Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
I Don't Need No Stinkin' Papers
In a couple of weeks, Deborah Davis is scheduled to be arraigned on federal misdemeanor charges for refusing to show her ID while riding a public bus that crosses the Denver Federal Center, a 90-building complex that includes offices of the Veterans Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the National Archives. According to her Web site, Davis was riding to work on September 26 when a guard boarded the bus at the complex and asked for her ID. She refused to comply, arguing that she had no legal obligation to carry ID, let alone present it on command. The guard disagreed, and so did the two other officers he summoned, who eventually dragged her off the bus and handcuffed her.
Davis' lawyers (whose services were arranged by the ACLU of Colorado) expect the government to cite two regulations. One says that on federal property closed to the general public, officials must "restrict admission to the property, or the affected portion, to authorized persons who must register upon entry to the property and must, when requested, display Government or other identifying credentials to Federal police officers or other authorized individuals when entering, leaving or while on the property." The other says "persons in and on [federal] property must at all times comply with...the lawful direction of Federal police officers and other authorized individuals." Presumably the government will argue that the first rule makes a demand for ID on a bus that happens to cross federal property a "lawful direction."
Davis' Web site explains the issue at stake this way:
Deborah Davis' case is about one thing: the right to travel.
The reason why she was charged has absolutely nothing to do with security. The guard at the Denver Federal Center wasn't checking IDs against a "no ride" list: there is no such thing. The demands made against Deb Davis were nothing more than a compliance test, a demand that she kowtow to officialdom. And lest we forget, having to show your ID is a search without a warrant....[The case will] determine whether Deb and the rest of us live in a free society, or in a country where we must show 'papers' whenever a cop demands them.
You decide: Is Deborah Davis a freedom fighter, or (as I'm sure the cops would have it) just a pain in the ass?
A couple of years ago, Reason's Brian Doherty reported on a similar crusade by software multimillionaire John Gilmore. By a strange coincidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Gilmore's case the day before Davis' arraignment.
|11.22.05 @ 6:25PM|#
Wasn't there a similar case like this somewhere down south where
the police arrested a man because he refused to show ID when
asked.
I remember the case went all the way to the SCOTUS and they ruled
that in fact it is legal for police to demand ID and arrest you if
you refuse to give it.
Although in that case, the cops were actively searching for someone
( I think a vandal or a theif or something) so I dunno if that
ruling directly applies to this case.
But I'll go out on a limb here and guess that she will be convicted
of this misdemeanor and that no court will overturn it. Somehow I
doubt too many courts will rule that you do not in fact have to
show "papers" when asked by an authority figure.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.22.05 @ 6:36PM|#
She's a pain in the ass but the id stuff is BS. I can assure you
however, that this is not the first time this has happened. She
will not win, particularly since it is on a federal reservation.
And there is the Hibel case where the Supers sided with the
LAW.
I once had a Garden Grove Ca police officer threaten my life for
refusing to produce a driver license. My argument then was that I
wasn't driving, merely a passenger. His argument was a .38 and more
persuasive. I mention this to point out that forced production of
valid ID for police authorities is nothing new and dates at least
to my YOOT some, ahem, time ago.
|11.22.05 @ 6:41PM|#
So what happens if you honest-to-god don't have ID with you? Can you be arrested for forgetting your wallet?
|11.22.05 @ 6:44PM|#
So what happens if you honest-to-god don't have ID with you?
Can you be arrested for forgetting your wallet?
Probably.
Garth|11.22.05 @ 6:47PM|#
If I remember correctly, the SCOTUS ruled that they could ask for ID if they could prove probable cause... I should look that up before posting but isn't this just what blogging is all about: slinging unfounded opinions?
|11.22.05 @ 6:50PM|#
IIRC, SCOTUS ruled that you had to produce ID if there was a law that said you had to produce it. Since the feds have that law, they are probably going to win.
|11.22.05 @ 6:52PM|#
So it appers the bus stops at the gates of this complex everyday
and everyone has to show id. This seems stupid.
I could see requiring anyone exiting to show id and get an exit
approval tag or whatever.
There seems to be no distiction between people just riding on a
non-federal bus on a route they can't control that happens to go
though the federal complex and people who are leaving the bus
inside that complex.
I would argure that as long as the defendant is just on the bus
they haven't volunteraly entered the complex. She is simply forced
to go there by the routing of the bus.
|11.22.05 @ 6:55PM|#
"Can you be arrested for forgetting your wallet?"
Well, "you knew or should have known," as they like to say, that
yes, you do need your stinking papers.
Comrade.
Hakluyt|11.22.05 @ 6:58PM|#
I'm surprised no one has made a Rosa Parks comment.
___________________
The Catholic Boat's gonna be headin' on out today.
The Catholic Boat. Time to throw all of your cares away.
Get some hot Chrisitan action; it'll make you-
|11.22.05 @ 6:58PM|#
As to the first rule regarding federal property closed to the
general public, if you hit the link about the case and follow
through to the "get the facts" portion, you'll note that there's a
picture of the Denver Federal Center sign that says "Visitors
Welcome".
I wonder, though, what Joe Fedcop is looking for when he boards a
public bus and asks for everyone's ID, with no list to refer to? An
ID that reads: Name -- Ahmed Al Bombthrower Occupation --
International Terrorist?
Oh, and she's a pain in the ass. Which is a good thing in this
case.
|11.22.05 @ 7:04PM|#
"or other identifying credentials"
How about a library card? If that's not OOOOfficial enough, maybe a
high school yearbook photo.
|11.22.05 @ 7:15PM|#
I don't know Davis, so she may be a pain in the ass who's a
freedom fighter. Or she may be neither. However, she's dead right
(emphasis on 'dead').
I agree with Deborah Davis 100%. She is absolutely correct in her
belief that she doesn't have to present papers to anyone simply 'on
demand'.
However, we're Europe, so she'd best be prepared to lose, and lose
big.
Precedent, or as everyone now calls it, Stare Decisis is not on her
side. There have been several cases which the SCOTUS has upheld
basically saying that yes, you have to give your id over on request
to any... let me emphasise ANY law enforcement agent. And what's
worse for Davis is that this is one of those situations where you
could almost make a case in favor of the feds. Not because I have
any faith in government, but because they're taking the effort to
point out that the facts of this case are specific and narrow- you
know, like when you go to the airport and get searched, or go on
the subway and get searched.
People with far LESS nuanced cases have already lost this battle. I
don't hold out any hope for Davis.
|11.22.05 @ 7:44PM|#
With this incident and the New York subway searches, I can forsee the day when everybody is required to present papers everytime they leave the city or cross state lines. What next? Written permission from your employer in order to travel?
|11.22.05 @ 7:50PM|#
I can forsee the day when everybody is required to present
papers everytime they leave the city or cross state lines. What
next? Written permission from your employer in order to
travel?
Ya think? It's a little thing called 'interstate commerce'. What,
you driving to another state ISN'T interstate commerce? Try selling
THAT one to the feds.
|11.22.05 @ 7:53PM|#
I can't see how anyone can argue that this isn't the direction in which we are traveling.
|11.22.05 @ 7:56PM|#
Why does Debbie Davis hate America?
Remember kids, all your busses are belong to us.
|11.22.05 @ 7:58PM|#
Why does Debbie Davis hate America
She doesn't hate America, she just hates the children.
|11.22.05 @ 8:05PM|#
Am I the first one to mention our friends Dudley Hiibel and
Terry Bressi?
You are not. However, you are the first to mention Bressi.
Paul
|11.22.05 @ 8:23PM|#
I can't see how anyone can argue that this isn't the
direction in which we are traveling.
Lately it's occured to me that our society isn't really getting
less free, it's just that the violations of freedom are changing.
It used to be illegal to suck someone off. Now it's illegal not to
show your ID on command.
I think society will always be unfree, just in ever-changing
ways.
|11.22.05 @ 8:45PM|#
Isn't this trial like a free lottery ticket for the
government?
Yes, the bus passed through Federal property, but as it was pointed
out, what security do the guards provide by checking ID's? There's
no list to check them agianst and no bags are being searched. It's
just the government messing with you. Now that someone has refused
to be hastled and brought a legal case, what does the government
have to lose? Nothing. If it loses the case it simply strengthens
existing laws or passes another which allows government officials
to search anyone in a situation that is similar to this one and can
take its chances with the next lawsuit. If it wins the case it will
have the authority to check ID's for nothing other than the sake of
checking ID's. Then it can strenghen the existing law or pass new
ones that expand this power to areas not currently covered -
subways, airports, all busses, etc - and can take its chances with
those inevitable lawsuits.
Where does it end?
|11.22.05 @ 9:04PM|#
Back when the russkies were the bad guys my Civics teacher
stated that one of the great things about America, something that
distinguished it from the godless, totalitarian commies, was that
we, as a free people, didn't have to carry and be prepared to show
ID at all times.
Guess the commies won that one.
|11.22.05 @ 9:08PM|#
Johnny-
Not to mention the secret prisons in former Soviety
facilities.
Nope, nothing at all Stalinist about a country that uses Soviet era
prisons to detain people without trial, and forces citizens to show
their papers when they move around. Nothing at all.
Jim Anderson|11.22.05 @ 9:39PM|#
Damned ACLU, allowing terrorists the right to roam our nation's
freeways unfettered by anything but their Yugo's massive
weight-to-power ratio and suspicion-raising nameplate.
Happy, Johnny?
|11.22.05 @ 10:28PM|#
I think that within the next few years, America will begin
issuing a national ID card.
Shortly after that, the national ID card will begin replacing
driver's licenses or social security numbers for nearly all
civilian identification purposes.
And then ...
Something terrible will happen.
|11.22.05 @ 11:24PM|#
This sounds ridiculous. It would have saved everyone a lot of
trouble if the bureaus would have simply rerouted the bus after the
increased security was put in place. They've done this at my fed
facility, sucks when it rains, but no one gets hauled off to
jail.
As for the IDs, it's interesting what IDs are acceptable and where.
I always offer up my DoD (civ) issued federal ID that I had to
clear a background check for first, but about half the time they
prefer to see the state issued one I had to learn to parallel park
for. Or I just ask state or federal? like paper or plastic? when
asked for ID. This often just gets blinks, especially on AmTrack ID
sweeps. I'm certainly no freedom fighter, but my mama always said I
was a pain-in-the-ass.
|11.22.05 @ 11:54PM|#
One can be both a freedom fighter and a pain in the ass. May we
all give thanks this season for such pains in police asses! (Please
pardon the redundancy)
The Supreme Court in the Hiibel case analogized an officer's
request for identification to a stop and frisk under Terry v. Ohio.
The officer must have an articulable, reasonable suspicion that the
person has engaged or is about to engage in criminal activity--a
lesser standard than probable cause. Ms. Davis' website suggests
that that suspicion is absent here.
Incidentally, Hiibel was a 5-4 decision, with Justice O'Connor in
the majority. Judge Alito should be asked about his views in this
area of Fourth Amendment law.
In that the bus ride here appears to have been intrastate, the
Fourth Amendment issue would appear to be much stronger than the
right to travel issue, which is in fact a fundamental right to
interstate travel.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.23.05 @ 12:02AM|#
Johnny, I fully intended to slam the ACLU, which is a fav
pastime of mine, but it turned out that they actually filed a brief
in the Hible case. So, I was forced to back off and STFU.
I think these guys (Reason), maybe it was Liberty Mag, once did a
piece that tried to determine whether the ACLU was good or bad. The
conclusion was that, on balance, over time, ACLU did slightly more
good than harm. I voted for ACLU to go hike to hell, but, I'm a
fargin' crank.
Dave|11.23.05 @ 12:30AM|#
Looks like it's time for a quick grammar lesson:
In German, all nouns are capitalized, not just proper nouns. For
example, "Guten Abend, Herr Offizer. Meine Papieren sind hier in
Ordnung."
(Translation: "Good evening, Mr. Officer. My papers are here and in
order.")
I hope this is of service; I'd hate for people to look illiterate
when they're writing their confessions.
dhex|11.23.05 @ 1:32AM|#
the aclu is about as good as it gets in these matters.
the whole thing is kinda fucked.
|11.23.05 @ 3:30AM|#
Twice police officers have threatened to arrest me unless I
produced my ID--in SF no less!
In both cases I said "Yes, sir!" and produced it. Call me a coward,
but I still have all my teeth and avoided getting the Diallo
treatment.
|11.23.05 @ 6:34AM|#
I have a friend that never shows ID when he gets pulled over. He claims the fith everytime. He has been arrested a few tims for it, but the local cops have learnt to not pull him over. He has a law degree, and knows more about the law than any of the prosecutors. His stories are pretty cool.
|11.23.05 @ 6:43AM|#
Meine Papieren sind hier UND in Ordnung.
Ve haff vays uff making you use conjunctions, Herr Dave.
|11.23.05 @ 6:44AM|#
Real Bill, you say "in SF no less!" like SF hasn't always leaned in the police state way. (hello handgun ban).
|11.23.05 @ 7:34AM|#
Yeah, A Drivers license is for Driving. if Im not driving, mr.
police officer has no reason to see it. none at all.
Now maybe if there has been a robbery or peeping tom and you happen
to be walking aroun in the dark in the neighborhood, ok
But if you are a passenger, being passive, not doing anything but
sitting and NOT operating a motor vehicle, um NO Ppiggy Piggy.
|11.23.05 @ 7:34AM|#
Just remember, if you're in New York, once you've shown your
papers, watch out for the guard who says "Haff a good trip!"
For heaven's sake, don't say "Oh, thank you" because then he'll
know you're really a British airman trying to escape (played by
David McCallum), and he'll shoot you. Real New Yorkers never say
thank you.
"If you who read this can say: I am not under fire; I am not under
torture; I am not on the run; no one in my country is arrested and
held without prompt charge or trial; if I hear a noise at six in
the morning, I know it is my neighbour or the milkman, not the
secret police; then you owe it in some part to the resistance that
occupied Europe put up to Hitler.
There is a saying in Holland: only dead fishes float with the
current, live ones swim against it."
Closing lines of "Resistance" by MRD Foot.
|11.23.05 @ 8:39AM|#
This happened to me while traveling in (/backpacking through)
Mexico. The cops got on the bus I was on (carrying machine guns)
and asked everyone for their papers and then randomly searching
bags. They left me alone though - maybe because I was the lone
white kid minding his own business. They may not have wanted to
bother with someone with his nose burried in a book who may not
speak spanish, or maybe they were intimidated by my long hair
:)
I was later told that we were in one of the poorest parts of
Mexico, and that the route I was travelling was a popular one to
smuggle drugs via. I don't really trust the source, but I don't not
trust him either...
When I came back to the US, I told all my friends about this, for a
few reasons. First, to point out that the obvious foreigner was the
only one who was NOT searched. Also, to show the impact that the
US's war on some drugs had outside the US. Finally, everyone I
talked to (myself included) pretty much carried the attitude that
"that would never happen here".
How wrong we were...
|11.23.05 @ 9:27AM|#
The majority opinion in Hiibel may be distinguishable
from this case, because the Hiibel court relied heavily on
the fact that the Nevada statute only required Hiibel to state his
name, not actually produce papers. Not to mention, the statute was
fairly narrow and not a broad grant of authority to the
police:
. . . . .
I'm not sure how this case will shake out, but it's not a foregone
conclusion that the courts will find for the government. If the
government relies on the we-can-do-anything-on-federal-property
argument, they'll probably get their hands slapped. Hiibel
and previous decisions do tend to suggest that compelling anything
beyond identification could implicate Fourth and Fifth Amendment
concerns. In any event, we'll see how this plays out.
For anyone interested, see Hiibel
v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt County,
542 US 177 (2004) and EPIC's page on
Hiibel.
|11.23.05 @ 9:31AM|#
On at least two ocassions, I've gone through a US border patrol
check point on I-89 in Vermont. Aparently the officials were
checking citizenship, as that was the first question they asked.
They aparently beleived us, and let us through after only about 15
minutes tied up in a traffic mess.
Having never left the country, I did not have any proof of
citizenship with me. I wrote to the department of homeland security
and asked what would happen if they did not beleive I was a US
citizen, and I was not carrying any documentation.
Several months later, a reply came, that basically explained that
the Border Patrol officials are highly trained, and I need to just
_trust_ them.
|11.23.05 @ 9:59AM|#
A friend of mine has started working at a nearby state prison. A
few weeks ago, on his way to work, he and -everyone else- on the
state route to the facility were waved off the road and subjected
to body and car searches by a task force of local, state, and (he
thinks) federal officials.
The story was that they were searching for--and found--cellphones
and drugs destined for the inmates.
I had to wonder if this is happening everywhere now . . . take a
stretch of road through or near a state or federal installation,
give a plausible-sounding excuse like phone- or drug-smuggling,
search everyone, and gradually accustom the populace to obedience
to random searches for no cause.
|11.23.05 @ 10:11AM|#
I've actually been the person checking IDs on civlian buses,
although in my case it was at a military facility. We entered the
bus two at a time, and usually had one guy carrying a semi-auto
shotgun.
The funny thing is, we didn't check IDs against a no-entry list.
All we did was ensure that the passengers were able to hold up some
sort of government-issued card. If they couldn't, we didn't arrest
them. We simply had them get off the bus before it entered the
base.
|11.23.05 @ 10:23AM|#
Number 6,
In order to call yourself Number 6, shouldn't you have to RESIGN
from your government job first?
|11.23.05 @ 10:48AM|#
"Real Bill, you say "in SF no less!" like SF hasn't always
leaned in the police state way. (hello handgun ban)."
Hello!
*waves*
|11.23.05 @ 10:52AM|#
Number 6-
I know you're just doing your job, but has anybody ever explained
the purpose of checking for ID if the names aren't compared to a
list? The only bad guys who wouldn't have legit ID are those who
entered the country illicitly, and even those guys could probably
find a way to procure convincing fake ID.
David Rollins|11.23.05 @ 11:07AM|#
I just wanted to say that John Gilmore is my hero. If I lived in SF I would go to the oral arguments, if only for the freak show (see the blurb on his site where he welcomes supporters but ask that they dress "appropriately").
|11.23.05 @ 11:08AM|#
Russ & Thoreau-I should explain a bit more. When Iraq
started up, I was recalled from civilian life by the Marines. In
other words, I had resigned, but they decided to come and get me
anyway. :) Luck of the draw meant that I was placed in an MP
Battalion guarding Camp Pendleton. As it happened, all my friends
from my old arty unit were there, also. That lasted four or five
months, and although it was a pain in the ass, I was also out there
having fun in the warm California sun.
They never were all that clear about the ID thing, and few of us
took it all that seriously. Picture a Marine dressed in an absurd
bright yellow rain slicker (issued to keep us from being run over)
hopping on your bus and bellowing "Never fear! Bannana Man is
here!"
Although I'll no doubt have to turn in my decoder ring, I must say
that I don't have a problem with ID checks for people entering
federal facilities. I do, however, think the way we did it was
silly.
Ron Hardin|11.23.05 @ 11:45AM|#
James Thurber makes a joke about the French idea of America, in
particular the Wild West, in one of the popular French Wild West
novels between the wars
``There were, in my lost and lamented collection, a hundred other
fine things, which I have forgotten, but there is one that will
forever remain with me. It occured in a book in which, as I
remember it, Billy the Kid, alias Billy the Boy, was the central
figure. At any rate, two strangers had turned up in a small Western
town and their actions had aroused the suspicions of a group of
respectable citizens, who forthwith called on the sheriff to
complain about the newcomers. The sheriff listened gravely for a
while, got up and buckled on his gun belt, and said, `Alors, je
vais demander ses cartes d'identite!' There are few things, in any
literature, that have ever given me a greater thrill than coming
across that line.''
Ron Hardin|11.23.05 @ 11:52AM|#
I suspect the American idea is that you can always go somewhere
and start over when you screw up.
Hence no identity cards. You can pick up and leave.
The interest of the government is the opposite, that you explicitly
be unable to do this.
So an avenue you like to live thinking is always open is
closed.
You can't ``go out West and start over.''
|11.23.05 @ 12:35PM|#
what arty unit, number 6? i was at flores and pulgas from
'91-'95 except for a brief stint at camp foster for my float and an
even briefer stay at HQ battalion for the somalia gig.
mike
|11.23.05 @ 12:47PM|#
Who are "other authorized individuals"? Most government
buildings employ private security guards to monitor visitors. Years
ago I was accosted by a security guard while sitting on a bench
reading around lunchtime in the park next to the federal courthouse
in Baton Rouge. I refused to show ID. The guard got on the radio,
went away, came back, and threatened arrest. This was after
Oklahoma City.
This security guard wasn't very bright, and I did not like being
ordered around by her.
|11.23.05 @ 1:14PM|#
What's the big deal of showing your idea on a bus? It's not the same as a home or your office. It's not really intrusive to show ID. It's not like a patdown search or a dog sniffing your trunk. Also, everyone is being asked, so it's not random and you're not being singled out. The guards cannot abuse any discretion. I don't even think the 4th amendment is really impacted when the guards aren't looking for anything in particular. Most importantly for Ms. Davis is that she can avoid being "searched" by avoiding the bus. Get a car, ride a bike, take a cab or walk. You have other options.
|11.23.05 @ 1:20PM|#
This ID fetish serves no purpose at all related to security. The
9/11 hijackers had valid ID and credit cards, for christ's
sake.
This is all about government demanding obedience, lest people
realize that their safety is in their own hands, as it always has
been.
-jcr
The Wine Commonsewer|11.23.05 @ 1:43PM|#
ADL, I'm worse, I figure we don't even need a driver's license
for driving. First of all, I already know how to drive. Second,
owning a DL means zero when it comes to rating the competency to
handle a car. Nobody ever required a license to ride a horse or
drive a stage coach. I rest my case.
Pro, I see, it's a Living Constitution
Seriously, thanks for the clarification. As much as I read about
the case it never, ever, struck me that this was about giving the
cop your name as opposed to coughing up id.
Larry A|11.23.05 @ 1:54PM|#
What? Has no one read the first law quote?
When property or a portion thereof is closed to the public,
restrict admission to the property, or the affected portion, to
authorized persons who must register upon entry to the property and
must, when requested, display Government or other identifying
credentials to Federal police officers or other authorized
individuals when entering, leaving or while on the
property.
Please explain how a public bus is "federal property closed to the
general public." Show your work.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.23.05 @ 1:55PM|#
AJ, it isn't a big deal but that isn't the point. Last
time I flew, Mrs TWC flew with no id, which can be a real hassle,
but TSA in Vegas made it no big deal (If you're so inclined I wrote
about it
here). In fact, the average person would say that TSA went out
of their way to make it convenient. A big plus at a crowded airport
during one of the busiest departure times of the week.
That doesn't change the fact that there is no probable cause to
begin with.........and when the same thing happened to her before
at a different airport it was a nightmare. Not because she didn't
have her id but because it expired on her birthday, which was the
day she flew.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.23.05 @ 1:58PM|#
Let me repeat that (because I didn't do that before pushing the
post button).
No Probable Cause. Government agents do not have a constitutional
right to stop and search or otherwise hassle citizens without
probable cause. It doesn't matter how minor the inconvenience is.
It doesn't matter how big the smile is.
|11.23.05 @ 3:08PM|#
Re: the comment about the 4th Amendment not being impacted
This is the exact type of behavior that the 4th Amendment was
designed to prevent, searches supported by no probable cause that
do not specify exactly who or what they are looking for.
Terry|11.23.05 @ 5:34PM|#
Why is it that it takes a 50 year old mother of four just trying
to get to work each day to show the rest of us what our right to
travel is all about?
The real shame here is not so much that those in a position of
authority will seek to abuse that authority when given an
opportunity (duh!), but rather that so few people are willing to
respond as Deborah Davis did in refusing to submit to unreasonable
and unlawful encroachments on their unalienable rights.
|11.24.05 @ 9:53PM|#
Oh so now they can arrest you and send you to jail for not carrying a ID card is this the USA or is it the USSR? It sounds to me like we need to do what ROSA PARKS did and boycott the buses in protest of this draconian idea i guess thats what happened when they left the russia and the USSR disovled they came here to make this country into a new USSR just look at the idiots at the infamous 9th curcut court BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
|11.25.05 @ 4:50AM|#
Of all the sites I've visited tonight, this site has been far
and above the MOST entertaining. I love you all for what you've
said. I need to clarify one thing, though. I LOVE children (when,
chronologically, they ARE children). One last thought...
I sincerely believe we have not gone past the point of "no return".
You are the proof.
Danke,
Deb
|11.25.05 @ 1:47PM|#
I am behind Deb for her stand. This is suppose to be a free country. I admire her strengh and perseverance for this stand.
|11.25.05 @ 1:47PM|#
I am behind Deb for her stand. This is suppose to be a free country. I admire her strengh and perseverance for this stand.
|11.27.05 @ 7:56AM|#
One thing I find ominous is that the major news feeds have not picked up this story. It makes me wonder just what is considered news today or if our news agencies are more so subverted by the federal government? I'm beginning to understand what it must be like to live in China.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245