.

• Detroit will vote on a measure to decriminalize up to an ounce of marijuana for adults over the age of 21
• Flint will vote to decriminalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana on private property for anyone over the age of 19
• Grand Rapids will vote to decriminalize and make the possession of marijuana a fined infraction instead of a misdemeanor.
• Ypsilanti will vote to make local enforcement of marijuana possession the lowest law enforcement priority.

Source: NORML, Ballotpedia

Alleged 9/11 mastermind: America killed more people than hijackers did

via Reuters 

(Reuters) – - The alleged mastermind of the September 11 attacks told the Guantanamo courtroom on Wednesday that the U.S. government had killed many more people in the name of national security than he is accused of killing.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed was allowed to address the court at a pretrial hearing focused on security classification rules for evidence that will be used in his trial on charges of orchestrating the hijacked plane attacks that killed 2,976 people.

“When the government feels sad for the death or the killing of 3,000 people who were killed on September 11, we also should feel sorry that the American government that was represented by (the chief prosecutor) and others have killed thousands of people, millions,” said Mohammed, who wore a military-style camouflage vest to the courtroom.

He accused the United States of using an elastic definition of national security, comparable to the way dictators bend the law to justify their acts.

“Many can kill people under the name of national security, and to torture people under the name of national security, and to detain children under the name of national security, underage children,” he said in Arabic through an English interpreter.

“The president can take someone and throw him into the sea under the name of national security and so he can also legislate the assassinations under the name of national security for the American citizens,” he said in an apparent reference to the U.S. killing and burial at sea of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and the U.S. use of drone strikes against U.S. citizens accused of conspiring with al Qaeda.

He advised the court against “getting affected by the crocodile tears” and said, “Your blood is not made out of gold and ours is made out of water. We are all human beings.”

The judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, gave Mohammed permission to speak and did not interrupt him, but said he would not hear any further personal comments from the defendants.

Mohammed’s lecture to the court came during a week of pretrial hearings at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base in Cuba for him and four other captives accused of recruiting, funding and training the hijackers.

He did not indicate why he wore a camouflage vest, but his wardrobe choice suggested he might try to invoke protections reserved for soldiers.

Pohl had ruled on Tuesday that the defendants could wear what they want to court, so long as it did not pose a security risk or include any part of a U.S. military uniform like those worn by their guards.

Mohammed’s lawyers had argued that he should be allowed to wear a woodland-patterned camouflage vest to court because he wore one as part of a U.S.-armed mujahideen force fighting against Russian troops that occupied Afghanistan in the 1980s.

“Mr. Mohammed has previously distinguished himself on the battlefield by wearing a military-style vest or clothing. He did it in Afghanistan for the U.S. government during that proxy war, he did it in Bosnia and he has a right to do it in this courtroom,” his defense attorney, Army Captain Jason Wright, argued on Tuesday.

The United States is trying Mohammed and the other alleged al Qaeda captives as unlawful belligerents who are not entitled to the combat immunity granted to soldiers who kill in battle.

They could face the death penalty if convicted of charges that include conspiring with al Qaeda, attacking civilians and civilian targets, murder in violation of the laws of war, destruction of property, hijacking and terrorism.

Under the Geneva Conventions, one of the things that separate soldiers from unlawful belligerents is the wearing of uniforms that distinguish them from civilians. Soldiers must also follow a clear command structure, carry arms openly and adhere to the laws of war.

Wright had argued that forbidding Mohammed from wearing military-style garb could undermine his presumption of innocence in the war crimes tribunal.

“The government has a burden to prove that this enemy prisoner of war is an unprivileged enemy belligerent,” Wright said.

Prepper Put on No-Fly List, Stranded in Hawaii

via Daily Paul: 

 

What does it take to get your name on the no-fly list in America? Apparently you only need to be classified as a “prepper.”

When 34-year-old U.S. citizen and Mississippi resident Wade Hicks boarded a military flight to visit his wife, a Navy lieutenant stationed in Okinawa, Japan, he did not think it would be a one-way trip. Stopping off in Hawaii to refuel, upon reboarding the plane, Hicks was quickly escorted back off again by armed guards. He was then taken to a secure interrogation room where Hicks was informed he would not be flying anywhere because he turned up on the no-fly list.

Hicks has since been stranded on the island state without a way home.

As seen below in a bombshell double interview on Infowars Nightly News, private investigator and founder of the Northeast Intelligence Network Douglas Hagmann revealed that Hicks not only passed through TSA screening at his original departure point in San Francisco, but he has also passed a criminal background check and an FBI screening for an enhanced concealed carry permit in his home state.

In addition, Hicks holds a TWIC card, or Transportation Worker Identification Credential, granted by none other than the TSA. Hicks has also held classified clearances as a defense contractor for the U.S. military. His passport is valid and has not been revoked.

Continue:

http://www.infowars.com/prepper-put-on-no-fly-list-stranded-…

 

NDAA critic stranded in Hawaii after turning up on no-fly list

via RT: 

Wade Hicks was en route to a US Navy base in Japan to see his wife when armed military guards informed him that they had other plans. Hicks, an American citizen with no criminal record, had just been put added to a federal no-fly list.

After being escorted off his plane during a routine re-fueling stop on the Pacific Island of Oahu, Hicks, 34, was left stranded in Hawaii this week. In an interview, he suggests that his opposition to a newly-created law that allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens at military prisons without charge or trial could be to blame for his mistreatment.

“I was very, very vocal about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and I did contact my representative” about it, Hicks tells talk show host Doug Hagmann. “I do believe that this is tied in some way to my free speech and my political view.”

According to Hicks, he has little reason to believe otherwise. He tells Hagmann that he formerly worked as a contractor for the US Department of Defense and has undergone extensive background checks in order to obtain an enhanced license that allows him to carry a concealed firearm. Hicks says he also holds on to a special identification card issued by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the US Homeland Security Department sub-agency that administers pat-downs and screenings at airports across the country. An investigation carried out by Hagmann has led him to locating no criminal history for the man whatsoever.

 

In fact, the only “dirt” the host has managed to dig up on Hicks, he writes, is his occasionally vocal identification as an American patriot.

Hicks, says Hagmann, “appears to be a law abiding member of society.” He adds, however, that preliminary research has led him to link the man as being “an outspoken ‘patriot’” who is “openly critical of the NDAA,” a bill US President Barack Obama signed into law on December 31 despite openly acknowledging that he had “serious reservations” about provisions that allow the military to indefinitely detain anyone on mere suspicion of ties with terrorists. Hicks also tells the radio host that he is critical of the government’s handling of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and says, “I think the evidence I’ve seen warrants a new investigation, and I’m very vocal about it as well,”

“He is a former talk-show host of a small, local radio station known for its ‘patriotic bias.’ He is a member of ‘Patriots for America’ and the Mississippi Preparedness Project. He is openly vocal about the erosion of our rights – and it certainly looks like he has been proven correct. Is that now a crime worthy of being denied the ability to travel freely within the United States?” Hagmann writes.

The Mississippi Preparedness Project, according to the group’s official website, strives “to encourage and train others to prepare for any situation, whether it be political or disruptions in the infrastructure and civil structure of the communities in which we live and work.”

“We intend to prepare and train for all foreseeable aspects of personal preparedness including Political, Basic and Emergency Medical, Food and Water Storage, Equipment, Local, State and Nationwide Communications, Personal, Home and Community Defense,” their mission statement continues.

Hicks’ incident occurred on October 14 when a military plane Hicks had boarded to visit his wife, a lieutenant in the US Navy, stopped in Oahu to refuel. Although he had no issues with gaining admittance to the aircraft during the first leg of his trip, things went amiss in Oahu.There two heavily-armed officers entered the plane and escorted him to a small interrogation room at a military base and told him that he had showed up on the US “no-fly” list, despite having boarded a flight earlier that day in San Francisco where he had been subjected to military-sanctioned security screenings reportedly more stringent than the TSA treatment. He was hoping to visit his wife of only eight months when the mishap unraveled.

“They have given me no reason. They just basically are telling me, ‘You can’t fly because we said so,’” Hicks tells Hagmann this week.“They didn’t know how I even left Travis Air Force Base.”

“I said, ‘If I could find a way off the island, I could leave’? They said, ‘Yes, as long as you don’t fly.”

Hicks adds that he has since met with a Navy lawyer in Hawaii who attempted to resolve the case with so far no avail. He reports that the attorney reached out to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement hoping that the incident has been the result of a case of mistaken identity, but, “They said, ‘No, we have the right person that is in our database. His social security [number] matches and his birth date matches.’”

“I have no idea how long I’m going to be stranded in Hawaii or if I’m going to be able to leave out of here on an aircraft,” Hicks adds.“Try to get back from Oahu . . . It’s a long swim and it’s a long boat ride.”