The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue #85 -- April 2, 1999
A Publication of the Drug Reform Coordination Network
-------- PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE --------
(To sign off this list, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
line "signoff drc-natl" in the body of the message, or
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. To subscribe to
this list, visit <http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html>.)
This issue can be also be read on our web site at
<http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html>. Check out the DRCNN
weekly radio segment at <http://www.drcnet.org/drcnn/>.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Portland, Oregon Police Called to Account for
Surveillance Operation
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#portland
2. Two New Polls Show Strong Public Support for Drug Policy
Reform
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#polls
3. Courts Place Limits on Drug Testing in Workplace, Schools
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#limits
4. Hash Bash Draws Ire of State Lawmakers
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#hashbash
5. California Democrats Give Nod to Industrial Hemp
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#demshemp
6. Government Reports: Prison, Drug Use Trends
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#reports
7. ACLU: Financial Privacy Update
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#privacy
8. EDITORIAL: Funding The Unknown Soldier
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/085.html#editorial
================
1. Portland, Oregon Police Called to Account for
Surveillance Operation
A county circuit judge in Portland, Oregon, has ordered the
city police bureau's Marijuana Task Force to release details
of a secret "trap and trace" telephone surveillance
operation they have reportedly maintained on American
Agriculture, a local indoor gardening supply store, for at
least the past three years. The task force, apparently,
traced the numbers of every caller to the store, and used
that information to target private homes for searches for
evidence of marijuana cultivation.
Trap and trace procedures do not record conversations like a
wiretap, but only trace callers' phone numbers. Still,
their use by law enforcement is regulated and limited to
certain circumstances. In Oregon, police are required to
have a court order allowing them to collect the numbers from
the local phone company, and the trap and trace is supposed
to be used only for thirty to sixty days in order to monitor
a specific suspect.
But several months ago, a defendant in a marijuana
cultivation case became suspicious of what had led police to
his door. According to court documents, Jeffrey Hauser of
Bend, Oregon, called an officer on the Portland task force,
pretending to be a Bend policeman. In the conversation that
followed, the Portland officer revealed that since 1995, the
task force had made weekly downloads of the phone numbers of
all callers to American Agriculture. Using a reverse-lookup
service to find the callers' names and addresses, the task
force then ran the information through the local electric
company, profiling those customers who used too much -- or
even too little -- electricity.
Now, a group of defense attorneys and their clients are
questioning the legality of the task force's use of the trap
and trace, and hoping that the judge's order will shed more
light on the special unit's practices.
"It's our theory that the trap and trace is like pulling on
the string that unravels the whole sweater," defense
attorney Bob Theummel told The Week Online. "It's the
beginning of a process that results in a whole lot of
marijuana busts." Theummel said he suspects that the trap
and trace is behind the task force's great success with
knock-and-talk busts, wherein the police come to people's
doors without a warrant and attempt to talk their way
inside. Once the resident has consented to this, it becomes
nearly impossible to have any evidence the police find
suppressed in court. The four member task force boasts a
50% arrest rate in as many as 2,000 knock-and-talk
operations over the seven years since its inception.
But attorney Michelle Burrows, who is also representing a
client in the trap and trace case, said that at least one
member of the task force has resorted to strong-arm tactics
when he is denied entry to a home. She said, "Brian
[Schmautz] claims that whenever he has smelled marijuana at
someone's door, he has found it. In Oregon, it's not enough
to have high electricity bills to get in the door, but once
they have the smell, they can get a warrant. Well, when
people would say 'go away,' he would say 'okay, fine, here's
my business card' or would reach out to shake the person's
hand. And then -- he's said this in affidavits, in the
police reports -- he arrests the person's hand. And then we
found out that in several cases, they don't even arrest the
hand. They will actually pull the person out of the house
and then arrest them on the porch."
Burrows said that one motivating factor behind the task
force's behavior is probably the money it raises through
asset forfeiture. "That's one of the more insidious parts
of this," she said. "It's not only their methodologies,
which are very questionable, but that they're making a lot
of money for the Portland Police Bureau with these
questionable methodologies."
Defense attorney Philip A. Lewis agrees. He said that the
Portland task force represents "an independently funded,
independently operated war on marijuana. And the reason
they're going after marijuana is not because they're so down
on marijuana, but because it's easy to do, and there's money
in it. Rather than going after methamphetamine labs or
major cocaine dealers, they go after mom-and-pop marijuana
growers. Almost all the cases they make are relatively
small cases, but they make money on it because they can
legally force the owners to cough up a percentage of the
equity on their homes."
This week, Judge Michael Marcus told attorneys for the task
force and the city that they must produce documents
detailing the trap and trace by May 4, or else admit that
the procedure is illegal. If it is shown to be illegal, the
defense attorneys must then try to prove that their clients'
arrests stemmed directly from the operation.
Meanwhile, American Agriculture, the gardening store whose
callers were traced, has filed suit against the task force.
"First we have to file a preliminary injunction to make them
stop trapping and tracing," said Spencer Neal, one of the
attorneys representing the store. He said the task force
still has not technically admitted the existence of the trap
and trace, let alone confirmed whether the practice has
stopped. He said the outcome of the criminal case will not
affect American Agriculture's suit. "The criminal cases
simply alerted us to the fact that the police were violating
our clients' civil rights -- surprisingly enough."
Attorneys for the marijuana task force and the City of
Portland have stated they are confident that the trap and
trace operation will be proved legal. They were not
available for comment on this story.
(Jeffrey Hauser, who recorded the conversation with the
Portland officer that revealed the trap and trace, was
acquitted in his marijuana cultivation case but now faces
felony charges of impersonating an officer. The transcript
of his conversation is a public document, and was originally
published in Willamette Week. DRCNet has reproduced it on
the web at <http://www.drcnet.org/transcript.html>.)
================
2. Two New Polls Show Strong Public Support for Drug Policy
Reform
- Scott Ehlers, Senior Policy Analyst, Drug Policy
Foundation, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.dpf.org
Whether it be medical marijuana or sentencing reform,
Americans are ready for drug policy reform, according to two
recent public opinion polls conducted by Gallup and the New
York Law Journal.
On March 26, the nationally recognized Gallup Organization
released the results of a poll that included two marijuana-
related questions. According to the telephone survey of
1,018 adults, 73 percent of respondents would "vote for
making marijuana legally available for doctors to prescribe
in order to reduce pain and suffering." The highest support
was among independent voters, at 79 percent, while 77
percent of 18-to-29 year-olds supported medical marijuana.
When asked, "Would you vote for or against the legalization
of marijuana?", 29 percent of respondents said they would
vote in favor. This is the highest level of general public
support for marijuana legalization since Gallup began asking
the question in 1969. Once again, the highest support came
from 18-to-29 year-olds and independents, with 44 percent of
younger voters and 37 percent of independents favoring
legalization.
How much effect did the recent release of the Institute of
Medicine's medical marijuana report have on the results?
According to the Marijuana Policy Project's director of
government relations, Rob Kampia, "Not a lot." According to
Kampia, "Over the last few years, all the polls have shown a
high level of public support for medical marijuana, ranging
anywhere from 60 to 80 percent. The Gallup Poll reflects
that."
As to why there seems to be a higher level of public support
for marijuana legalization, Kampia points to the successes
of marijuana decriminalization initiatives in Arizona and
Oregon as possible influencing factors. "Certain people are
not willing to admit they are in favor of controversial
issues like marijuana legalization unless they see that a
lot of other people support it. People like to be on the
winning team, whether it be football, basketball, or
politics."
On March 29, the New York Law Journal released the results
of its poll of 909 New York voters conducted by the
Quinnipiac College Polling Institute. The poll found that
more than two-thirds (69%) of respondents preferred for
judges to be allowed to decide on a case-by-case basis the
length of sentences for those convicted of selling drugs,
rather than having sentences set strictly by state law. The
poll also found, however, that 70 percent of respondents
believed that a prosecutor should have the right to appeal a
sentence for drug use or sales if he/she believes the
judge's sentence is too lenient.
The poll is significant because there have been extensive
outcries against the harsh Rockefeller drug laws in New York
state in recent months. Last month, Chief Judge Judith S.
Kaye proposed legislation to change the Rockefeller drug
laws by allowing appellate courts to reduce the 15-year
mandatory minimum sentence for the most serious drug
felonies. She also suggested that trial judges, with the
consent of the prosecutor, be allowed to defer prosecution
of low-level drug offenders for two years, and instead
divert them to drug treatment programs.
The New York Law Journal poll is online at
<http://www.nylj.com/stories/99/03/032999a3.htm>.
================
3. Courts Place Limits on Drug Testing in Workplace, Schools
- Scott Ehlers, Senior Policy Analyst, Drug Policy
Foundation, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.dpf.org
Drug testing in the workplace and schools were given a
setback in recent weeks thanks to the Supreme Court and a US
District Court. Although neither case is precedent-setting,
both cases could potentially effect how schools and private
employers conduct their drug testing programs.
On March 22, the Supreme Court announced its denial to
review Anderson Community School Corp. v. Willis (98-1183),
in which it let stand a ruling by a three-judge panel in the
7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Appeals Court found
the Anderson school district's policy of drug testing
suspended high school students to be a violation of the
students' privacy rights.
The case involved James Willis II, a freshman at Highland
High School, who was suspended in December 1997 for five
days for fighting. According to the school official who
immediately saw Willis, there was no indication that he had
been using alcohol or drugs.
The Anderson County policy required that all students
suspended for three or more days to take a urine test in
order to be reinstated. If the test detected alcohol or
drug metabolites, then the student's parents and a
designated school official would be notified, but no
additional punishment would be inflicted.
Willis refused to take the drug test and sued the school
district. A federal district court judge upheld the drug
testing policy, but the 7th Circuit Court reversed the
ruling, saying that drug testing must be restricted to
disciplinary cases where students were individually
suspected of using drugs or alcohol.
While the Supreme Court let the ruling stand, it has also
upheld drug testing of students who wish to participate in
extracurricular activities. In 1995, the Court ruled in
Vernonia School District v. Acton that randomly drug testing
student athletes did not violate their 4th Amendment
protection against unreasonable search and seizure. And
last October, the Court let stand a ruling which found that
the Rush County, Indiana school district did not violate
students' rights when they required all students
participating in any extracurricular activity -- from
athletics to the chess club -- to be subjected to random
drug testing.
In a very different case decided this week, Chief U.S.
District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo found the drug testing policy
of a Pennsylvania company to be a violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA). The case, Rowles v. Automated
Production Systems, was brought by John Rowles, an epileptic
who takes an anticonvulsant, Dilantin, and Phenobarbital to
control his seizures. After Rowles found out that the
company's drug policy required him to disclose the use of
prescription drugs and could result in his firing for taking
Phenobarbital, a controlled substance, he refused to take
the drug test. He was subsequently fired.
In Judge Rambo's decision, she noted that precedent had
established that "at some point, an individual's privacy
interests trump an employer's efficiency concerns," that
APS's drug testing program was "highly offensive," and that
private medical facts would be revealed by the drug testing
process. She granted Rowles partial summary judgement under
the ADA because APS had a policy of prohibiting the use of
certain prescription drugs, even if their use had no effect
on job performance.
Lewis Maltby, director of the ACLU's Workplace Rights
Office, echoed Judge Rambo's reasoning and applauded her
decision for protecting disabled workers: "What this
company's drug testing policy did, in effect, was prohibit
persons with certain disabilities from working for the
company. It clearly violates the ADA."
Maltby went on to tell the Week Online, "Clearly this is an
issue that the drug warriors did not think about. It
exposes the inherent contradiction in drug testing by trying
to distinguish between 'drugs' and 'medicines,' and the lack
of distinction inevitably causes problems with the ADA. The
only way to screen for people who don't use illegal drugs is
to require them to disclose what prescription drugs they are
using, which in turn is a potential ADA violation."
================
4. Hash Bash Draws Ire of State Lawmakers
- Marc Brandl, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This weekend, the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor will
host one of the country's longest-running annual marijuana
rallies. The event originated as a celebration when local
residents voted to reduce the penalty for possession of
small amounts of marijuana to a $5 fine, making Ann Arbor
home to one of the most liberal marijuana laws in the United
States. The 28th Annual Hash Bash will feature speakers
like Tommy Chong and The Emperor Wears No Clothes author
Jack Herer, and is expected to draw as many as 20,000
people, depending on the weather. But a bill that recently
passed the Michigan Senate threatens to put permanent rain
clouds over the rally. S.B. 380 would nullify local
ordinances like Ann Arbor's, forcing cities to impose drug
penalties as harsh or harsher than those enforced at the
state level.
State Senator Beverly Hammerstrom (R-Temperance), who
sponsored the bill, made it clear that S.B. 380 is aimed
directly at Ann Arbor's law and the Hash Bash in particular.
At a press conference last week, she produced several
teenagers who told reporters that they had tried marijuana
for the first time at past Hash Bash rallies. Hammerstrom
later told the Detroit News, "When a local unit of
government penalizes an individual with a $25 dollar fine,
it is in essence making the statement that this is not an
important issue. It is time we send a clear message to our
youth that we are serious about the war on drugs and that
this is an important issue across the state."
But Adam Brook, a former organizer of the Hash Bash, said he
believes that the bill, if passed, will have no effect on
the Hash Bash or Ann Arbor's liberal marijuana law. "First
of all, campus police have been deputized to enforce the
state law, not the Ann Arbor law," he said. "Second, the
bill will have no teeth because the law is part of the
city's charter and cannot be changed except by a vote of
local residents. The lawmakers know this," he said. In
1990, citizens of Ann Arbor voted to keep the law, but
raised the fine from $5 to $25.
Linda Wagenheim of the Michigan ACLU says the group will
lobby against the bill when it is considered in the Michigan
House. "We oppose the bill because it targets Ann Arbors'
law, which is a result of a vote of the people," she said.
"Law enforcement's finite resources should be spent on
better things." But Wagenheim concedes that it will be hard
to stop the bill. "It's probably on its way [to passage].
We have a Republican majority in the House and Senate and a
Republican governor." A similar law almost passed in the
last legislative session, but was dropped because it was not
germane to the appropriations bill to which it was attached.
(Editor: The Hammerstrom bill is likely to add fuel to a
debate within the reform movement over the issue of
marijuana rallies. While some reformers believe the
rallies play an important role in bringing advocates
together and demonstrating both the large number and
peaceful nature of marijuana users, others believe the
rallies provide opportunities for the media to put out
images that impact negatively on drug policy reform efforts,
such as pictures of teenagers smoking marijuana, as well as
rhetorical ammunition for politicians like Hammerstrom, who
wish to make drug laws harsher.)
================
5. California Democrats Give Nod to Industrial Hemp
- Marc Brandl, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Industrial hemp advocates in California were elated to learn
that the state's Democratic Party (CDP) endorsed a
resolution supporting the legalization of the crop at their
annual convention in Sacramento this week. The resolution
states, in part, "The CDP endorses the legalization of the
domestic production of Industrial Hemp, and strongly
recommends to the State Legislature that laws be adopted to
allow Industrial Hemp to be cultivated and harvested."
"This vote of confidence is a stunning victory for the
industrial hemp movement," proclaimed Mari Kane, editor and
founder of the California-based HempWorld Journal. Kane and
several other hemp advocates had booths at the CDP's
convention, which hosted more than two thousand delegates.
The resolution was put forth by Sam Clauder, a member of the
central committee of the Orange County Democratic Party and
executive director of the pro-hemp advocacy group,
Californians for Agricultural and Industrial Renewal,
(CAIR). "Democrats have a solid majority in both chambers
of the California legislature and control most statewide
elected offices," Clauder told The Week Online. "The
democrats are really the machine of state politics, and this
is an important prelude to getting an industrial hemp bill
introduced and passed this year. Without the machine behind
it, it would be harder to accomplish." Clauder, who is a
political consultant, said he learned of hemp's value while
working for environmental causes.
A political action committee has been formed, and Clauder
says he hopes to raise at least $20,000 to lobby for hemp.
Plans have also been drawn up to make hemp an issue at the
2000 Democratic National Convention, which will be held in
Los Angeles. "At that time," Clauder said, "we intend to
place a plank in the national platform of the Democrat
Party, to establish the legalization of industrial hemp as a
political issue of major importance to the nation's economy
and the planet's ecology."
================
6. Government Reports: Prison, Drug Use Trends
A report released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a
division of the US Dept. of Justice, found that at midyear
1998, 1 in every 150 US residents was incarcerated, with an
estimated 1,802,496 men and women held in the country's
prisons and jails. "Prison and Jail Inmates Midyear 1998,"
NCJ (173414). Copies of this and other BJS reports can be
obtained from the What's New page of the BJS web site at
<http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/whtsnw2.htm>, or by calling
BJS at (800) 732-3277.
The Office of National Drug Control Policy has released its
"Pulse Check: National Trends in Drug Abuse, Winter 1998"
report. The report offers demographic information on local
drug use patterns throughout the country. This release
includes findings of widespread marijuana use,
methamphetamine problems in Hawaii, and a move toward
snorting heroin rather than injecting it in the Northeast
and Mid-Atlantic South, as well as a section on "club
drugs." The report can be obtained online at
<http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/pulsechk/winter98/winter98puls
e.pdf>,
or by calling (800) 666-3332.
These and many other government reports can also be ordered
by writing to the National Criminal Justice Reference
Service, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], or by mail to P.O.
Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000.
Periodic bulletins from NCJRS can be obtained on the web at
<http://www.ncjrs.org/justinfo/>, or by e-mail through the
justinfo mailing list -- to subscribe, send e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line "subscribe justinfo your
name" in the body of the message.
================
7. ACLU: Financial Privacy Update
The following bulletin has been forwarded from the American
Civil Liberties Union Action Network list. To subscribe,
send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For further
background, see http://www.drcnet.org/wol/082.html#kyc and
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/076.html#kyc in our archives.
TO: ACLU Action Network
FROM: Penny Crawley, ACLU Cyber Organizer
DATE: April 1, 1999
Momentum around a financial privacy bill is building after
more than 250,000 Americans took a stand against the so-
called "Know Your Customer" banking regulations.
The proposed "Know Your Customer" regulations would have
required banks to profile their customers, monitor their
financial transactions, and report certain unusual
transactions as "suspicious" to the super-secret Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) at the Treasury
Department. These proposed regulations were withdrawn by
the FDIC earlier this week.
Even though the proposed "Spy on Your Customer" regulations
were withdrawn, banks will continue to spy on their
customers. That's because regulations under the Bank
Secrecy act require banks to report their customers as
suspects" to a super-secret agency in the Treasury
Department. Bankers are supposed to file a "Suspicious
Activities Report" whenever the banker has "reason to
suspect" that a large transaction is unusual for the
customer and the "bank knows of no reasonable explanation
for the transaction."
There may be a fix, however. Representative Ron Paul (R-TX)
has introduced HR 518, which would repeal the statute used
to justify bank spying. HR 518 would also prevent bank
regulators from enacting "Know Your Customer" regulations in
the future.
Fight for your financial privacy! Send a FREE FAX to your
Representative urging him or her to support HR 518 from the
ACLU web site at:
http://www.aclu.org/action/finprivacy106.html
For extra credit, you can also turn the tables by getting to
"Know Your Banker!" Check out the "Know Your Banker"
feature on the ACLU web site at:
http://www.aclu.org/privacy/financial.html
================
8. EDITORIAL: Funding The Unknown Soldier
Adam J. Smith, Associate Director, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As war rages in Europe this week, scattered reports have
popped up claiming that the KLA, the armed forces of the
Kosovarians, have been linked to major European drug
trafficking. The KLA, of course, is on NATO's side, and so
we shouldn't expect to hear President Clinton or Barry
McCaffrey publicly crowing about the matter, as they have
done for several years when the subject of the Colombian
rebels has come up.
The issue, however, is not whether the groups raising money
off the drug trade are "good guys" or "bad guys," but rather
that the drug trade is funding political and quasi-political
groups all over the world. Some of those groups, like the
KLA, are aligned with official US interests, but many others
are not. In fact, for terrorist groups, fringe movements
and dictator wannabes, the drug trade, courtesy of
prohibition, is the fastest and easiest way to raise money
for arms and other instruments of mayhem.
This fact has not been lost on American agencies either.
The CIA, for instance, knows well the convenience of the
drugs for weapons matrix from its involvement with the
Contras, and perhaps even before that. Easy cash, lots and
lots of it, is temptation in the extreme, making it
difficult for even well-funded spooks and arms of state to
resist dipping their fingers into the contraband pie.
Imagine then the choice faced by any wacko with a "cause."
It's a no-brainer, really. Drugs have become the currency
of choice in a world where the prospect of a nuclear bomb in
a suitcase or anthrax in a subway station is no longer the
stuff of late night science fiction.
What to do? Well, we can go on pretending that we're
addressing the problem, running lengthy and elaborate
undercover operations designed to pick off these operations
one by one, but of course, we'd only be fooling ourselves.
The UN reports that narcotics now account for 8% of all
global trade. And while America's prisons are filled with
two-bit dealers and strung-out addicts, the real money is
being made by people and groups who stand little risk of
ever being called to account for something as trifling as
drug trafficking. Prohibition has turned poppies and coca
into money trees, and anyone with the wherewithal to move
cargo from point A to point B under the protection of arms
or payoffs can make a killing. Literally.
So on we go. This week's shocking -- if unconfirmed --
revelation is that the KLA has (gasp) funded itself to one
extent or another via the drug trade. Well, given the scope
and the nature of that business, they'd have been stupid to
have turned down the opportunity. When you are involved in
or planning armed struggle, or to blow up a passenger jet or
to poison innocent commuters, are you likely to find the
immorality of supplying a much-in-demand product too high a
price for your soul to bear? Not likely. Today we can be
thankful that the newly exposed KLA-drug connection was not
perpetrated for the purpose of buying a nuclear device from
a renegade Russian general, or rocket launchers to take down
a planeload of tourists. These drug dealers are on "our"
side. But make no mistake, our precious drug war is lining
the pockets and building the arsenals of plenty of groups
whose sworn enemies are not named Slobodan Milosevic. We do
have the power to de-fund them. All at once.
----------------------------------------------------------
DRCNet needs your support! Donations can be sent to 2000 P
St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036, or made by credit
card at <http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html>. Donations to
the Drug Reform Coordination Network are not tax-deductible.
Deductible contributions supporting our educational work can
be made by check to the DRCNet Foundation, a 501(c)(3) tax-
exempt organization, same address.
PERMISSION to reprint or redistribute any or all of the
contents of The Week Online is hereby granted. We ask that
any use of these materials include proper credit and, where
appropriate, a link to one or more of our web sites. If
your publication customarily pays for publication, DRCNet
requests checks payable to the organization. If your
publication does not pay for materials, you are free to use
the materials gratis. In all cases, we request notification
for our records, including physical copies where material
has appeared in print. Contact: Drug Reform Coordination
Network, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036,
(202) 293-8340 (voice), (202) 293-8344 (fax), e-mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you.
Articles of a purely educational nature in The Week Online
appear courtesy of the DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise
noted.
***********************************************************
DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet DRCNet
***********************************************************
JOIN/MAKE A DONATION http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS LIST http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html
DRUG POLICY LIBRARY http://www.druglibrary.org/
DRCNET HOME PAGE http://www.drcnet.org/
GATEWAY TO REFORM PAGE http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/
