ttystikk
Well-Known Member
I got one for ya; 'get a haircut, ya goddamned hippie!'
DEA Lawsuit
- Thread starter Finshaggy
- Start date
I got one for ya; 'get a haircut, ya goddamned hippie!'
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
@Finshaggy I'll be watching; you're amassing an interesting record.
.Pinworm.
Well-Known Member
Wait, let me get a pen. This is good info.Part Two of Two:
Expressing the Anal Glands ExternallyEdit
1
Position the dog in front of you in a standing position. Its rear end should be facing you. If you have a partner, they should secure the dog by wrapping one arm around the neck and the other at the side of the body, hugging the dog close to them.[7]
2
Lift the dog's tail, rolling it up to expose its anus. You should be at level with the dog's bottom, in a position that is comfortable to maintain.
- While the process shouldn't take too long (about five minutes), the first time may require a little extra time and patience. Make sure you're in a comfortable position.
- The procedure won't hurt your dog, but if the glands are particularly swollen or impacted, your pet might be guarding their backside more than usual. Be careful and pay attention to your pet's body language.
3
Try not to frighten your dog. Talk to it, stroke it, and attempt to keep things as relaxed as possible.[8] You yourself should stay relaxed, as well: this will help things go smoothly.
4
Locate the anal glands. Place two fingers (thumb and forefinger) on either side of the anus. The anal glands are beneath the skin, just under the anus, at approximately 4 o'clock and 8 o'clock. If the glands are full, you will feel a slight bulge, about cherry-sized, when pressing inward just below the anus.
- Emptying the glands depends on pressing in the right place. If you can't feel the "cherries," you are either in the wrong place or the glands don't need emptying.
- Sometimes only one gland may be full. This could be a sign that the glands were functioning normally but that one has become infected or impacted. Call your vet before attempting to express the sac. This could require a round of antibiotics.[9]
5
Milk the glands upwards and inwards toward the anus. Keeping your thumb and forefinger on the glands, gently apply pressure up and in, in the direction of the anus. You should not squeeze continuously, but rather in gentle pulses.[10] Don't apply too much pressure: no more than you would apply to your own closed eye.[11]
6
Watch the dog's bottom for expressed liquid. If you're milking correctly, the liquid should be coming out in slow drips.
- If nothing is coming out, try adjusting the position of your fingers.
- The liquid smells strongly of fish and may be anything from a clear, smooth consistency to a brownish, grainy substance.[12]
- If the discharge is bloody or especially pasty, do not continue. See your vet as soon as possible about a possible impaction or infection.
7
Stop after a few tries if nothing comes out. You may want to try again another day. Repeated milking can be painful and cause bruises, which only exacerbates the issue.[13] Or, the glands may be impacted, which requires veterinary intervention.[14]
- Don't force the expression. It may be difficult to express the anal sacs of large dogs because they are located deeper internally. If this is the case, don't persist and hurt the dog. Seek veterinary attention because the sacs may need emptying via an internal procedure (placing a gloved finger in the rectum, which is best done by a professional!).
8
Continue to milk until the glands have emptied. You'll know they're empty when the sacs are barely palpable and there is no more liquid being expressed.[15]
9
Wipe your dog's bottom with a paper towel. Do this gently, as your dog may be feeling discomfort associated with the swollen glands.[16]
10
Give the dog a treat. Praise your dog, pet him, and reward him for his cooperation.
11
Wash the dog's rear end. Wipe the dog's rear with a clean paper towel and thoroughly bathe the dog.[17]
- If your dog won't tolerate a bath at this point, make sure you at least wash and rinse his bottom before letting him loose.
12
Don't express the glands more often than necessary. Too much expression can do more harm than good, leading to irritation and loss of muscle tone in the gland (reducing its ability to function normally).[18][19]
- You shouldn't need to do this more than a few times a year. If your dog has frequent troubles with his glands, see your vet.
- Although dog groomers may practice regular anal gland expression, this is not recommended unless there is a problem with the glands.[20]
Indagrow
Well-Known Member
I posted it all in my blog, I just put it here as well
srh88
Well-Known Member
just make sure you go to the park to find a helper like this pic suggests
"duuude, you trying to touch some butthole?"
.Pinworm.
Well-Known Member
Make sure to vote for me.just make sure you go to the park to find a helper like this pic suggests
"duuude, you trying to touch some butthole?"
https://www.rollitup.org/t/pinworm-announces-his-campaign-for-mayor.923565/
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
Update coming soon. I am filing the Summons soon, so I will do updates on that.
And I filed a EPCA/FOIA with the NSA. I filed it about a month ago, but I got ahold of someone today and they said they didn't get it somehow. So I refiled it today.
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
I don't know if it will be on TV. But it will be in the Newspapers in Austin, San Antonio, El Paso, Midland, etc. and it will be in Washington DC newspapers. So it could easily end up on TV. It's going to be a pretty big deal when its over, and probably while it's happening.
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
Lol.
I didn't think of it that way, I am winning so I didn't think of it as a record, but it is a record. I have won more cases than some lawyers who spend tens and hundreds of thousands on education before ever going in a courtroom.
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
Sent this to the DOJ Yesterday:
I have already Submitted a Lawsuit, but I thought I would also submit the complaint to the DOJ. Please get ahold of me at my phone number at X. The lawsuit can be found at 1:2016cv01117 in the 5th Circuit region.
The Defendants are:
Chuck Rosenberg (DEA Administrator)
Loretta Lynch (US AG)
Stepan Company
Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals
Here is the Class in the Lawsuit:
All United States Persons who practice Hinduism (or similarly barred Religion) or who are or wish to become Sadhus (Hindu Priests), or who have been barred from doing so for fear of the Controlled Substances Act, as well as any Hindu (or similar Religious Practitioner) who has been jailed or imprisoned as a result of this Act. As well as anyone who has lost the life of a family member due to this Act; and
All United States Persons who have been financially affected by the Monopoly enforced and operated by Defendants. As well as anyone who was jailed or imprisoned in the course of the enforcement of this Monopoly, family members of those killed in the process of that enforcement and anyone who has been in fear for their life or safety as a result of the enforcement of the Monopoly and overbroad enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in general.
The DEA is supporting Monopolies, an example of this is the Monopoly where Stepan Company imports Coca Leaves, extracts the Cocaine, then sells that Cocaine to Mallinckodt, but Stepan keeps the Coca Leaves to create a Coca extract with no Cocaine in it, then sells that Extract Commercially to Coca-Cola. No one else in the country gets to make this extract because the DEA won't let them import Coca Leaves or extract Cocaine.
This has been brought up in a previous case: 375 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2004)
But the DEA has failed to correct their mistakes.
They also, during the enforcement of these Monopolies, violate Religions like mine which include Marijuana use. But they allow companies like Mallinckrodt to Manufacture and Distribute Cannabinoids. This is Gerrymandering and Religious Gerrymandering. My brother also died because the current enforcement by the DEA, though it claims to allow for Medical use of Cannabinoids that have been researched, does not allow for easy access to Hospitals. So he is dead.
MM Steel, LP v. Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. et al, No. 4:2012cv01227 - Document 504 (S.D. Tex. 2014)
2 Companies conspiring against Competitor(s)
Tunica Web Advertising v. TUNICA CASINO OPERATORS, 496 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2007)
Section 1 of the Sherman Act
Spectators’ Comm. Network, Inc. v. Colonial Country Club, et al., 253 F.3d 215 (5 th Cir. 2001)
NW Wholesale Stationers v. Pac. Stationery 472 U.S. 284 (1985)
“Disadvantage competitors by directly denying… relationships the competitor needs in the competitive struggle”
To purposely allow one company to produce something, whether by the companies own efforts to push others out, or by legislation, is the essence of Monopoly
(via United States v. E. C. Knight Co. 156 U.S. 1 (1895))
“In commenting upon the statute, 21 Jac. I. c. 3, at the commencement of chapter 85 of the third institute, entitled "Against Monopolists, Propounders, and Projectors," Lord Coke, in language often quoted, said:
"It appeareth by the preamble of this act (as a judgment in Parliament) that all grants of monopolies are against the ancient and fundamental laws of this kingdome. And therefore it is necessary to define what a monopoly is."
"A monopoly is an institution, or allowance by the King by his grant, commission, or otherwise to any person or persons, bodies politique, or corporate, of or for the sole buying, selling, making, working, or using of anything, whereby any person or persons, bodies politique, or corporate, are sought to be restrained of any freedome or liberty that they had before or hindred in their lawfull trade."
"For the word 'monopoly,' dicitur [Greek phrase] (i. solo,) [Greek phrase] (i. vendere) quodest cum unus solus aliquod genus mercaturae universum vendit, ut solus vendat, pretium and suum libitum statuens: hereof you may read more at large in that case. Trin. 44 Eliz. Lib. 11, f. 84, 85; le case de monopolies."
Here is a Statement from you guys at the DOJ Anti-Trust Division that supports my case:
https://www.justice.gov/atr/memorandum-antitrust-division-united-states-department-justice-amicus-curiae-support-application
Here is a DEA recent Policy change that supports my case (I have been affected by this for 10+ years, and my brother is dead, so them realizing they were in the wrong 2 months ago is too little too late):
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2016/fr0812_3.pdf
This shows where the DEA allows Mallinckrodt to Manufacture Cannabinoids (Religions should get similar exemption, or it is Gerrymandering):
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/manufact/app/2001/fr0530.htm
This shows where the DOJ made a statement about Marijuana, allowing for exemption, but forgot to add Religion:
https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf
I have already filed the lawsuit, but would appreciate if you guys would back up the Statements you have made in the past (Judicial Estoppel). Please contact me at the number provided.
Thank you
I have already Submitted a Lawsuit, but I thought I would also submit the complaint to the DOJ. Please get ahold of me at my phone number at X. The lawsuit can be found at 1:2016cv01117 in the 5th Circuit region.
The Defendants are:
Chuck Rosenberg (DEA Administrator)
Loretta Lynch (US AG)
Stepan Company
Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals
Here is the Class in the Lawsuit:
All United States Persons who practice Hinduism (or similarly barred Religion) or who are or wish to become Sadhus (Hindu Priests), or who have been barred from doing so for fear of the Controlled Substances Act, as well as any Hindu (or similar Religious Practitioner) who has been jailed or imprisoned as a result of this Act. As well as anyone who has lost the life of a family member due to this Act; and
All United States Persons who have been financially affected by the Monopoly enforced and operated by Defendants. As well as anyone who was jailed or imprisoned in the course of the enforcement of this Monopoly, family members of those killed in the process of that enforcement and anyone who has been in fear for their life or safety as a result of the enforcement of the Monopoly and overbroad enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in general.
The DEA is supporting Monopolies, an example of this is the Monopoly where Stepan Company imports Coca Leaves, extracts the Cocaine, then sells that Cocaine to Mallinckodt, but Stepan keeps the Coca Leaves to create a Coca extract with no Cocaine in it, then sells that Extract Commercially to Coca-Cola. No one else in the country gets to make this extract because the DEA won't let them import Coca Leaves or extract Cocaine.
This has been brought up in a previous case: 375 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2004)
But the DEA has failed to correct their mistakes.
They also, during the enforcement of these Monopolies, violate Religions like mine which include Marijuana use. But they allow companies like Mallinckrodt to Manufacture and Distribute Cannabinoids. This is Gerrymandering and Religious Gerrymandering. My brother also died because the current enforcement by the DEA, though it claims to allow for Medical use of Cannabinoids that have been researched, does not allow for easy access to Hospitals. So he is dead.
MM Steel, LP v. Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. et al, No. 4:2012cv01227 - Document 504 (S.D. Tex. 2014)
2 Companies conspiring against Competitor(s)
Tunica Web Advertising v. TUNICA CASINO OPERATORS, 496 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2007)
Section 1 of the Sherman Act
Spectators’ Comm. Network, Inc. v. Colonial Country Club, et al., 253 F.3d 215 (5 th Cir. 2001)
- Engaged in Conspiracy;
- That restrained trade;
- In a particular market
NW Wholesale Stationers v. Pac. Stationery 472 U.S. 284 (1985)
“Disadvantage competitors by directly denying… relationships the competitor needs in the competitive struggle”
To purposely allow one company to produce something, whether by the companies own efforts to push others out, or by legislation, is the essence of Monopoly
(via United States v. E. C. Knight Co. 156 U.S. 1 (1895))
“In commenting upon the statute, 21 Jac. I. c. 3, at the commencement of chapter 85 of the third institute, entitled "Against Monopolists, Propounders, and Projectors," Lord Coke, in language often quoted, said:
"It appeareth by the preamble of this act (as a judgment in Parliament) that all grants of monopolies are against the ancient and fundamental laws of this kingdome. And therefore it is necessary to define what a monopoly is."
"A monopoly is an institution, or allowance by the King by his grant, commission, or otherwise to any person or persons, bodies politique, or corporate, of or for the sole buying, selling, making, working, or using of anything, whereby any person or persons, bodies politique, or corporate, are sought to be restrained of any freedome or liberty that they had before or hindred in their lawfull trade."
"For the word 'monopoly,' dicitur [Greek phrase] (i. solo,) [Greek phrase] (i. vendere) quodest cum unus solus aliquod genus mercaturae universum vendit, ut solus vendat, pretium and suum libitum statuens: hereof you may read more at large in that case. Trin. 44 Eliz. Lib. 11, f. 84, 85; le case de monopolies."
Here is a Statement from you guys at the DOJ Anti-Trust Division that supports my case:
https://www.justice.gov/atr/memorandum-antitrust-division-united-states-department-justice-amicus-curiae-support-application
Here is a DEA recent Policy change that supports my case (I have been affected by this for 10+ years, and my brother is dead, so them realizing they were in the wrong 2 months ago is too little too late):
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2016/fr0812_3.pdf
This shows where the DEA allows Mallinckrodt to Manufacture Cannabinoids (Religions should get similar exemption, or it is Gerrymandering):
https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/manufact/app/2001/fr0530.htm
This shows where the DOJ made a statement about Marijuana, allowing for exemption, but forgot to add Religion:
https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf
I have already filed the lawsuit, but would appreciate if you guys would back up the Statements you have made in the past (Judicial Estoppel). Please contact me at the number provided.
Thank you
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
Lol.
Certified return receipt
Have fun thinking that when the Drug Laws in America are completely different in about a year.
Indagrow
Well-Known Member
Just think that everyone who reads this will know how to express themselves and help their friends
