2012-05-19 TO: MP Blake Richards, Unmask the Police at Protests (Remember Montebello)

Corporatocracy or Democracy?, Peace or Violence No Responses »
May 192012

In particular, please consider forwarding this to police and military officers you might know.

 

Blake Richards is the Conservative MP for the Alberta constituency called Wild Rose.

In October 2011, Blake introduced Private Member’s Bill C-309 in the House of Commons. The bill if passed would make it a new Criminal Code offence to wear a mask or to otherwise conceal one’s identity during a riot or an unlawful assembly. The bill has garnered the support of police chiefs in major Canadian cities, including Calgary, Toronto, Vancouver and Victoria. (from http://www.blakerichards.ca/about.cfm)

I am thinking of supporting your call to make it illegal to wear masks at protests . . .

TO:   blake  AT  blakerichards.ca

Dear Blake Richards,

I believe you would want to know this event that involved masked protesters.   I also sent a brief to the CBC Radio programme, “Day 6” (link appended) that interviewed you on the morning of May 19.

EVENT:   SPP meetings in Montebello, Quebec.  Peaceful protest.

DATE:  2007

The only protesters who were masked were POLICE OFFICERS.  They were trained and assigned the role of turning the protest violent.

It is all on video, along with the later statement by the head of Quebec Police (Surete) that yes, the “protesters” were actually police officers.

Peaceful protesters tried to stop these “violent protesters” from using rocks against the line of uniformed police officers who were holding shields and wearing riot gear.

An observant person noticed that the “violent protesters” were wearing police boots and shouted it out.   The legitimate protesters then reached in and yanked down the masks so that others could catch the revealed faces on video.

Through video footage, the officers were later identified.  The head of the Quebec police was then forced to make a public statement, admitting that the masked “violent” protesters were police officers.  He excused their actions.

Links to the video of the Montebello footage and the Police response are contained in  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=747

For at least 15 months, demands for a public inquiry went unheeded.   An inquiry was eventually announced.  As far as I know, it was never held.  No one was ever held to account.

It is illegal to incite violence.  When it is masked police offers who are doing it, under the direction and blessing of their superiors, then implicitly sanctioned by the Government (though inaction to correct), we have descended to a police state.

The documentary film, Battle in Seattle, (huge WTO protests) makes it clear that in some cases it is a police (National Guard) strategy to ALLOW violence to get out-of-hand BEFORE they step in with tear gas and rubber bullets (let the violence discredit the protesters AND make citizens reluctant to protest).  Montebello is ample evidence that in some cases it is the police themselves who instigate the violence.

OFFICIALS LEARN:

The Government and Police officials learned things from “The Battle in Seattle”.   (It took place in the U.S. but remember that Canadian and U.S. military and police are now “integrated” and have “compatible doctrine”.  Also note:  The WTO, the SPP and the SPP successor organization have a common base:  transnational corporate interests.)

It seems to me that the Officials took two things away from Montebello:

  1. Disguised police officers planted in a crowd must not wear police boots  OR,  maybe it is safer to CONTRACT OUT such work.
  2. They can do whatever they want:  Canadians are dumb, uninformed and without backbone.  Canadians won’t stand up for ANYTHING.  The talk about defending what the veterans fought and died for in World War Two (democracy) is meaningless rhetoric.

Another brief point:   Media portray the Quebec protests as student protests over tuition hikes.

They fail to note that the largest protests in Quebec happened on Earth Day and are about the failure of Governments to protect the Environment.   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5143

Failed protection of the environment, the SPP and its successor organization, corporate influence in Universities, failing democracy, Healthcare is on its way down, too – - the ROOT is the same:  large corporate interests being served by Governments and public institutions.

In CONCLUSION:

  • Protests will continue to escalate because NOTHING is being done to address the root cause:   the Government, Police Officials and Universities have become tools to serve corporate interests.
  • Montebello is misleading VIEWED IN ISOLATION.  The mistake of “officials” is to add insult upon insult. Growing protest tells me that Canadians know the dangers;  they are standing up - with much more to come, unless Government officials start to aggressively defend
    and serve the public interest.

 

I am thinking of supporting your call to make it illegal to wear masks at protests (unmask the police).  However,

  • it should also be illegal for police officials to contract out their “work” (they will do that if they are “unmasked”).
  • there also needs to be extremely strong whistle-blower protection for police officers.

Thank-you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Sandra Finley

(address)

- – - – - – - – - – –

APPENDED:  LINK TO CBC Interview with Blake Richards.

http://www.cbc.ca/day6/

Most Recent Podcast

Day 6 Podcast – May 19, 2012
Unmasking Quebec protesters;   Download  To download a file, right click and save.

= = = = =  = = = = = = = = =

Contact info for individual MPs and Senators:     http://www.canada.gc.ca/directories-repertoires/direct-eng.html#mem

Email addresses for Canadian MP’s, copy and paste the whole batch:  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=3297

Posted by admin at 2:21 pm

2012-05-11 Harvard to be tried for research fraud.

Corporatocracy or Democracy?, Take back the University No Responses »
May 162012

“   Inasmuch as no effective, safe treatment for Alzheimer’s exists, and ALL such screening tests have been demonstrably inaccurate and inconsistent, such an “early intervention” approach in clinical practice is unethical and controversial.”

http://www.omsj.org/corruption/harvard-to-be-tried-for-research-fraud

Harvard To Be Tried for Research Fraud

11 May (AHRP) – The US Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit has overturned a summary judgement by a lower court ordering a whistleblower lawsuit filed by Dr. Kenneth Jones against Harvard Medical School, its teaching hospitals, Brigham and Women’s and Massachusetts General Hospital, and Dr. Marilyn Albert (Principal Investigator) and Dr. Ronald Killiany to proceed to trial.

by VERA SHARAV
AHRP

The case involves the largest Alzheimer’s disease [AD] research grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health (from 1980 through 2007) for a large project aimed at identifying early physical signs of Alzheimer’s by scanning certain regions of the brain with MRIs.

Dr. Jones was the chief statistician for the NIH grant.  He blew the whistle after realizing that measurements used to demonstrate the reliability of the study had been secretly altered.  Without these alterations, Dr. Jones explained, there was no statistical significance to the major findings of the study.  When he insisted that the altered measurements be subjected to an independent reliability study, and that the manipulated results could not be presented as part of a $15 million federal grant extension application, he was terminated and his career came to an end.

The allegations in the suit concern multiple research fraud: data manipulation, significant deviations from the protocol, altered and re-traced MRI scans. To get positive results, Dr. Jones alleges, Dr. Killiany “fraudulently altered the MRI study data prior to 1998 to produce false results of a statistically significant correlation between conversion to AD and volume of the EC [entorhinal cortex].”

He further alleged that Dr. Albert and Dr. Killiany violated federal regulations (43 CFR 50.103(c)(3) by making false statements in the NIH grant application: Statements that “were predicated on falsified data that the defendants, knowing of this falsity, failed to take corrective action or disavow the data.”

In overturning the lower court and ordering the case to proceed to trial, the Court of Appeals cited  the lower court failure to consider substantial evidence of research fraud, and failed to consider relevant testimony from three expert witnesses presented by Dr. Jones:

“A statistician who confirmed that the alterations were responsible for the statistical significance of the study results, a medical researcher who identified that the altered results could not be justified and were changed to establish a predetermined outcome, and a third expert who confirmed that NIH would not have funded the study had the falsity of the data been revealed during the application process and that Harvard failed to adequately investigate allegations of research fraud.”

The Court of Appeals decision states:

“the essential dispute is about whether Killiany falsified scientific data by intentionally exaggerating the re-measurements of the EC to cause proof of a particular scientific hypothesis to emerge from the data, and whether statements made in the Application about having used blinded, reliable methods to produce those results were true.”

Michael D. Kohn, one of the lead attorneys for Dr. Jones said:

“This is a major breakthrough holding universities accountable for the integrity of reported research results. Fraud committed in order to obtain NIH funding not only robs taxpayers, but also sets back long-term medical research goals. The facts of this case indicate that the report of false data misdirected research efforts at other institutions.”

This case also underscores an inconvenient truth about the financial stakes that drive clinical trials.  Those who are persuaded to serve as human subjects “for the good of humanity” and “to help medical progress” believe in the integrity and high mindedness of medical researchers–especially those at premier academic institutions. That trust, however, is all too often misplaced. Vulnerable human subjects are being shamelessly exploited in invalid, most often commercially driven experiments.

Indeed, the rationale behind the Harvard brain scanning experiment was to justify early interventions. Another example is Eli Lilly’s Alzeheimer’s imaging detection test (Amyvid) launched last month.

Inasmuch as no effective, safe treatment for Alzheimer’s exists, and ALL such screening tests have been demonstrably inaccurate and inconsistent, such an “early intervention” approach in clinical practice is unethical and controversial.

 

This entry was posted on Friday, May 11th, 2012 at 12:18 pm and is filed under Alzheimer’s,  Civil Cases,  Corruption,  Dangerous Doctors,  Harvard,  Health Care,  Incompetence,  Investigations,  Issues,  Junk Science,  Medical,  NIH,  National Institutes of Health,  Public Policy,  Universities,  Vera Hassner Sharav,  bioethics,  biotechnology,  legal,  propaganda. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Posted by admin at 11:40 am

1 of 6 Please - - Lockheed Martin at University, F-35s and bombers flying over our cities. Yes.

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) No Responses »
May 152012

I’m scaring myself by connecting the dots.   If you join me, I am not afraid.

There is a small role for each of us.

6 short emails.   Number:

  1. Stop the University from setting Lockheed Martin up to train our young people for war-related undertakings (below).
  2. Stop Harper from setting up a vacuum pump to funnel our money to Lockheed Martin for F-35’s.
  3. Stop fighter jets from flying over our cities, normalizing the police state.  Another one flew over my home in Saskatoon yesterday evening.  It
    has become routine.
  4. For Saskatonians:  Come to the University tomorrow (May 16th).  The University has racked up a pile of debt (Provost Brett Fairbairn).  They are holding a “Financial Town Hall Meeting”.  Who will be held to account for the huge debt?   How will the situation be resolved?   Lockheed Martin is plying the University with dollars.   Will corporate interests take over this extremely valuable public institution for a few shekels?  Will we just let it happen?
  5. ***   Understand how a nation becomes conditioned to, and the enablers of, violence and war.   Watch Michael Moore’s  “Bowling
    for Columbine    ”.    ***
  6. And oh yes, Don`t forget Lockheed Martin and Boeing at the new Aviation Training Centre:  Drone Technology.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = =  = = = ==  = == = =

Canadians!   Don’t you see?

Our Universities train our young people.

These young people feed into Government and other positions of influence.

WHAT  do the Grad students study?

As the bright young woman in physics enthusiastically explained: there’s lots of money in . . . “

Grad students go where the  $$money$$ is.

 

The University has racked up a PILE of DEBT.

Lockheed Martin Corporation – - to the rescue!  – -  Lots of  $$money$$!

And they then get to dictate the priorities!

Lockheed Martin’s  “lots of $$money$$”  actually comes from ONE MAIN SOURCE:  tax-payers. (Through things like extravagant contracts for F-35 stealth bombers.)

  • Now that American tax-payers have been bankrupted by Lockheed Martin’s war-mongering and profiteering,
  • Lockheed Martin is increasingly turning to the Canadian public purse.

 

  • It started out as weapons for the U.S. and their allies.  Now . . .

(As you read, remember that if we don’t stop Harper from the F-35 purchase, and if we don’t stop Lockheed Martin’s dollars from pouring into the University, we will end up in the same position as American sheeple for Lockheed.)

From Background Info on Lockheed Martin.  excerpt:

(as at 2005):    Since 1992, the United States has exported more than $142 billion dollars worth of weaponry to states around the world. ix The U.S. dominates this international arms market, supplying just under half of all arms exports in 2001, roughly two and a half times more than the second and third largest suppliers.x U.S. weapons sales help outfit non-democratic regimes, soldiers who commit gross human rights abuses against their citizens and citizens of other countries, and forces in unstable regions on the verge of, in the middle of, or recovering from conflict. The United States supplied arms or military technology to more than 92% of the conflicts under way in 1999.xi

In addition to paying billions of dollars every year to support weapons exports, Americans may also feel the impact of increasing instability overseas. The United States military has had to face troops previously trained by its own military or supplied with U.S. weaponry in Panama, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan and now in Iraq.

Lockheed Martin with a share of 24% of US arms exports xii is the world’s largest arms exporting company. Former company CEO Norman Augustine was a major lobbyist on behalf of the more than $7 billion per year in grants and subsidized loans that the U.S. government provides to U.S. arms exporters  each year to help them hawk their products around the world.

Both Augustine and company Vice President Bruce Jackson have also been major supporters of the expansion of NATO, in hopes of selling combat aircraft and other weapons systems to new NATO members states.

- – - – -  –  – - – - – - – — – - -

On May 7th I wrote to the Board of Governors, U of S.  Who is responsible for Debt situation at the University?  Vulnerability to Lockheed Martin Corp. See   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5325.

Posted by admin at 10:19 am

2 of 6 Stop Harper from setting up a vacuum pump to funnel our money to Lockheed Martin for F-35's.

Corporatocracy or Democracy?, Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) No Responses »
May 152012

Note:   Ceasefire.ca can`t issue receipts for Income Tax because they advocate for peace.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The best vehicle for stopping the F-35`s (Lockheed Martin and a war economy) is CEASEFIRE.CA  and Steven Staples.

RECENT:

We are entering a critical phase of our campaign to stop Harper. Thank you so much for your support, and let me tell you how we are using donations from our supporters to Ceasefire.ca.

A few days ago I was on Parliament Hill once again to try to stop Harper’s pro-war lobby and the multi-billion-dollar F-35 stealth fighter fiasco.

I wasn’t alone. This time, I was joined by the highest ranking former Canadian military officer to come out publicly against Harper’s war planes.

Colonel Paul Maillet (ret.) had a distinguished 33-year career in the air force. He is an expert in military aircraft, an aerospace engineer who worked on Canada’s current CF-18 aircraft fleet starting in the 1980s, and who rose to become engineering and maintenance manager of the entire fleet in the 90s.

Together, we held a press conference inside the Parliament Buildings and spoke to a room full of journalists from every new media network in the country.

Colonel Maillet, in a calm, matter-of-fact way, laid out a devastating critique of the F-35, arguing that it is a complete mismatch for Canada’s needs, will be terribly expensive, and will likely perform very poorly compared to other available aircraft.

Our press conference was broadcast live across Canada by GlobalTV, and Colonel Maillet was invited onto CBC Radio’s As It Happens that evening. His remarks were carried in nearly every major newspaper in Canada.

Harper’s pro-war lobbyists and their allies in the media are alarmed by our campaign.

The notorious Sun TV took aim at Colonel Maillet and tried to malign him for standing for election in the past for the Green Party, for saying the billions of dollars for the F-35 should be used for education or hospitals, for being opposed to a war against Iran, and even for being associated with “Steven Staples who runs a website called Ceasefire.ca….”

Your support has allowed us to push this issue to the top of the political agenda.

More than 400 Ceasefire.ca supporters have joined our Peacekeepers monthly donor club already. Would you gladly give $25 each month to stop Harper’s F-35 stealth fighter, too?

I hope you answered “Yes!”

In my letter to you earlier this year, I promised we would confront Harper’s agenda at every turn.

I made a commitment to you that we would

• release a damning new study on the F-35,

• speak to Members of Parliament urging them to stop the waste, and

• bring Canadians together to send thousands of letters to Harper and other MPs.

And that’s what we did!

In March, Ceasefire.ca supporters and friends like you came together and sent more than 5,000 emails against the F-35s to Harper, opposition party leaders and their own MPs through Ceasefire.ca. A massive outpouring!

And now the government appears to be in trouble.

Harper was exposed by the Auditor General, who released a report on the F-35 debacle proving that Canadians have been lied to by Harper and his pro-war lobby.

• Harper said there is a contract for the jets. There isn’t!

• Harper said they’d be $75 million each. They won’t!

• Harper said it will be the only plane that can meet the military’s needs. It falls far short!
Our campaign has put Harper in a tight spot – but he still refuses to back away from the F-35s.

We must keep up the pressure on Stephen Harper.

There are only a few weeks left before Parliament breaks for the summer. Will you help us raise $15,000 before June 8?
(INSERT:  click on  http://www.ceasefire.ca/)

We are planning more meetings with MPs.

We will be publishing news articles, speaking to journalists and appearing on national television.

And we will mobilize Canadians again on the F-35!

Thank you for everything you do for peace.

In peace,

Steven Staples, Ceasefire.ca

P.S. Please help us to stop Harper by making a small gift of $25 every month to Ceasefire.ca. If you choose, we will also send you a free copy of Noah Richler’s book, What We Talk About When We talk About War.

Please share this message.

Sent from Steven Staples, Rideau Institute, Ceasefire.ca   63 Sparks St., suite 608, Ottawa, ON K1P 5A6.

Posted by admin at 10:09 am

3 of 6 Stop fighter jets from flying over our cities, normalizing the police state.

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) No Responses »
May 152012

I don’t know when I heard the first fighter jet fly over my home
in Saskatoon.  Sometime in the last year
or two.  I wondered what on Earth was
happening.  Moose Javians (live in Moose
Jaw, SK) might be accustomed to them – NATO does training exercises at their
nearby Air Force base.

 

WHAT are they doing HERE?
If you know, please let me know.
If no one knows, I had better find out!

 

The first time the fighter jets fly over, a chill goes in your
bones. You cannot mistake them for a West Jet or Air Canada flight, not by
sound nor by sight.   Now they are almost
routine.

 

Fighter jets should not be flying over our cities, as a step in the
normalization of a military state.   “Conditioning” us.

 

One flew over my home yesterday evening.  Another time, coincidentally
just after I’d sent out an email to challenge Lockheed Martin at the University!,
one roared very low over the house;  a
minute later the phone rang.  Larry had
been in his backyard.   He phoned to ask
if I’d seen the devil – - from where he stood about 10 blocks away, it looked
as though the plane went right over my house.
I assured him it had!  (I seem to
be on a flight path.)

 

Lynn writes:

 

Dear
Sandra,  I refer to the jets as ” grooming us ” for war, I use
the words deliberately because that is what sex offenders do, they condition
their victims for abuse.

 

Imagine, we are
supposed to accept austerity in order to provide Lockheed Martin with huge
profits.  I was reading about Obama in Z magazine and his connections with
General Dynamics who have increased their profits threefold in eight years,
a 300% increase, while we get accustomed to many more people being
homeless, while middle income people are bankrupted by health insurance
payments that have increased that much as well.

Posted by admin at 10:09 am

4 of 6 Lockheed Martin at University. Financial Town Hall, Wed May 16th, TIME CHANGED to 1:30 pm, Saskatoon

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials), Take back the University 1 Response »
May 152012

NOTE:

  • the time change
  • you can also watch the meeting on-line
  • the original notice of meeting is appended, scroll down.

For Saskatonians:  Come to the University tomorrow (May 16th).   The University has racked up a pile of debt (Provost Brett Fairbairn).  They are holding a “Financial Town Hall Meeting”.

Who will be held to account for the huge debt?   How will the situation be resolved?

Lockheed Martin is plying the University with dollars.   Will corporate interests take over this extremely valuable public institution for a few shekels?  Will we just let it happen?

1. ORIGINAL NOTICE OF MEETING, RECEIVED MAY 2 – scroll down, it’s appended.

2. NOTICE OF MEETING (REVISED), MAY 14 (below)

3. MY LETTER TO THE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF GOVERNORS, MAY 7, Click on   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5325
= = =  = = = = = = =  = = = = =  ==  = = = = ==

2. NOTICE OF MEETING  (REVISED), May 14

(Note:  Anyone who received the original notice will not know from the subject line that the meeting time is changed.)

From: Leonhardt, Lesley [mailto:lesley.leonhardt  AT  usask.ca]

Sent: May-14-12 2:08 PM

Subject: Financial Town Hall, May 16th

We will provide updated information on the university’s financial situation, including the 2012-13 detailed operating budget, and provide more information on the emerging strategy related to budget adjustments at a financial town hall:

Date: Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Time: 1:30 – 2:30 pm (please note this is a new time from what was previously scheduled)

Place: Convocation Hall, College Building

We encourage everyone to attend. If you are unable to, you can watch live online at www.usask.ca/finances. The video of the presentation, including the question and answer period, will also be available on this website by May 18.

We also encourage you to continue to submit your ideas for financial solutions through www.usask.ca/finances or email them directly to finances@usask.ca, by May 23.

Kind regards,

Brett Fairbairn, Provost and Vice-President Academic

Greg Fowler, Acting Vice-President Finance and Resources

For more information, contact:
Office of the Provost and Vice-President Academic at 966-8484

= = =  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  == = =

3. MY LETTER TO THE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF GOVERNORS, MAY 7th

Who is responsible for Debt situation? Vulnerability to Lockheed Martin Corp.

Click on   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5325 .

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = ==  = =

ORIGINAL NOTICE OF MEETING

RECEIVED:  Wed 02/05/2012 9:43 AM

SUBJECT:  Financial Town Hall May 16, 2012

Members of Senate:  please see the email announcement below.

Lea Pennock

University Secretary

Financial Town Hall May 16, 2012

U of S Campus Community,

As part of the ongoing process related to the current financial pressures our university is facing, we are holding our next Financial Town Hall (on the topic of “Emerging Strategy”) on May 16 at 11:30 am in Convocation Hall. Everyone is welcome and we encourage you to attend. You may also watch the event live online at www.usask.ca/finances

At this town hall, we will talk about how the university’s plans have started to come together since the last town hall on April 3, including the process, governance and timelines of upcoming initiatives to balance the university’s budget. We will also discuss how your ideas assist in forming the strategy to narrow the gap between our revenue and expenses.

As you now know, we face a potential shortfall of $20 million to $40 million annually by 2016. The first challenge in narrowing this gap between our revenues and expenses will be to address the projected $15.5 million deficit for 2012-13. At their May meeting, the Board of Governors will consider actions that can be taken to mitigate a portion of the 2012-13 projected deficit through the detailed operating budget; details of these actions will be shared with you at the May 16 town hall.

In connection with the first town hall, we asked you for your ideas, comments and suggestions. We have heard from individuals from all areas of campus, including students, alumni, staff and faculty. We are very pleased with the participation we have seen so far, and we continue to look to all of you to share your thoughts with us at finances@usask.ca.

Submitted ideas range from short-term to long-term solutions and include suggestions such as offering more online classes, allowing more flexible work weeks and looking at more energy-efficient options to reduce utility expenses. On behalf of the Provost’s Committee on Integrated Planning (PCIP), the two of us are assembling an ad hoc committee to oversee the process of budget adjustments and to receive and consider ideas from across the campus. This committee will consider these ideas as we use the initial campus community consultations to co-ordinate a strategy to address the gap. At the town hall we will say more about this committee and its make-up.

Hearing from you will continue to be a vital part of this process. Key to our deliberations and actions as a university will be focus: focus on the priorities all of us have already identified in integrated planning; focus on choices; and focus on sustainable long-term solutions. In light of the budget pressures we face, we must continue to invest our resources in the areas we have identified in Promise and Potential, our third integrated plan, while also mitigating the risks inherent in our situation.

For more information, including the presentation and video from the last financial town hall, we encourage you to visit www.usask.ca/finances

Kind regards,

Brett Fairbairn
Provost and Vice-President Academic

Greg Fowler
Acting Vice-President Finance and Resources

For more information, contact:
Provost’s Office at 966-8484

Posted by admin at 10:08 am

2012-05-07 Letter to U of S, Board of Governors. Who is responsible for Debt situation? Vulnerability to Lockheed Martin Corp.

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials), Take back the University No Responses »
May 072012

May 7, 2012

TO:

Members of the Board of Governors

University of Saskatchewan

(Peter MacKinnon, Vera Pezer, Art Dumont, Nancy Hopkins, Greg Smith, Garry Standing, David Sutherland, Grit McCreath, Susan Milburn,
Linda Ferguson, Scott Hitchings, Lea Pennock)

FROM:

Sandra Finley

University Senator (Elected)

656 Saskatchewan Cres East

Saskatoon,  SK  S7N 0L1

306-373-8078

Dear Members of the Board of Governors,

Speaking on behalf of the citizens of Saskatchewan who are the owners of the University of Saskatchewan, and for whom I am one of the elected representatives (“voices of the community (owners)”):

I am very concerned about the vulnerabilities created by the deteriorating financial situation at the University.

The finances, roughly:

  • $95 million debt
  • Borrowing capacity maxed out
  • A $10 million shortfall in the current operating budget
  • $15.5 million deficit for 2012-13
  • a potential shortfall of $20 million to $40 million annually by 2016
  • $600 million needed for repair and maintenance of the existing buildings
  • No money to finish the interior of some of the new buildings

The vulnerability:

  • Corporate take-over of the University, as a way to deal with the deficits and debt.

Who is responsible?

In any system of democratic governance, it is the role of elected representatives to hold administrators to account.  I see where the University Governors are mostly by appointment.  So it seems that I am supposed to ask the hard questions.

QUESTION 1:

Who is responsible for the current financial situation of the University?   (It is not “we are all responsible and hence no one is responsible.”)  Big salaries are being paid, who is the responsible person?   Is that person being held to account, and if so, how?

QUESTION 2:

What are the numbers for cuts to quantity, salaries, benefits and frills of Administrators?  (At Senate Meeting on April 21, the Dean of Law defended
back-to-back 16% tuition increases for students in law.  There was no discussion regarding cuts in Administration costs.)

QUESTION 3:

Lockheed Martin Corporation is courting the University with money.  Who is responsible for the decision to accept money from Lockheed Martin?   (At Senate Meeting Ernie Barber, Dean of Engineering, defended collaboration with Lockheed Martin.  You will find a copy of the “Collaboration Topics” in the posting http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5103.)

QUESTION 4:

Are you aware that a main focus of the unrest in the world today is corporate behaviour?  (witness the “Occupy” movement which started on WALL STREET).  Lockheed Martin’s recruiting on campus was during exams so there was little mobilization.  I spoke with two different Muslim professors from two different faculties (U of S, Medicine, Engineering).  I doubt I need to describe their reaction to you.  Lockheed Martin had a large influence in the decision of the Americans to launch a war of aggression on Iraq.  They used lies to justify it. Muslim people have been killed in large numbers and driven from their homes.  It seems to me that the U of S is making a large mistake in taking any money from Lockheed Martin, not only on moral and legal grounds, but also in terms of setting itself up for targeting.

Thank-you in advance for your responses to these questions.

Sincerely,

Sandra Finley

= = = = = = = ==

FYI

1.  SCIENCE UNDER SIEGE

An ill wind is gusting through the halls of science these days: faked research, suppression of unwelcome results, corruption of science advisory panels, university research falling under the influence of corporate sponsors, and many other conflicts of interest.  It’s as if science were under siege. . . .    (The full article is at 2005-08-05)

2.  THINKERS OF THE DAY ON: PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESS, please see: http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5312

3.  Earlier correspondence with the Board of Governors is posted at:  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5309

 

Posted by admin at 12:51 pm

Thinkers of the Day on the Unholy Alliances between Government (public institutions) and Industry

Uncategorized No Responses »
May 072012

The statements are applicable to public institutions in general, not just “Government”.   Here are half-a-dozen examples.  I need to add Dwight Eisenhower’s statements regarding the danger of the “Unholy Alliances” among military, industrial, and congressional.

(1)  We have Justice Krever, Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in Canada, 1996

“Industry can’t be regulated by government – and for environmental and health reasons they must be – if that government is in bed with them.”

(2)  John Ralston Saul, “Health Care at the End of the Twentieth Century”,  1999

“The Panel identified… serious concerns about the undermining of the scientific basis for risk regulation in Canada due to… the conflict of interest created by giving to regulatory agencies the mandates both to promote the development of agricultural technologies and to regulate it…”

(3)  From John Kenneth Galbraith’s “The Economics of Innocent Fraud – Truth for our Time”, published in 2004 :

“… As the corporate interest moves to power in what was the public sector, it serves, predictably, the corporate interest. That is its purpose. …One obvious result has been well-justified doubt as to the quality of much present regulatory effort. There is no question but that corporate influence extends to the regulators. … Needed is independent, honest, professionally competent regulation … This last must be recognized and countered. There is no alternative to effective supervision. …”

4)  Mae-Wan Ho, Genetic engineering – Dream or Nightmare?, 1998

“To reassure us, they lie to us, and then treat us as idiots by insisting on things we all know are untrue. Not only does this prevent a reasonable debate from taking place, but it also creates a very unhealthy relationship between citizens and their elected representatives.”

(5)  Jane Jacobs’ “Systems of Survival, the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics” sets forth a framework for understanding that the system of governance will succumb to corruption if we fail to appreciate the functional roles of two separately evolved sets of ethics, one for the commercial function in a society and the other for governance (guardianship).  But,

“Societies need both commercial and guardian work … the two types are prone to corruption if they stray across either their functional or moral barriers.”

(6)  George Soros, “the best fund manager in history, a stateless statesman, and an original thinker”, turned philanthropist.  From his book, “Open Society  [Reforming Global Capitalism]“, published in 2000 by PublicAffairs.

p. xi,  “… Perhaps the greatest threat to freedom and democracy in the world today comes from the formation of unholy alliances between government and business.”

Posted by admin at 10:34 am

2006-02-14 and 03-03 Letters to University of Saskatchewan Board of Governors,

Uncategorized No Responses »
May 072012

(Two letters below)

February 14, 2006

TO:   University of Saskatchewan Board of Governors,  Members listed below

CC:

  • Pat Atkinson, MLA Saskatoon Nutana, Minister of Advanced Education and Employment
  • Ernie Barber, Dean of Agriculture, U of S
  • Lynne Pearson, Dean of Commerce, U of S

—————————————-

Dear Board Members,

I request that you re-evaluate the University’s partnerships with business.

The Federal Government through Agriculture and Health has partnered with the biotech companies.  So too have universities, including the U of S.

The outcome is predictable:  corruption.  A list of quotes from authorities that make the connection (Galbraith, Soros, Jacobs, Ralston-Saul, Krever, Ho) appears below.  You may also find the well foot-noted article “Science under Siege” helpful – about the undermining of “science” through corporate funding of research.

Apart from the academic documentation, the egregious example of the corrupting influence of the “partnerships” comes from Canada’s participation in the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.  You may know that Canada is host country to the Convention.  Currently there is an international de facto moratorium on Terminator Technology (seeds engineered to be sterile).  Canada has attempted to sabotage the moratorium.

(INSERT:  This has to do with the with-holding of entry visas to Canada, for UN delegates to these UN bio-safety (biological diversity) meetings in Montreal.  Montreal is the permanent site for the UN Bio-safety Protocol;  the delegates attend meetings there occasionally, so they are known people.

The Government’s argument was that the applications for visas weren’t filed in time for the Government to process them.  When I raised the question of the with-holding of entry visas with a responsible Government official I was told that the information which would corroborate the timing of the applications for the visas was personal to the overseas applicant and therefore not available to the public.  I told him that the information might be withheld from Government officials (who might then doubt what they are being told) but that the information is readily available in the public sphere through email networks directly from the scientist(s) and others who were being barred from attending the meetings.  The African scientist, Dr. Tewolde, in particular has been very effective in asserting the public interest and was one for whom the entry visa was originally withheld.  I think it is fairly obvious that the Government of Canada, through its partnerships with Monsanto to develop “Roundup Resistant wheat”, and through the licensing of BASF’s herbicide-tolerant wheat, etc. has acted in the interests of the transnational corporations.  That interest is contrary to the interest represented by the people who were blocked from attending the Montreal meeting.)

The actions are reprehensible and serve to demonstrate what happens when corporations are in bed with the Government.  They are also in bed with “credentialed” authorities from what are supposed to be our higher centres of learning.  Details of the Government actions are appended, under heading “Terminator Technology”.

Participation by the University of Saskatchewan in corporate partnerships has put the reputation of the University in serious jeopardy.

It would be prudent to change course, as difficult as that may be.

Note:  information to make the case is included for you to scroll through.  The complete package is a serious indictment of where we have allowed ourselves to be taken.

The problem needs to be acknowledged as a first step to finding a way out of the predicament.  I do not expect that you all will make time to sink your teeth in, but a few people will.

Yours truly,

Sandra Finley

- – - – -  – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

SCIENCE UNDER SIEGE

An ill wind is gusting through the halls of science these days: faked research, suppression of unwelcome results, corruption of science advisory panels, university research falling under the influence of corporate sponsors, and many other conflicts of interest.

It’s as if science were under siege. . . .    (The full article is at 2005-08-05)

= = = = = = = = = == = = = = = =

The appended information is contained in this posting:

2006-04-12 Real-life experience. PPP’s and corruption in action. Government-University-Chemical Biotech. (from a series)  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=1970

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = =

COPIES TO:

Members Ex Officio

  • Peter MacKinnon, President
  • Tom Molloy, Chancellor

Members Appointed by the Government

  • Gail R. Appel
  • Art Dumont
  • Nancy E. Hopkins
  • Garry Standing

Members Elected by the Senate

  • Judy Buzowetsky
  • Gary Carlson

Faculty Member

  • Linda McMullen

Student Member

  • Gavin Gardiner

Secretary to the Board

  • Lea Pennock, University Secretary

Resource Officers

  • Michael Atkinson, Provost & Vice-President (Academic)
  • Paul Becker, Associate Vice-President (Facilities Management)
  • Barb Daigle, Associate Vice-President (Human Resources)
  • Steven Franklin, Vice-President (Research)
  • Laura Kennedy, Associate Vice-President (Finance & Resources & Controller)
  • Heather Magotiaux, Vice-President, University Advancement
  • Richard Florizone, Vice-President (Finance & Resources)

= = = = = =

SENT:  March 3, 2006

TO:   University Secretary  Lea Pennock

Dear Lea,

The light went on … AFTER I made the submissions for the Board of Governors.

The package of information I submitted, to make the case for re-consideration of the relationships between the University and corporations, is information from other authorities.

But I have personal experience which speaks loudly to “Egregious example of “partnerships” outcome”.

If I am invited to make a verbal presentation, my personal experience would be appropriate reinforcement of the need to re-evaluate public partnerships with business.

When I objected to a Government of Canada scientist who works on the University grounds taking significant amounts of money from the industry his Department is responsible for regulating, I received a letter from a lawyer threatening to sue me.

Copies of the

  • letter from the lawyer
  • my response to the lawyer
  • Saskatoon Star Phoenix front page report of the incident

tell the story.  (INSERT:  Click on
2004-04-10 Tom Wolf, Health Canada scientist threatens to sue me. Response – the mafia uses threat of broken bones.)

A verbal presentation could actually be just my fielding of any questions arising out of the documents.

My experience is damning and reinforces the critics of today’s “science” and public-private-partnerships.

We have a very weak democracy as a consequence of these partnerships.

Anytime a Government employee and member of the University community uses intimidation tactics to silence legitimate citizen protest, and no steps are taken to address the situation, we are in deep doo-doo.  I have submitted the documents to various bodies and people in Government to no effect (one example is the Standing Committee on Health).

Corruption is a symptom of the failure to maintain separation between the commercial and guardian (governing) roles in the society.  We have escalating corruption in Canada.  It is well past the time for appropriate corrective action.

I don’t know how you want to handle this, Lea.

Sorry I didn’t think to include this in the original package of information.

Yours truly,

Sandra (Finley)

Posted by admin at 10:25 am

2012-05-05 New documentary "The Greater Good" (the Vaccine Controversy)

Uncategorized No Responses »
May 062012

trailer:  http://www.nextworldtv.com/page/10460.html

Thanks to Anita.

From: NextworldTV

Since the 1980′s, the numbers of doses of vaccines have tripled.

The recently released documentary film “The Greater Good,”about vaccination policy, safety, and history, is a runaway hit. It follows a few families whose children have been struck down by what they believe to be vaccine related adverse reactions, on one case the death of an infant–in another, the destruction of an entire family, following a teenage girl’s demise after Gardisil shots. It contrasts these heart-wrenching interviews and scenes with interviews from the head researchers and vaccine advocates from CDC, FDA, pharmaceutical companies, and others, creating not a”balanced” documentary but one with a carefully documented point of view.

There is no environmental concern that is more important–none–than the dumping of known neuro-toxins into our children’s bodies. See the trailer here: Video: (2:33)  http://www.nextworldtv.com/page/10460.html

 

Posted by admin at 9:33 pm
Older Entries
© 2012 The Battles Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha