Sandra Finley

Jun 142016
 

I did not know about the Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup  in Paris, 1942.  Many French people were likewise in the dark.

Bless Tatiana de Rosnay for her compelling novel, Sarah’s Key.  She says:

I was . . .  appalled by what I discovered concerning the Vel’ d’ Hiv’ Roundup, especially about what happened to those 4,000 Jewish children, and I knew I had to write about it. I needed to write about it. . . .  writing Sarah’s Key took me to Drancy and Beaune La Rolande, places around Paris which have a dreaded past that cannot be forgotten despite time going by.

The novel was recommended to me (thanks, Ev).

I hope I do not see everything through the lens of Lockheed Martin Corporation, the Censuses and the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.   For 13 years (2003 – 2016) I have hammered on the fragility of democracy, the reason we need to defend to the death, the Charter Right.   Citizens cross over from civility and thoughtfulness for others to barbarity, some in short order.

Tatiana de Rosnay says (Author’s Note at the beginning of  Sarah’s Key):

. . .  It (the novel) is my tribute to the children of the Vel’ d’Hiv’.  The children who never came back.  And the ones who survived to tell.

My Tribute:

The removal and extermination of those children was made possible by detailed census files.  The appalling treatment of them was done by otherwise ordinary people.   From their blood came the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information that we have today in Canada.

Does the Charter Right just wither and slither out through our fingers?   why?  because we are slovenly and ignorant?   . . .

Can’t we understand:   the depravity of the perpetrators and collaborators sixty years ago has not changed  (how about Lockheed Martin, number one Contract Interrogator at American offshore prisons?).   The detailed files on citizens are being constructed  (Lockheed Martin in charge of the “steerage”, Lockheed Martin with its specialty in Surveillance).

The lives of those 4,000 children, their mothers and fathers, were worth something, surely.   But only if we are willing to act on behalf of the legacy of those children.

EXCERPT  from the letter to PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL at bottom of   Official correspondence reveals lack of scrutiny of MI5’s data collection 

There is a connection not mentioned in the article.    You may know it, but  just in case you don’t!

The issue of surveillance enabled by collection of personal data through censuses and continuously on-going surveys is

additional to what is happening through “Security” forces and legislation regarding police powers.

The involvement of Lockheed Martin Corp in the data base at the  UK Office for National Statistics is a vehicle for loss of Privacy of personal information (surveillance), if the UK situation is similar to the Canadian.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B001HNE3NO/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

Sarah’s Key (2006)      by Tatiana de Rosnay 

Paris, July 1942: Sarah, a ten year-old girl, is brutally arrested with her family by the French police in the Vel’ d’Hiv’ roundup, but not before she locks her younger brother in a cupboard in the family’s apartment, thinking that she will be back within a few hours.

Paris, May 2002: On Vel’ d’Hiv’s 60th anniversary, journalist Julia Jarmond is asked to write an article about this black day in France’s past. Through her contemporary investigation, she stumbles onto a trail of long-hidden family secrets that connect her to Sarah. Julia finds herself compelled to retrace the girl’s ordeal, from that terrible term in the Vel d’Hiv’, to the camps, and beyond. As she probes into Sarah’s past, she begins to question her own place in France, and to reevaluate her marriage and her life.

Tatiana de Rosnay offers us a brilliantly subtle, compelling portrait of France under occupation and reveals the taboos and silence that surround this painful episode.

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

The Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup

With help from Wikipedia

The Vélodrome d’Hiver (Winter Velodrome), colloquially Vel’ d’Hiv, was an indoor bicycle racing cycle track and stadium (velodrome) on rue Nélaton, not far from the Eiffel Tower in Paris. As well as a cycling track, it was used for ice hockey, wrestling, boxing, roller-skating, circuses, bullfighting, spectaculars, and demonstrations. It was the first permanent indoor track in France and the name persisted for other indoor tracks built subsequently.

In July 1942, French police, acting under orders from the German authorities in Occupied Paris, used the velodrome to hold thousands of Jews and others who were victims in a mass arrest. The Jews were held at the velodrome before they were moved to a concentration camp in the Parisian suburbs at Drancy, then to the extermination camp at Auschwitz. The incident became known as the “Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup” (Rafle du Vel’ d’Hiv).

 

The Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup

(French: Rafle du Vélodrome d’Hiver, commonly called the Rafle du Vel’ d’Hiv: “Vel’ d’Hiv Police Roundup / Raid”), was a Nazi directed raid and mass arrest of Jews in Paris by the French police, code named Opération Vent printanier (“Operation Spring Breeze”), on 16 and 17 July 1942. The name “Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup” is derived from the nickname of the Vélodrome d’Hiver (“Winter Velodrome”), a bicycle velodrome and stadium where a majority of the victims were temporarily confined. The roundup was one of several aimed at eradicating the Jewish population in France, both in the occupied zone and in the free zone. According to records of the Préfecture de Police,  13,152  (13 thousand) Jews were arrested,[1] including more than 4,000 children.[2] They were held at the Vélodrome d’Hiver in extremely crowded conditions, almost without water, food and no sanitary facilities, as well as at the Drancy, Pithiviers, and Beaune-la-Rolande internment camps,[2] then shipped in rail cattle cars to Auschwitz for their mass murder. French President Jacques Chirac apologized in 1995 for the complicit role that French policemen and civil servants served in the raid.

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

Excerpts from “A Conversation with Tatiana de Rosnay” (at the end of the book)

How much did you know before you started writing?

… I didn’t know much about what exactly happened.  I was not taught about this event at school during the ’70s.   And it still seemed to be shrouded by some kind of taboo. …

And what did you learn?

… I was moved, appalled by what I discovered concerning the Vel’ d’ Hiv’ Roundup, especially about what happened to those 4,000 Jewish children, and I knew I had to write about it. I needed to write about it. . . .

. . .  Writing Sarah’s Key took me to Drancy and Beaune La Rolande, places around Paris which have a dreaded past that cannot be forgotten despite time going by.  My visits there were poignant and memorable. . . .

Historical Perspective

. . . Early on the morning of July 16, 1942, the French police, acting under orders from the German Gestapo, wrenched over thirteen thousand Jewish men, women, and children from their beds,  Most of the adults were sent directly th the camp at Drancy, while parents with children went to the Ved’ d’ Hiv’.  And it didn’t stop then.  For the next two days the French police canvassed the city with buses, picking up Jews and taking them to the stadium.

Conditions inside the Vel’ d’Hiv’ were horrendous:  it was not, there were no toilet facilities, and there was little food and no place to sleep.  For six days amidst mounting panic, the horrified prisoners endured physical indignity while the French police stood by.

… Each year now a ceremony commemorates the shameful incident.  It was here, in 1995, that President Hacques Chirac, who had just been elected to office, officially acknowledged France’s complicity in the murder and deportation of the Jews of Europe.

Excerpt:  President Jacques Chirac’s 1995 Address

 “These black hours will stain our history for ever and are an injury to our past and our traditions.  Yes, the criminal madness of the occupant was supported by the French, by the French state.  Fifty-three years ago, on 16 July 1942,    450 policemen and gendarmes, French, under the authority of their leaders, obeyed the demands of the Nazis.  That day, in the capital and the Paris region, nearly 10,000  Jewish men, women and children were arrested at home, in the early hours of the morning, and assembled at police stations . . . France, home of the Enlightenment and the Rights of Man, land of welcome and asylum, France committed that day the irreparable.  Breaking its word, it delivered those it protected to their executioners.”

Jun 142016
 

Banksters: Index

From: Adam Smith   Sent: June 12, 2017 5:58 PM

I have emailed every senator my letter about the folly of the infrastructure privatization bank.

Below is the email to the senators, attached is the letter to the PM, Finance Minister, and my MP about the CIB.

(INSERT:  (the attached letter is under password pending consent to post))

Feel free to use whatever you want, copy paste even, no attribution necessary.  Don’t forget to address the emails as properly as possible.

Cheers,

Adam

Subject:   The Honourable (Senator’s name):   Bill C-44, The CIB vs the Bank of Canada…

 

Dear Senator  (Name),

My name is Adam Smith, I’m a Canadian citizen and resident of Ontario who is deeply concerned about the government’s plan for an unnecessary infrastructure privatization bank when we already have the publicly owned Bank of Canada, which in combination with Bill 143, the Municipal Improvements Assistance Act, served successfully as our infrastructure bank for many decades.

Attached is a thoroughly researched and fully sourced letter I wrote to MPs, detailing historical and technical reasons why we do not require an infrastructure bank and how the Bank of Canada can easily suit such needs, including alarming information of the private sector conflicts of interest involved in devising this bank, which deviates significantly from the Liberals’ campaign promise to “use its strong credit rating and lending authority to make it easier and more affordable for municipalities to build the projects their communities need.”

The Senate has already considered the need to separate this legislation, proving the Senate is indeed the “house of sober second thought” and still has important relevance to our democracy.

I implore the Senate to strike Division 18 of Part 4 from Bill C-44 in its entirety and influence the government to return the Bank of Canada to previous levels of monetary financing and economic activity, instead of creating new burdens of public debt, fees, and taxation.

Thank you for your time,

Adam Smith

(contact info)

 

Jun 142016
 

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/06/12/will-liberals-defend-charter-values-on-c-51

By Tom Parkin, Postmedia Network

Note:  I deleted the first part of the article focusing on the Bill C-51 (Secret Police) portion.

. . .   Triangulation is the same strategy that, a year ago, lead Trudeau to support Bill C-51, Harper’s version of homeland security.

As with C-14, many respected constitutional lawyers and rights groups said sections of C-51 violated the Charter. When an uproar over the moral hollowness of Trudeau’s position offended actual liberals, he promised a Liberal government would fix C-51.

Recently, the Minister of Public Security told the Commons he hopes a C-51 fix-it bill will be tabled “before Parliament rises for the summer.” But will the Liberals fix C-51? Or “balance” it? How will we know?

Paul Cavalluzzo – former commission counsel in the Maher Arar inquiry – has done the research on what needs to be fixed to make C-51 Charter-compliant. He’s filed an application asking an Ontario court to strike down several provisions of C-51 because they trample Charter rights. His analysis is a valuable scorecard for any forthcoming Liberal bill.

“Our main concern is the power C-51 attempts to give a judge to authorize a violation of Charter rights and freedoms if CSIS applies for a warrant to break the Charter,” says Cavalluzzo in an interview. “In our view this is totally alien to our constitutional order.” He argues the entire idea needs to be scrapped.

Cavalluzzo is also concerned about C-51 provisions that “criminalize speech.” These efforts result in language “too broad and vague to be an effective check on conduct.” Existing Criminal Code provisions are sufficient, he argues. C-51’s criminal code sections also need to be scrapped, he argues.

And then there’s oversight. Bill C-51 included new inter-agency information sharing provisions. But existing oversight mechanisms are agency-specific silos. With an increased flow of information between agencies, “the Charter requires cross-government oversight.” Cavalluzzo argues for a broadened, multi-agency, integrated oversight mechanism.

Cavalluzzo lauds the government for promising a parliamentary committee for security oversight – something he believes is needed for broader policy decisions. But argues protecting Canadians’ Charter rights requires another sort of review mechanism “to deal with the day-to-day investigations.”

In any upcoming fix to C-51, Cavalluzzo’s points might be an effective guide to determine if these Liberals are liberals who defend Charter values, or triangulating centrists who leave that dirty work to social democrats.

Jun 142016
 

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2016/06/13/mackay-says-he-regrets-failure-to-buy-new-fighter-planes/#.V2A7aunmo3F

 

By Stephanie Levitz, The Canadian Press

 

OTTAWA — Buying a fighter jet that’s different from the one used by Canada’s closest allies risks disconnecting the country from the global alliances it needs the most, a former Conservative defence minister said Monday.

Peter MacKay told a Senate committee that in his mind, there’s no question the Lockheed-Martin F-35 is the right plane for Canada — from defending the Far North to helping to confront the threat of terrorism around the world.

MacKay’s government tried to purchase that very plane but questions about its costs and capabilities forced a halt to the process — something MacKay said he regrets.

“I’m very much lamenting some of the to-ing and fro-ing that’s going on currently over the purchase of fighter aircraft,” he said.

“Do I regret that we did not make the final purchase of that aircraft? Absolutely. We need it, it’s good for industry, it’s good for interoperability, we need it at Norad.”

During the election campaign, the Liberals said they would not buy the F-35 and would instead open the process up to a competition. However, cabinet is now grappling with how to meet that commitment and Canada’s defence needs at the same time.

“Our government is committed to making sure that we replace the fighters and we will do so and any procurement that takes place with our fighters will benefit Canada and make sure that our industry benefits as well,” Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said Monday.

The Liberals have been arguing there’s a capability gap that must be closed and soon, but MacKay disputed that, noting the money his government invested in keeping the existing planes in the air.

The current fleet of CF-18s are nearing the end of their useful life. Some of the upgrades needed to keep them in the air until 2025 have begun, but others have not. The military has said they need 65 planes to meet their current commitments to Norad, NATO, training programs and whatever else might be in store. There are currently 77 planes in the fleet.

Outside the hearing, MacKay said some of the problems that dogged the F-35 at the early stages of the process have been fixed. It is not just being flown by the Americans, but several other countries, he noted.

“The F-35 is by far the superior aircraft,” he said.

“It is by far the one that brings the most industrial benefits to Canada, it’s proven its value time and time again, they’ve got the bugs out, countries are taking delivery of it now, the cost is coming down.

“Its superiority is proven and we need it and we need it soon, so having a competition — if that’s what they need to justify it, then fine, then keep your word, just do it.”

The former Chretien Liberal government kick-started the process of replacing the CF-18s by agreeing to take part in a multinational development program for the F-35s. The Conservatives took up the process when they formed government in 2006.

David Pratt, who served as a Liberal minister of defence in 2003-04 under former prime minister Paul Martin, told the committee the Conservatives had 10 years but still failed to get the job done.

“We need an open competition in order to ensure that we’re getting the best plane for Canada — now.”

Jun 132016
 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stealth-fighter-contracts-1.3629403

Canadian companies could stand to lose at least $10B over lifetime of aircraft

An F-35 Joint Strike Fighter on display at naval yard in Maryland in January.

An F-35 Joint Strike Fighter on display at naval yard in Maryland in January. (Yuri Gripas / Reuters)

U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin is warning Canada that $825 million in aerospace industrial contracts signed with Canadian companies to build and equip F-35 jets would be moved to other partner nations if the Trudeau government decides to buy a different fighter jet.

Steve Over, the company’s director of F-35 international business development, says other countries that have already committed to buying the stealth jet are clamouring for the work.

“It’s not really a threat,” Over said in an interview with CBC News. “I don’t want it perceived as a threat, but we will have no choice, if Canada walks away from F-35, except to relocate work in Canada to other purchasing nations.”​

By the end of the year, Over said he expects the value of Canadian parts and sustainment contracts to reach $1 billion, with an anticipated lifetime value of $10 billion or more.

The comments mark a sharp escalation in the war of words over the Liberal government’s efforts to speed up the replacement of the Royal Canadian Air Force’s current fleet of CF-18s fighters.

During the 2015 election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised not to buy the F-35 and instead go with a cheaper alternative. Lockheed Martin remained silent at the time, regarding the comments as campaign rhetoric.

Under questioning this week, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan refused to exclude the notion of a sole-source purchase of brand new Boeing Super Hornet fighters, despite a campaign promise for an open bidding process.

The deputy minister of material at DND, Pat Finn, told a House of Commons committee Thursday that all options, from sole-source to full-blown competition, were being studied by the government, but no decision had been made.

Change in tone

Earlier in the week, Lockheed Martin officials seemed content to pull their punches when it came to the industrial benefits question, saying only that they would “evaluate their options.”

Even going back to 2013, months after the Harper government put the acquisition of the F-35 on hold, company officials were soft-pedalling the consequences, suggesting that if Canada went in a different direction, existing contracts would remain safe but no new work would be offered.

But all of that was tossed aside Friday as Over and other company executives made it clear that existing contracts would be honoured until renewal, and once they expire, they would go to nations participating in the program.

“If, in that most negative scenario where Canada chose to purchase a different airplane, we would have to take those future opportunities that are today envisioned for Canadian industry and we’d have to offer it to countries that are purchasing the airplane,” he said.

Losing future contracts

The example he offered was Mississauga, Ont.-based Magellan Aerospace’s 20-year, $1.2-billion subcontract from BAE Systems Inc. to build the jet’s tail fins.

“So Magellan would just no longer be offered the opportunity to produce horizontal stabilizers,” Over said.

A 2006 memorandum setting up Canada’s participation in the development of the stealth fighter was signed by the Conservative government with the implicit suggestion the country was in for the long haul.

“The government of Canada and Lockheed committed together that we would put this industrial work in Canada, assuming that Canada bought airplanes, and we can’t meet our commitments around the rest of the partnership if Canada doesn’t buy the airplane,” said Over.

“We want to approach this in a good-faith effort, but Canada is going to have to help us with that.”

There are approximately 110 Canadian companies working on the F-35.

Industry warns of lost money, jobs

Unlike other defence procurement contracts, the stealth fighter is unique in that Canadian companies don’t get guaranteed work. They are required to compete and work collaboratively to keep costs down.

The Lockheed Martin warning comes one day after an open letter published by Canadian companies involved in the program expressed fears about what would happen to them if the Trudeau government went with another plane.

“Not selecting the F-35 will set off a chain of events that will see hundreds of millions of investment dollars lost and high-tech jobs leaving Canada, going to countries who are buying the F-35,” said the letter.

“Sole-sourcing a legacy aircraft will leave Canadian industry in the unfavourable position of working on 30-year-old technology over a finite period of time, with little opportunity to progress Canada’s aerospace capabilities globally. The future landscape of the aerospace and defence industry in Canada will be permanently affected in an adverse manner.”

The Liberals have attempted to justify their desire to move quickly — and possibly avoid an open competition — by saying the air force is facing a “capability gap,” which means it may not have enough fighters to live up to its domestic and international obligations.

In the Commons Friday, Liberal MP John McKay, the parliamentary secretary for defence, put the blame on the previous Conservative government.

He said only 20 of the air force’s 77 CF-18s will be available for service by 2025 if circumstances remain the same.

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

RELATED:  Liberals miss membership payment to stay in F-35 consortium – –  http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stealth-fighter-payment-1.3619469

Jun 112016
 

Would you prefer

 

A.    Innovative new strategy against the weapons manufacturers:

These kids blow me away.   SO MANY people working in SO MANY different ways.

They’ve created “Situation Rooms”.

To bring people who wear very different shoes together.

Link to audio, interview:    Situation Rooms puts you in the shoes of those affected by the arms trade

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

 

OR, would you rather   B:  

(Confession: Option A helps generate hope  – – it’s another example of people who are tackling the problem head on.  Option A sets you up for Option B which might require us to be a bit more than spectators?)

The article,  Official correspondence reveals lack of scrutiny of MI5’s data collection  motivated me to send info to  Privacy International – – the ones who released the confidential Government communications.   Article and Response are both at the link.

EXCERPT:

GCHQ is alleged to be illegally collecting “bulk personal datasets” from the phone and internet records of millions of people who have no ties to terrorism and are not suspected of any crime. 

(GCHQ = The UK Government Communications Headquarters in the British intelligence and security – – MI5, MI6)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 

RELATED, ON THE SURVEILLANCE SIDE:    The surprising reason you should care about privacy, TED Talk, Greenwald)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 

FALSE DILEMMA (FALSE DICHOTOMY)

AND of course,  I used the manipulative tool of offering you a choice between A OR B.   When there is no reason – – you are completely free to do BOTH Options A AND B.

The false dilemma fallacy can be by

  • deliberate deception
  • accidental omission of additional options
  • can be the result of habitual, patterned, black-and-white and/or intensely political/politicized thinking in which a model of polar opposites is imposed almost automatically

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 

In case you missed it, you might be interested in the efforts to stop $15 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia,   2016-04-16 Court Challenge to Saudi Arms contract by Constitutional lawyer Daniel Turp – – interview on The House.

 

Jun 112016
 

 

Note:   JUNE 19  – Julian Assange will have been inside the embassy for four years.
Cities, including Paris, Berlin and New York, will hold special events to mark the anniversary.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/film-maker-michael-moore-visits-8157426#tbVGsgJrPHM8LwbP.99

By Alan Jones

THE award winning film maker took time out of his promotional tour for his new film, Where To Invade Next, to visit Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

image: http://i2.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article8157526.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/JS92191216.jpg

Oscar-winning documentary film-maker Michael Moore meeting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

 

OSCAR-winning documentary film-maker Michael Moore has taken time out from promoting his new film to meet WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange .

The American has been a supporter of Mr Assange for years but they had never met in person.

Moore paid a visit to the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where Mr Assange is living as he seeks to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning over a sex allegation , which he has always denied.

He believes that if he travels to Sweden he will be taken to the United States to be quizzed about the activities of WikiLeaks.

image: http://i3.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article8157528.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/cfJS92191368.jpg

 

Mr Moore has been a supporter of Mr Assange for years but they had never met in person.

Mr Assange will have been inside the embassy for four years on June 19.

A number of cities around the world, including Paris, Berlin and New York, will hold special events to mark the anniversary.

In Moore’s new film, Where To Invade Next, he examines how Europeans view work, education, healthcare, sex, equality and other issues.

He is visiting a number of European countries for the film, but not the UK.

 

Jun 092016
 

People are so smart and creative!   We have

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/q/schedule-for-thursday-june-9-2016-1.3623832/situation-rooms-puts-you-in-the-shoes-of-those-affected-by-the-arms-trade-1.3623845

 

In 'Situation Rooms' participants move through various rooms in a building, each re-created to match one of the real-life protagonists' setting.

In ‘Situation Rooms’ participants move through various rooms in a building, each re-created to match one of the real-life protagonists’ setting. (Jörg Baumann/Ruhrtriennale)

 

It’s being called “the future of theatre” for its seamless mixing of theatre, video, installation and participation.

In Situation Rooms, you become the characters as you move through a series of recreated spaces, using an iPad and headphones to see and hear what they see. What makes the experience even more impactful is that the stories aren’t based off a script, each character is a real person whose life was changed by the global arms trade.

“Seven minutes after … you might be a German member of parliament who is from a political party that wants to forbid any kind of weapon export, seven minutes later you might turn into a manager of a weapon manufacturer … and seven minutes later you might be a Doctors Without Borders who is in Sierra Leone mending pieces of bodies together that have been transformed by these weapons.”

Stefan Kaegi, director and co-creator of Situation Rooms, says finding people for the project was a difficult and, at times, dangerous endeavour — for example, one of their subjects is part of a Mexican drug cartel. However, during the process of filming, Kaegi witnessed these people from different and clashing walks of life put aside their pasts and “zoom out from normal reality.”

WEB EXTRA | Watch the trailer for Situation Rooms, which opens at Toronto’s Luminato Festival on Friday, June 10.

 

Jun 072016
 

The link to Dr. Nutt’s excellent TED Talk. 

http://www.ted.com/talks/samantha_nutt_the_real_harm_of_the_global_arms_trade

“War is ours,” she says. “We buy it, sell it, spread it and wage it. We are therefore not powerless to solve it.”

ACTION?   Will you forward to your friends?   TED Talks are popular.  The number of views should hit 1 million with some help from us.   June 7, 2016 there are 195,465 Total views

These young people like Samantha are powerful. We can help them achieve their visions.  Which are ours, too.

If we enrich Lockheed Martin through complicity with lucrative Government contracts,  we are working against Samantha.

We become enablers of what Lockheed Martin does in the world,  listed in the email of solidarity (below) to Samantha.

 

The killing ways are becoming obsolete.   We have had enough.

It is as Dwight Eisenhower said back in the fifties:   I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it.

In our case,  getting IN the way is the responsible action by citizens!

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More about Samantha Nutt:  http://samanthanutt.com/

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  
Email sent to Dr. Samantha Nutt, follow-up to her TED Talk

 

From: Sandra Finley  Sent: June 7, 2016

Subject: Support.  Your TED Talk.

 

Dear Samantha,

 

I cannot thank you enough for your excellent TED Talk on the insane arms trade.

 

I would like you to know that a network of thousands of Canadians have battled since 2003 against the use of our money to enrich one of the largest arms dealers, Lockheed Martin Corporation.   Public Works and Statistics Canada awarded long term contracts to Lockheed Martin.

 

Citizens dig into one pocket to help fund constructive initiatives such as War Child (yours).  Meanwhile the Government is in our other pocket taking money to give to Lockheed Martin Corporation that negates the good work.   Makes a lot of us very angry.   Non-violent resistance, on-going since 2003, takes the form of refusal to cooperate with StatsCan censuses and surveys.

 

Census non-compliance had gone from 2% to 11% by the 2011 Census, if the interpretation of (transcript) figures given under oath at the trial of Audrey Tobias is correct.

 

Appended, please see the “why” of the resistance.

 

In order to drive Lockheed Martin out, however, it is necessary that citizens of other countries fight them, too.    Links to the international collaboration between Governments and Lockheed Martin are in the posting:  2016-03-18   Does Lockheed Martin Corp have a role in the 2016 Census?   

 

Your TED Talk video is going into our network today.   Once again, thanks – – you are compelling and succinct.

 

We choose to tread your path with you; be damned if we will follow the path laid down by the bureaucrats and politicians who are collaborators with the war corporations.

 

The means do not justify the ends, whether for war or for statistics.  As far as I can understand history, they lead to destruction of the state and of the self who partakes in the treacheries.  Russian communism would be one example of many (Ref:  Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon, 1941).

 

Best wishes,

 

Sandra Finley

 

APPENDED

What were the earlier causes of resistance to Lockheed Martin at StatsCan?   (today it is these, plus the Surveillance issue) 

Outrage that Public Works and StatsCan would award contracts to a company with the track record of Lockheed Martin:

 

  • Producer of land mines, illegal under International and Canadian law.

 

  • Producer of cluster munitions, illegal.

 

  • Played a promotional role in the decision by the U.S. and U.K. to launch an illegal war of aggression on Iraq.

 

  • Number one “contract interrogator” in the Torture done at American offshore prisons such as Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay) and Abu Ghraib.

 

  • Have been convicted numerous times of breaking American arms export control laws.  In general they consider themselves to be outside the rule of law.

 

  • This video explains a lot – the annual arms bazaar in Jordan.  Lockheed Martin is there – – all nations and players, anyone who wants to buy weapons.  People ostensibly at war with each other but they are partners in business.  The “terrorists” are there buying weapons, too.    http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=13349    A must see:  The Business of War: SOFEX – YouTube

 

  • Involved in terrorizing people in Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc, through the dropping of bombs by remote control from drones  (“drone warfare”.  The RQ-170 Sentinel drone used in the Middle East is made by Lockheed Martin.)

 

  • They are corrupting of democracy through the huge amounts of money they spend on lobbying and contributions.

 

  • The Americans have an accumulated federal debt well over $18 trillion, growing continuously.  War is expensive.  Jumping into bed with Lockheed Martin means growing an economy that becomes dependent upon the waging of war.   Think of how much money individual Americans pay through taxes that just goes to the banks to pay costs of $18 trillion in Government debt – – that only continues to escalate.   Not much wonder there is poverty and huge infrastructure deficits in the U.S..  We don’t aim for the same in Canada.

 

  • Application of the business model by a war corporation, words from the current CEO of Lockheed Martin, Marillyn Hewson, to potential investor Deutsche Bank:  (The plan is actually one that helps de-stabilize the world.) Even if there may be some kind of deal that is done with Iran, there is volatility all around the region and each one of these countries believes they’ve got to protect their citizens and the things that we can bring to them help in that regard. So similarly, that’s the Middle East. And I know that’s what you asked about, but you can take that same argument to the Asia-Pacific region, which is another growth area for us. A lot of volatility, a lot of instability a lot of things that are happening both with North Korea as well as some of the tensions between China and Japan. So in both of those regions, which are growth areas for us, we expect that there is going to continue to be opportunities for us to bring our capabilities to them.More:   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=8972   Strategy, scenarios, and the global shift in defense power

 

  • They gouge the public purse.  The helmet alone, for each pilot of an F-35 stealth bomber that they are trying to stuff down our throats  is a million dollars.   (the F-35 contracts will be back on the table in 2018)More:   http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=8906    Lockheed Martin is desperate – – to get our money!   And what is the cost of one F-35 stealth bomber?     See also,  Iraq for Sale youtube, not specifically Lockheed Martin, but makes the point:    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cJlJudDtVE