Sandra Finley

2016-02-08 Watchdog ‘Aware of’ Duffy Testimony Related to Election Fraud Cold Case, The Tyee

 Robocalls & Vote moving, Election Fraud  No Responses »
Feb 082016
 

A small bit of background first.  or, just scroll down to the article.

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

Mike Duffy said during his trial:

. . . Basically what happened was that they used robocalls to misdirect NDP voters, to split the vote and allow Gary Lunn to win . . .    (the 2008 Election)

 

Bryony Penn (Liberal) and Elizabeth May (Green Party) were the candidates wronged by these robocalls, not to mention the electorate in Saanich-Gulf Islands, BC.

By Briony Penn March 5, 2012

My name is Briony Penn — I am a journalist and lecturer, and I ran as a political candidate in the 2008 federal election. My other claim to fame is apparently being the first “victim” of illegal robocalls.  more

 

Many thanks to Sebastian Silva, a resident of SGI.  He wrote to Elections Canada following the Duffy revelation, to question whether their investigation would re-open in light of the new evidence.

And thanks to THE TYEE for covering the story.

 

http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/02/08/Watchdog-Duffy-Testimony/

Watchdog ‘Aware of’ Duffy Testimony Related to Election Fraud Cold Case

Commissioner’s office may have reopened probe after senator alleges that Tories robocalled in 2008.

By Andrew MacLeod, Today, TheTyee.ca

The Commissioner of Canada Elections has taken a second look at a seven-year-old election fraud cold case from British Columbia and may have reopened its investigation thanks to court testimony made by Sen. Mike Duffy in December.

“We are aware of Mr. Duffy’s recent testimony,” senior director of investigations Eric Ferron wrote in a Jan. 19 letter responding to Sebastian Silva, a resident of Saanich-Gulf Islands who worked on the Liberal campaign in the riding in 2008.

“Our office takes all allegations of wrongdoing under the act very seriously, and the [Commisioner of Canada Elections] has always maintained that should any new information be uncovered or disclosed to us, it would be carefully considered and all appropriate action taken,” Ferron wrote.

Former senator Mike Duffy

In December, Sen. Mike Duffy alleged Tories ‘used robocalls to misdirect voters’ in 2008.

The case goes back to Oct. 14, 2008, when on the eve of the federal election automated phone calls were made to people in the riding encouraging them to support the NDP candidate, Julian West. The calls went out even though West had withdrawn 20 days earlier. He’d dropped out too late to have his name removed from the ballot.

Recipients said the calls appeared to be coming from NDP riding association president Bill Graham’s phone, but Graham insisted they had nothing to do with him or the party.

When the ballots were counted, West had received 3,700 votes, significantly more than the margin of 2,625 votes that separated Conservative cabinet minister Gary Lunn from his nearest challenger, Liberal Briony Penn.

The office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections investigated complaints about the calls, as Ferron confirms in his letter to Silva, but was unable to determine whether the calls had influenced anyone’s vote or to discover the source of the calls or who had made them.

‘Black ops’ group involved: Duffy

There it stood until December when Duffy — who is facing 31 charges, many of them involving travel he billed to the Senate — described in court the rationale for a 2009 trip to help Lunn.

“He’d had a close call during the previous election, and it was only through the divine intervention of [late former senator and campaign manager] Doug Finley’s black ops group at Conservative headquarters that he managed to get himself re-elected,” Duffy reportedly told the court.

“Basically what happened was that they used robocalls to misdirect NDP voters, to split the vote and allow Gary Lunn to win,” Duffy said. “He knew nothing about it, except that they phoned him afterward and said ‘You’re welcome Gary.’ He said ‘What?’ [They said] ‘We got you in.'”

Following Duffy’s testimony, Lunn told the Canadian Press that he never knew who made the misleading calls and never told Duffy that it was Conservative headquarters.

Finley died in 2013 after a long battle with colorectal cancer.

In his letter to Silva, Ferron said the Commissioner of Canada Elections’ policy is to neither confirm nor deny whether an investigation has been opened or is ongoing. “Our evaluation with respect to any new information in this file will not be made public,” he said.

2016-02-06 “Propaganda and the Ethics of Persuasion”, by Randal Marlin

 Propaganda  No Responses »
Feb 062016
 
From books.google:
Propaganda and the Ethics of Persuasion,  by Randal Marlin.
Revised Second Edition 2013

 

This book aims to develop a sophisticated understanding of propaganda. It begins with a brief history of early Western propaganda, including Ancient Greek classical theories of rhetoric and the art of persuasion, and traces its development through the Christian era, the rise of the nation-state, World War I, Nazism, and Communism. 

The core of the book examines the ethical implications of various forms of persuasion, not only hate propaganda but also insidious elements of more generally acceptable communication such as advertising, public relations, and government information, setting these in the context of freedom of expression. 

Propaganda and the Ethics of Persuasion examines the art of persuasion but it also hopes to establish a “self-defense” resistance to propaganda. As Jacques Ellul warned in 1980, any new technology enters into an already existing class system and can be expected to develop in a way favourable to the dominant interests of that system. 

The merger of AOL and Time-Warner confirms the likelihood of corporate interests dominating the future of the Internet, but the Internet has also opened up new possibilities for a politically effective counter-culture, as was demonstrated at the meeting of the World Trade Organization in Seattle in late 1999 and numerous similar gatherings since.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
About Randal Marlin:  Wikipedia    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randal_Marlin

2016-02-04 Census, Lockheed Martin & Charter Right. Replies to student research, Philosophy Class, Truth & Propaganda.

 Privacy of Personal Information; Charter Right; Surveillance; StatsCan Censuses & Surveys  No Responses »
Feb 062016
 

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS     (My replies are italicized)

STUDENT FROM PHILOSOPHY CLASS,  TRUTH AND PROPAGANDA

(Reference  “Propaganda and the Ethics of Persuasion”, by Professor Randal Marlin)

RE your statement:    former Chief Statistician agrees with the premise of your second reason (Charter Right to Privacy). He states that while the mandatory collection of personal information is in violation of the charter right, however it is a ‘legitimate violation of the right’ (the idea that rights may be rescinded for a social good) because it is a recognized necessity as outlined in the statistics act.

MY REPLY:

Yes, the Government may rescind the rights of an individual.  However,

  1. The Statistics Act does not give the Government the authority to do that.  StatsCan cannot just declare that this is so.
  2. In order to override the Charter Right of an individual, the Government has to pass the “Oakes Test“.

If StatsCan wishes to take away Canadians’ Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information, it would have to make an application to the Court to do so, supplying the Court with the arguments to satisfy the Oakes Test.   It has not done that.   So the Charter Right stands.

REFERENCE:

Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 8 Privacy – Case Law: The Queen Vs Plant protects a “biographical core of personal information” from the state. Oakes Test to override.

Excerpt

(3)  DOUBTFUL THE GOVERNMENT CAN MEET THE “OAKES TEST” TO OVERRIDE THE CHARTER RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN RELATION TO THE CENSUS

. . .   I have a constitutional right not to be forced to hand over “a biographical core of personal information”.  Legislation that forces me to do so (the Statistics Act) is unconstitutional, unless it can pass the  Court test for an override:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Oakes

The Court presents a two step test to justify a limitation (INSERT: of an individual’s Charter Rights and Freedoms) …

  • First, it must be “an objective related to concerns which are pressing and substantial in a free and democratic society“, and
  • second it must be shown “that the means chosen (INSERT: 3 months in jail and a fine of $500) are reasonable and demonstrably justified“.

 

The second part is described as a “proportionality test” which requires the invoking party (the Government) to show:

  • First, the measures adopted must be carefully designed to achieve the objective in question. They must not be arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations. In short, they must be rationally connected to the objective.   (i.e. 3 months of jail and a fine of $500 must be shown to have a logical connection to the objective of the Census)
  • Second, the means, even if rationally connected to the objective in this first sense, should impair “as little as possible” the right or freedom in question.
  • Third, there must be a proportionality between the effects of the measures which are responsible for limiting the Charter right or freedom, and the objective which has been identified as of “sufficient importance”.

(example using two actual questions on the Census long form – –   it is of sufficient importance that the Government know  what language I spoke at home when I was 5 years old, and how many bedrooms are in my home – – it is important enough that they can impose 3 months in jail and a $500 fine (“the effects of the measures” responsible for limiting the Right to Privacy)  if I refuse to give up my Charter Right to Privacy of personal information.)

Note:  this is about the Census.  It is not about StatsCan “Surveys” because the Statistics Act says that surveys are not mandatory – – no matter what StatsCan might tell you.  See  Are StatsCan “surveys” mandatory?

 

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

RE:   What are your primary reasons for opposing the mandatory census? 

–       Initially it was the out-sourcing of StatsCan work to Lockheed Martin Corp, the largest arms manufacturer and player in the American military-industrial-congressional complex (today, “-university” is added to the handle).  They flaunt Canadian and International Law, they corrupt democracy through the huge dollars they spend on lobbying.  They are a prime mover in what was once called the North American “Security and Prosperity Partnership” that takes decision-making out of the public arena, moving it to backroom deals between Government and Business officials. They are corrupt, very corrupt with ample documentation to prove it.  As time passes more is learned:  on top of their other sins they were the number one contract interrogator in the illegal outrages of torture committed at offshore American prisons like Guatanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc.

–       My second reason for opposition is the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information which the Census long form, along with Lockheed Martin’s involvement at StatsCan, are in breach of.  I believe that Charter Rights are extremely important to the citizenry of a democracy, they exist for important reasons, and it is incumbent upon us to fight to get them back when they are infringed.

To Clarify: Initially the case of Lockheed Martin; but the second reason is your main reason. The long form census, through its agents (Statistics Canada and lockheed martin) is a violation of the charter right to privacy by  instituting a mandatory collection of personal information.

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

Follow up; So in this case your second reason debates the fundamental existence of the mandatory census. In an open letter for the long form census, former Chief Statistician agrees with the premise of your second reason. He states that while the mandatory collection of personal information is in violation of the charter right, however it is a ‘legitimate violation of the right’ (the idea that rights may be rescinded for a social good) because it is a recognized necessity as outlined in the statistics act. Am I correct in stating that your second reason is ethically, morally and legally opposed to this line of thought?

The answer is “yes”, and you can add “rationally”.   Please see  2016-03-18  Does Lockheed Martin Corp have a role in the 2016 Census?  which points to the aspect of census collaboration between countries under Lockheed Martin’s “steerage”.   It is about International Surveillance driven by the American NSA.  

9/11 became a vehicle for fomenting fear of “terrorists”, a justification for taking away citizen rights.   

But the CAUSES of “terrorism” are not addressed.   American imperialism plays a pivotal role – – there is a long list of examples from which to choose.  See 2016-03-22 There are two sides to the story. Why do we hear only one? (Terrorists & Context: CIA – examples Mossadegh, Lumumba, Arbenz, Guevera, Allende . . .)   

Essentially, what Westerners know and don’t know is subject to the tools of propaganda.

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

If the census were to be processed entirely by our government, would you oppose a mandatory census?

The considerations in arriving at a “yes” response:

–       Do the questions create profiles of citizens?   Our Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information exists for a compelling reason.  You do not allow Governments to create detailed files on its people;  such files are the tools of police states.  I always recommend Edwin Black’s book “IBM and the Holocaust” if there is any doubt in a person’s mind.  Past or present it makes no difference, the practice is the same.  The historical record is clear.  Current events are clear.  It is the reason why we have the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.  Detailed files on citizens are verboten in a democracy.  

I further believe that critical examination of the reasons trotted out in support of the alleged necessity for taking away the Charter Right are insubstantial.  You may want to take a look at:

2016-05-21 I lose myself. “A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem.”

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

Follow up; This is a very difficult question to answer, and yes, that is a shocking story with IBM and the holocaust I am quite familiar with it.

I know that there are standard practices in place to prevent access to citizen profiles. In certain census subdivisions (geographically and demographically similar areas) data is suppressed if there are too few residences there. However, what Statistics Canada implies is that the collection of data in these areas must take place first before it can be determined what data is suppressed.

The crux of the problem is this  …   

   The remainder of the Question, and the Reply now a separate posting.  Please see  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=16581    

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

Do you think that the press presented your case fairly?

A few did, local journalists were more likely.  Others did not.  The most egregious example of failure was the New York Times.  They changed the coverage by the Times reporter in Ottawa to eliminate the name “Lockheed Martin”, stating that the small opposition in Canada to the Census was due to involvement of “an American technology contractor”.   Americans generally know who Lockheed Martin is. Canadians especially then, were more unlikely to know.  Portraying Lockheed Martin as a “technology contractor” is misleading journalism.

It was frustrating trying to get the main reason for the non-compliance, Lockheed Martin, into the news coverage partially because the “newsiness” of the story was the court case which strategically used the Charter Right to Privacy to defend against the charge of non-compliance.  It was also difficult to get Lockheed Martin’s name onto the Court record, for various reasons.

Follow Up;  It is interesting to see some varied reports, there is a lot to be said in not only omissions, but emphasis and phrasing as well. One consistent factor that I have seen is that these cases are reported too individualistically. Several I have come across have never included the rates of non-participation, statistics on persons charged with not completing the census, nor even linked to similar cases of persons charged with non-compliance despite the fact that these details would be relevant to the story.

2016-01-06 re Julian Assange. My “Error Report” to CTV news coverage of “Significant victory”

 Julian Assange, Wikileaks, Chelsea (Bradley) Manning, Arjen Kamphuis, Propaganda  No Responses »
Feb 062016
 

Amy Goodman, I love that woman, covered   “A Significant Victory”: Julian Assange Hails U.N. Panel Calling for His Freedom,

At bottom, the link to the actual UN Report.

In response to  CTV News Coverage  of this important development for democracy,  I used their “Error Report” button to submit THREE FACTUAL ERRORS.

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

THREE FACTUAL ERRORS.   (submitted to CTV News.  Three days later the report has not been corrected.)

I hope my input will help improve media coverage:

  1.   RE Assange has consistently denied the allegations but has refused to return to Sweden to meet with prosecutors

Assange has consistently offered to meet with the Swedish prosecutors.  And according to The Guardian, a pact was signed in December whereby Assange will be questioned by the prosecutors in the Ecuadorean Embassy:

Dec 17, 2015, Reuters in Stockholm, The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/dec/17/swedish-prosecutors-new-request-question-julian-assange-rape-allegations

. . .   On Sunday, the Quito government said Ecuador and Sweden had signed a pact after half a year of negotiations that would allow Assange to be questioned at the embassy, where he has been holed up for more than three years.

 2.    RE   British and Swedish officials maintain the panel’s finding has no legal force, but it represents a public relations victory for Assange

Context: the UK and Sweden are both signatories to the U.N. Convention on Civil and Political Rights.  Assange’s lawyers sought remedy within that framework, so I assume any person in a similar situation in any country is free to do that.  A hearing of the case by the duly-constituted U.N. body found that Assange has been “arbitrarily detained”, he should be allowed to walk free, and compensated for his years of arbitrary detention.

Failure to provide the readership with context, and Reuters’ complicity in mere parroting of officials, reducing Assange’s situation to a “public relations victory” amounts to not-so-subtle propaganda.

If this U.N. body had made this finding in similar circumstances, against the Governments of countries in the southern hemisphere, the brave Foreign Secretaries and officials would shout loudly for upholding the outcome of a process they helped to establish.

INSERT, Feb 8th:   See at bottom, excerpt from the actual U.N. Report, their Statement on whether their decisions are legally binding.  The Reuters/Associated Press/CTV Coverage is also propagandist when it quotes officials who announce, without qualification,  that the UN Panel’s findings are not legally binding.

 

3.    RE: The 44-year-old computer hacker’s lawyers

Assange is an investigative journalist and founder of Wikileaks. Reuters chose dismissive words (tool of the propagandist), characterizing Assange as a “computer hacker”.  In spite of  intense surveillance, his work continues.

 

I will check back later  (to the CTV News Coverage)  – – I hope to see these errors corrected. Thanks!

(3 days later no corrections have been made.)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Full text of UN judgement in Julian Assange’s case (No. 54/2015)  http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/A.HRC.WGAD.2015.docx … (.docx)

More: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17013&LangID=E …

QUESTION OF “LEGALLY BINDING”,  EXCERPT FROM THE LATTER LINK:
The Opinions of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention are legally-binding to the extent that they are based on binding international human rights law, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The WGAD has a mandate to investigate allegations of individuals being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary way or inconsistently with international human rights standards, and to recommend remedies such as release from detention and compensation, when appropriate.
The binding nature of its opinions derives from the collaboration by States in the procedure, the adversarial nature of is findings and also by the authority given to the WGAD by the UN Human Rights Council. The Opinions of the WGAD are also considered as authoritative by prominent international and regional judicial institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights.

2016-01-05 “A Significant Victory”: Julian Assange Hails U.N. Panel Calling for His Freedom, Democracy Now, Amy Goodman

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Julian Assange, Wikileaks, Chelsea (Bradley) Manning, Arjen Kamphuis  No Responses »
Feb 062016
 
IMPORTANT VIDEO

Click on   http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/5/a_significant_victory_julian_assange_hails 

A United Nations panel has officially concluded WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been “arbitrarily detained” and should be allowed to walk free. Assange has been holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London for more than three years. He wants to avoid extradition to Sweden over sex crimes allegations, which he has repeatedly denied and for which he has never been charged. He fears Sweden would extradite him to the United States, where he could face trial for WikiLeaks’ revelations. We air reaction to the U.N. decision from Assange and his attorney, Melinda Taylor, and speak with Mads Andenæs, U.N. special rapporteur on arbitrary detention.   (Transcript below)

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

CTV NEWS COVERAGE OF THE STORY

There are THREE FACTUAL ERRORS  I  reported to CTV.

See   “Error Report” sent to CTV news re their coverage of “Significant victory”   

Three days later, corrections have not been made.   The “Errors” add a significant stroke of propaganda.

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

FULL TEXT OF THE UN JUDGMENT

Julian Assange case (No. 54/2015)  http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/A.HRC.WGAD.2015.docx … (.docx)

More: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17013&LangID=E …

QUESTION OF “LEGALLY BINDING”,  EXCERPT FROM THE LATTER LINK:
The Opinions of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention are legally-binding to the extent that they are based on binding international human rights law, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The WGAD has a mandate to investigate allegations of individuals being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary way or inconsistently with international human rights standards, and to recommend remedies such as release from detention and compensation, when appropriate.
The binding nature of its opinions derives from the collaboration by States in the procedure, the adversarial nature of is findings and also by the authority given to the WGAD by the UN Human Rights Council. The Opinions of the WGAD are also considered as authoritative by prominent international and regional judicial institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
TRANSCRIPT, AMY GOODMAN, DEMOCRACY NOW COVERAGE OF THE UN FINDINGS

 

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: A United Nations panel has officially concluded WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been “arbitrarily detained” and should be allowed to walk free. Assange has been holed up in Ecuadorean Embassy in London for more than three years. He wants to avoid extradition to Sweden over sex crimes allegations, which he has repeatedly denied and for which he has never been charged. He fears Sweden would extradite him to the United States, where he could face trial for WikiLeaks’ revelations.

AMY GOODMAN: Seong-Phil Hong, the rapporteur of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, spoke this morning.

SEONG–PHIL HONG: The working group maintains the arbitrary detention of Mr. Assange should be brought to an end. And his physical integrity and his freedom of movement should be respected. And finally, if necessary, he should be entitled to an enforceable right to remedy—for example, compensation.

AMY GOODMAN: The U.N. panel’s judgment is not legally binding. British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond dismissed it as “ridiculous.”

PHILIP HAMMOND: Well, I reject the finding of this working group. It’s a group made up of laypeople, not lawyers, and they are—their conclusion is flawed in law. Julian Assange is a fugitive from justice. He’s hiding from justice in the Ecuadorean Embassy. He can come out onto the pavement any time he chooses. He’s not being detained by us. But he will have to face justice in Sweden, if he chooses to do so. And it’s right that he should not be able to escape justice. This is a—frankly, a ridiculous finding by the working group, and we reject it.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: At a press conference at the Frontline Club in London this morning, Julian Assange’s attorney, Melinda Taylor, discussed the significance of the ruling.

MELINDA TAYLOR: So, finally, we have the verdict of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. And they issued a very detailed opinion, which considers all arguments from Sweden and the United Kingdom. And this decision dispels the myth that Mr. Assange is either a fugitive from justice or that he could just walk out of the embassy. It is a damning indictment of the manner in which this case has been handled. It further affirms that Mr. Assange is a victim of a significant miscarriage of justice that is attributable to the action and inaction of both Sweden and the United Kingdom. It further emphasized Julian’s continued willingness to cooperate with the investigations in this case at all stages of the procedure.

Now, today I’m going to first address why we brought a complaint before the United Nations working group and, secondly, what are the findings of this working group. In terms of why we brought the complaint, there are two main reasons. First, he is and has been detained now for five years, one month and 29 days. And to put it bluntly, that’s a hell of a long time to detain someone, someone who has never been charged and has never even been questioned by the Swedish authorities.

AMY GOODMAN: Julian Assange also responded to the ruling just before our broadcast today. He spoke at that news conference at the Frontline Club in London via video stream from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, I’ve been detained now without charge in this country, the United Kingdom, for five-and-a-half years. That’s five-and-a-half years where I’ve had great difficulty seeing my family and seeing my children. Today that detention without charge has been found by the highest organization in the United Nations—that is, has the jurisdiction for considering the rights of detained persons—to be unlawful.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Julian Assange speaking just minutes before we went to broadcast through a video stream at the Frontline Club. He’s been holed up at the embassy in—the Ecuadorean Embassy in London for three-and-a-half years, where he got political asylum.

Joining us now is Mads Andenæs. He is the former U.N. special rapporteur on arbitrary detention and the chair of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. He’s a professor at the University of Oslo and a visiting professor at All Souls College in Oxford. And that’s where we’re speaking to him right now.

Mads Andenæs, thanks so much for joining us. Can you explain the ruling of the U.N. committee?

MADS ANDENÆS: So, the U.N. committee holds that this is a violation of the prohibition against arbitrary detention. Mr. Assange has been deprived of his liberty for a five-year—more than a five-year period. He was initially arrested and detained in isolation. The isolation was completely groundless. He was afterwards in house arrest under, again, very strict restrictions. He was then threatened with actually being extradited to Sweden. And you’ve spoken about the consequences of that. And that would negate his basic human rights. He had no other choice than to go and seek refuge, and he did that in the Ecuadorean Embassy. That was not his choice. That was not his volition. It was the only way he could uphold his own rights in this situation.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Mads Andenæs, I wanted to ask you—The Guardian newspaper had an editorial basically not backing—not backing Julian Assange, and saying that the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, that this latest opinion, is simply wrong. It says, “He is not being detained arbitrarily. Three-and-a-half years ago, he sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in order to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sex offences. … ‘Arbitrary’ detention,” The Guardian says, “means that due legal process has not been observed. It has. This is a publicity stunt.” What do you say to that?

MADS ANDENÆS: Well, first of all, due process has not been upheld, and that’s what the U.N. working group very clearly shows—a series of procedural mistakes on the Swedish side, no proportionality review on the U.K. side. And the alternatives here—there were alternatives. Under the European Arrest Warrant system, he could have been interviewed, interrogated in England, in London. That’s how we normally do these things in Europe. In these kind of cases, Swedish officers could have traveled to the U.K. He would—Mr. Assange would have been interviewed in an English police station. That’s how we usually do it, and it wasn’t done here. It was a highly irregular procedure. This was nothing like due process. And it is obvious to the U.N. group and, after this ruling, obvious that this did not serve the purposes of the case, the way it was explained. This was to achieve other aims and illegitimate aims. And it was clearly not a part of a due process.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to go back to Julian Assange speaking this morning after the U.N. ruling became public.

JULIAN ASSANGE: It is now the task of the states of Sweden and the United Kingdom, as a whole, to implement the verdict. Now, while there can be attempts for the media, for the popular press, to look tough and attempt to undermine that, a serious attempt, not just for show, would have the effect of undermining the U.N. system. And there are consequences of doing that. And Sweden and the U.K. know full well that there are consequences. Those consequences include not merely weakening a human rights and international law instrument to which both countries have signed binding treaties, but rather it will have the diplomatic effect—and diplomats know it. The diplomatic effect will be to make life difficult for Sweden and the United Kingdom to be treated seriously as international players that obey their international legal obligations.

Their attempts, if they proceed to undermine the U.N. system, will see various enforcement measures that can be taken by the U.N. Those, initially, of course, can include their removal from U.N. committees, the movement against those states in various voting processes, and, ultimately, up to and including sanctions. Now that’s, of course, a matter for the U.N. to decide about how it’s going to enforce its decisions, and a matter for Sweden and the U.K. to think, do they really want to go down that path?

AMY GOODMAN: So, that is Julian Assange speaking at the news conference today, albeit by video stream because he is in the Ecuadorean Embassy. If he steps foot outside, he’ll be arrested by British authorities. We’re talking to the former U.N. rapporteur on arbitrary detention, Mads Andenæs. I was watching CNN this morning, and a reporter was standing outside the Ecuadorean Embassy and saying, “Despite Sweden’s efforts to question Julian Assange in the embassy, Ecuador has prevented them from doing this.” This was exactly the opposite. This was not true, what the reporter said. Ecuador has said that the Swedish authorities could come in. Even a court in Sweden has reprimanded the prosecutor for not questioning Julian Assange. Mads Andenæs, can you say what happens from here?

MADS ANDENÆS: Well, it’s now for the U.K. and the Swedish authorities to find some way of abiding by this opinion. This U.N. body is the only body or the one U.N. body dealing with arbitrary detention. And they come with this very clear ruling. Sweden and the U.K. are bound by the U.N. Convention on Civil and Political Rights. And it’s now for them to find a way of complying.

And what you mentioned there is part of the substance of the case. There are, of course, lesser—much lesser measures, less intrusive measures that could have been chosen. For instance, they could have interviewed him in the U.K. And it’s not true that Assange has not offered that, as far as I—well, I think it’s absolutely clear, although you have this reporter that you just mentioned. To the contrary, it’s absolutely clear that Assange and his team has offered to answer—that he should offer—he had offered to answer questions by Swedish police in the U.K. That’s beyond dispute. And that offer has not been taken up. And as you mentioned, Swedish courts have been very critical of the prosecutor, of the Swedish prosecutor, for this. And if you read those judgments closely—they’re in Swedish, of course—you will see that it is as strong a criticism as you can expect possible from a Swedish court against the way that the prosecutors have proceeded here.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Mads Andenæs, we only have about 30 seconds or so, but your sense of how public opinion, both in Britain and in Sweden, is in respect to how their governments are dealing with the Julian Assange case?

MADS ANDENÆS: Well, it’s split. It’s split. But no country likes to get a ruling for arbitrary detention, to be censured by the U.N. like this. But if you don’t abide by it, you fall into the category of countries we don’t like to compare ourselves with, who do not abide by these rulings. And it’s very important for the international human rights systems that countries like the U.K. and Sweden do actually go for—show a good example and do follow these rulings, because, in the end, they are bound by the conventions. And there’s no more authority body to interpret and apply the Convention on Arbitrary Detention than this working group, which is established by the U.N. And—

AMY GOODMAN: Mads Andenæs, we’re going to have to leave it there, but I thank you so much for being with us. He is the former U.N. special rapporteur on arbitrary detention and chair of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, now professor at University of Oslo, a visiting professor at All Souls College in Oxford, where we just spoke to him.

2016-01-29 Dr Tennant. pH Scale, human physiology, energy (electron) flow. Energy practitioners.

 Health  No Responses »
Jan 312016
 
Hi – – – ,

Scientists understand how electrical currents work when you plug in an appliance.   They list many applications of how electron flow (electricity) applies out there in the world.

But they don’t connect it to how it works in the human body – – it’s the same phenomenon (electron transfer) that is commonly referred to as “body pH”.

Dr. Tennant’s “aha!” was  to make that connection.

Appended are some articles I found by googling.   They say to me that authors come at the question from their particular perspective,  And then stop short of making the leap they need for full understanding/explanation.

In his hour of desperation to reverse his condition (medical specialists could not help him), the “Aha!” moment for Dr. Tennant came while digging into the science of cellular biology.   He repeatedly came across references to pH.

“Yes”, but what does the pH level in the body actually signify, what IS it?”

and he made the connection – –

It’s actually about ion transfer which is the flow of electricity, see below, “ELECTRICITY” FROM THE SCIENTIST’S PERSPECTIVE    (It’s helpful to remember high school chemistry,  how do batteries work? and litmus paper for reading the acidity/alkalinity of a solution.)

I attended Dr. Tennant’s clinic a few years ago.   As I understand him, the 7.35 to 7.45 pH reading (blood, slightly akaline) is when the body is in routine mode.

But if the cells then need to go into repair or reproduction mode, the body must have:

1.       the sticks and mortar required to build a cell  PLUS

2.       a bit more energy.

The body needs to ramp up to about 7.55 pH reading when in repair mode.

See  below  UNDERSTANDING THE pH SCALE.    Health practitioners understand that pH levels can tell you about the healthiness of the body.  But they tend not to understand that pH levels in the body are about minute electrical currents.  (Synapses?)    The electrical impulses are essential to health.   Note that the article I copied discusses pH but does not interpret the essence (electricity or “energy”).   The article is typical.

Tennant’s work in helping the body heal, depending on the case, provides:

  • sticks and mortar required by cells to re-construct
  • the small incremental electrical current

I think I have a copy of Tennant’s book on Voltage and Healing.  Will look for it.

“Energy” work on the human body takes on another meaning.  Reiki, acupuncture, shiatsu, and other energy modalities have an essential place in healing.  It seems to me that the science of cellular biology makes it clear.

The scientists and the health practitioners have to walk across the bridge:  alkalinity (pH reading) in the body is caused by energy, the same electron flow as in a battery.

Healthy cells have a right energy flow.   It can be measured, same as we used litmus paper in high school science to guage the acidity/alkalinity of a solution.

In the case of blood, a pH level of 7.35 to 7.45 is normal healthy.  And the body has to have low-stress times when it can muster resources to ramp up extra energy (to pH 7.55) in order to do repair work in the body.   Sometimes health practitioners are called upon for outside assistance.

This is my layman’s understanding of things – – certainly not the gospel and I hope I am doing at least minor justice to Dr. Tennant!

/Sandra

= = = = == = = =

1.      Biography of Dr. Tennant is at:

http://www.tennantinstitute.us/dr-tennant-1/

Focuses on his work in ophthalmology.  But, as explained to you,  his emphasis today is in areas of healing outside strictly allopathic thought.

2.      His Website:   http://www.tennantinstitute.us/

Since I last visited,  judging by the website, I would say that he is now working with some marketing-type people in order to make the clinic financially viable.  Probably so he can spend his time working with patients and simultaneously be able to fund the clinic which is modest, except that he has state-of-art ophthalmolic machines.

He was born in about 1941.   So he is about 75 years old.   It makes sense that (from his website)  there appears to now be people who might be able to carry on his healing work.  He is very dedicated to the work.

3.       The “Biomodulator” I told you about (voltage)

Integrative Health Conference & Biomodulator Training Program

The Integrative Health Conference & Biomodulator Training is a 3 day training that begins Thursday evening with a 2-hour keynote presentation that introduces participants to Healing is Voltage, as well as, explains how the body works, why chronic disease occurs and how to use Dr. Tennant’s teachings and technology to have better health. . . .

(INSERT:  I took my daughter to a physiotherapist a few years ago – – he used a small voltage machine, too.)
 

 

  

“ELECTRICITY” FROM THE SCIENTIST ‘S PERSPECTIVE

See   https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/what-is-electricity

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

ELECTROTHERAPY   (historical interest)

NIKOLA TESLA – – Scroll down to heading “electrotherapy” at  http://altered-states.net/barry/newsletter208/

The author is getting close to the idea but not dead on.

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

UNDERSTANDING THE PH SCALE

INSERT:  Helpful, but doesn’t get at what pH actually is – – an energy flow, a transfer of free electrons which happens when the liquid is not “neutral”:

https://www.womentowomen.com/digestive-health/digestion-gi-health-the-truth-about-ph-balance/

The pH scale measures acidity in terms of hydrogen ion (H+) activity in a solution. A solution is acidic when it has more free hydrogen activity, and alkaline when there is a lack of free hydrogen activity.

The lower the pH reading, the more acidic the solution. Readings from 0–7 are considered acidic, and numbers from 7.0–14 are considered basic, or alkaline. Pure water, in the very middle of the (logarithmic) pH scale, has a pH of 7.0, which is considered neutral.

Body pH balance

In terms of body pH balance, there is no one “correct” reading for the entire body. For instance, healthy human skin has an approximate pH of 5.5 (slightly acidic). Saliva, on the other hand, has a pH of around 6.5–7.4 (teetering on either side of neutral). Your digestive tract’s pH can range from 1.5 to 7.0, depending on what stage of digestion is underway. And when the body is in good working order, human blood reveals a narrow pH window of about 7.35–7.45 (slightly alkaline). Other parts of a healthy, well-functioning body will show still other pH readings.

Why is this? It’s all part of the same body, so why wouldn’t a person’s acid–alkaline balance be the same all over? Because different parts of our bodies serve different purposes. Each of these purposes and their related processes requires a particular acid–alkaline environment for optimum function.

Skin needs to be slightly acidic in order to deal with environmental factors like bacteria and other toxins. Likewise, the vagina maintains an acidic environment to protect itself, and when the pH is raised too high, infections like bacterial vaginosis and yeast infections can result. The stomach and other parts of the digestive system are highly acidic out of biological necessity. The digestive acids are part of how we process and use the foods we eat as fuel. They are part of our internal combustion for nutrition.

Part of the confusion over body pH arises from the close-to-neutral pH balance of our blood, saliva, and urine — substances we can test easily. This has led to the mistaken belief that pH levels are static throughout the body, when in fact they are not. Eating more alkalizing foods (such as leafy greens and dried fruits) can help balance and maintain the pH level of your body and ultimately promote better well-being, but this doesn’t happen in a vacuum, and it also doesn’t happen overnight. Along with a diet rich in alkalizing plant foods, it takes time and commitment to certain lifestyle changes, including exercise and regular detoxification. It also takes knowing whether or not your pH is truly off-balance.

Enthusiasts of the “pH miracle” say that simply living in the modern world — with its reliance on refined grains and sugars, corn-fed beef, and unhealthy fats — means we are all overly acidic. To rectify this, we should focus all our attention on restoring “healthy pH,” by which they mean a blood pH of 7.35–7.45. I fully agree that most people could benefit by addressing their acid–base balance, but before anyone begins megadosing on supplements or downing gallons of “green” water, they need to define their individual needs. (Remember, the key to pH is balance!) And the best way to do this? Test your pH.

Testing your pH

Physicians use esophageal and gastric pH meters to help identify the causes of heartburn and gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD). Such tests determine the amount of acid in the environment being tested. Similarly, you can test the pH of your saliva and/or your urine with simple litmus strips, which are available in most pharmacies. Keep in mind that in order to get the full picture of your body’s pH, you’ll need to carry out the test not just on one day, but daily for a period of time.

Tracking your urine or salivary pH over the course of a week or so will provide a window into what is going on in your internal world. A diet that lacks essential vitamins and nutrients and is high in acid–forming foods will show up in acidic urine. This is a good indicator that your body is struggling to maintain an optimal digestive environment (also affected by your intestinal flora and immune system), which could be contributing to systemic inflammation — that ubiquitous bugaboo at the root of so many chronic health concerns, including heart disease, high blood pressure and obesity.

If conditions of hyperacidity and inflammation are occurring in your body, the next step is to take a look at the source of the acidity — and food is the first place to start. Imbalanced pH is primarily a product of what you eat — although this might not mean what you think it does.

You may think it’s acid — but it’s not

Considering whether a food is acidifying or alkalizing in the diet can require some mind-bending, because some foods that we think of as “acidic” are, in fact, alkalizing in the diet. It’s actually better to look at whether the food is acid–forming or alkaline–forming, not where the food itself falls on the pH scale. So even though we think of citrus as acidic, fruits like lemons and tangerines are alkalizing because when they’re consumed, they break down and donate alkaline mineral salt compounds like citrates and ascorbates.

Similarly, foods we might normally think of as meek and mild in nature are acid-forming when ingested. Grains and milk are two examples. What’s important is not so much the pH of the food as it goes into our bodies, but the resultant pH once the food is broken down — and this is dictated by the residues the broken-down nutrients leave behind, particularly sulfates and phosphates.

But this isn’t the sort of association most of us can readily make, so we have compiled a list of common acidic and alkalizing foods to guide you (refer to our Acid Alkaline Food Chart). But why is it important to have a certain acid–alkaline balance in our diets? The answer has to do with the dance that occurs between acid and alkaline elements in our digestion.

Digestive enzymes, microbes, nutrients, and pH balance

As mentioned earlier, pH within the digestive tract isn’t a constant, and in each zone of increasing acidity, there are different digestive enzymes and beneficial microbes present. In the mouth, where the process begins, the pH is only mildly acidic, and the enzyme amylase is present. Amylase, responsible for breaking down starch, works in a fairly neutral environment, so when the pH falls below 6.5 it is no longer active.

Acid isn’t all bad…

The acidic environment of the stomach is not only necessary for processing food, but it also helps to protect your body from pathogenic organisms or food antigens that shouldn’t be there.

Interestingly, many people with acid reflux and heartburn — a condition conventional medicine blames on acid-containing foods like fruits and vegetables — actually have too little acid in their stomachs, a problem that’s compounded by medications like Pepcid and TUMS that increase alkalinity in the stomach.

In my experience, many of my patients get rid of their heartburn and acid reflux by adding more acid to their diets. For more on this, please see our article on the link between IBS, acid reflux, and antacids.

As food makes its way from your mouth to your stomach, the digestive tract becomes more acidic. Pepsin, the enzyme responsible for protein breakdown, needs an acidic environment and therefore gets released into the stomach, where pH is very low (about 2.0–1.5). Your small intestine is where most of the nutrients in your food get absorbed, and where the pH increases from 2.0 to 6.5 as the food travels from the stomach to the small and large intestines.

Protein — particularly in the form of red meats — requires huge amounts of alkaline minerals for complete digestive processing. When the system goes looking for the alkalinity needed to offset the acid load, it looks first to the minerals currently in the digestive tract. If it fails to find alkaline nourishment there, it draws on the calcium, magnesium, phosphorus and potassium minerals stored in our bones.

This is where the good greens and essential vitamins and minerals come in. When we eat a diet that is rich in nutrients, there’s no need to draw on the stored minerals in the bones. It’s when we don’t consume a nutrient-rich diet — or, worse, when we over consume foods that promote acidity in the body — that we start tapping our bone resources. In the short term, this isn’t an issue, but in the long run, it can have serious consequences, not just for our bone health but for our overall health.

pH and disease

It make sense, given that the bones are the storehouse for alkalizing minerals, that when the body has to drain the stores to offset acid overload in the digestive tract, the net result can be loss of bone density, which can lead to osteopenia and ultimately osteoporosis. We talk about this at length in our bone health section. But bone loss is not the only health issue that stems from overdrawing our account at the bones mineral bank.

As I mentioned earlier, when your body struggles to maintain the relatively tight blood pH required for survival, it can result in inflammation. Over time, this struggle may be mirrored by a steady rise of the pro-inflammatory blood acid homocysteine in your blood. Studies show that high levels of homocysteine in the blood double the risk of osteoporosis–related fractures, along with other inflammatory conditions like heart attack, stroke, fuzzy thinking, and Alzheimer’s disease. A recent report published in the New England Journal of Medicine explains how elevated homocysteine levels inhibit new bone formation by interrupting the cross-linking of collagen fibers in bone tissue.

Homocysteine levels can be stabilized by eating foods and taking a vitamin supplement rich in folic acid, B12, and B6. Some researchers also describe a beneficial synergistic effect on homocysteine levels between omega–3 fatty acids and the metabolism of these vitamins.

Be aware that a minority of the population cannot convert folic acid due to certain enzyme deficiencies. If your homocysteine levels remain high even after a few weeks of B supplementation, you may want to ask your practitioner about adding a more bioavailable form of folate called 5-methyl-tetrahydrofolate (MTHFT) to your diet.

Naturally improving your pH balance

Proponents of alkaline diets sometimes talk as though eating alkaline is the only step to good health. It’s true that our bodies know intuitively where balance lies, and they can maintain balance on their own if provided what they need through healthy diet and nutritional supplements. But it’s important to understand that you can’t simply load up on alkalizing foods and supplements and presume they’ll offset any amount of acid you consume or create. To restore pH balance, you must address other sources of metabolic acidity as well, because in most situations, no amount of alkalizing can balance a toxically acidic environment. And to cap it off, detoxification takes place more slowly in an overly acidic environment.

Here are some ideas on how to restore pH balance to your diet, support healthy digestion, keep blood pH levels on track, and protect your bones and kidneys, too.

·       Take a high-quality daily multivitamin. This will offset any nutritional gaps and insure that your body has the reserves it needs. Your supplement should contain essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and magnesium in their most bioavailable, alkalizing forms. In addition, I recommend an essential fatty acid supplement and a top-quality probiotic to help the body absorb the minerals that are all-important to your bones. Women to Women has formulated high-quality and pure supplements to assist you with this goal.

·       Fill your plate with fresh vegetables, particularly the dark green leafy kind. Add fresh lemon or lime juice to foods and beverages as a highly alkalizing flavor accent. Enjoy plenty of fruit, especially fruit with a low glycemic index. Women in perimenopause and menopause, particularly, benefit more from fruits that are lower in sugars, to avoid concerns about insulin resistance. Again, foods that are fresh, organic, and deeply pigmented or brightly colored are the kinds that benefit you the most!

·       Choose root vegetables, too, as excellent sources of alkalizing mineral compounds. Eating foods such as slow-roasted sweet potatoes, onions, and leeks, which are also high in inulin, can optimize your body’s ability to fully absorb the calcium present in your food and thereby decrease your risk for osteoporosis. Inulin is a type of prebiotic — it is believed to serve as a welcoming “fuel” for friendly gut flora, paving the way for beneficial bacteria to thrive further down into the colon, where it lowers the pH and improves the solubility and absorption of calcium by the body.

·       Consider boosting your diet with “green foods” or “green drinks,” which contain the pigment chlorophyll in abundance. The plant world’s equivalent of the hemoglobin in our blood, we can thank chlorophyll as the original source of all our food (except perhaps fungi!) It works in the body as a strong detoxifier and immunity–building agent. Foods that contain high levels of chlorophyll include the algae spirulina and chlorella and the juice of wheat grass and other sprouted grains. These foods offer high levels of other micronutrients as well, and their neat packaging can be especially helpful for those who lack time to prepare whole balanced meals or people recovering from illness.

·       Eat plenty of vegetable protein, watch your red meat intake, and keep your servings of the acidifying animal proteins down to four ounces per meal (the size of a deck of cards).

·       Avoid refined carbohydrates whenever you can, including sugar, and when you include grains, be sure to emphasize the “whole” in whole grains. Eliminate all processed foods, particularly those that contain partially hydrogenated oils (trans fats).

·       Clear the digestive slate with a gentle detox plan, to get a better reading on how your diet — and pH — are affecting your sense of well-being. You may be surprised at how well you feel!

·       If you suffer from IBS, acid reflux, or regular heartburn, consider testing your pH. Remember that you may have too little acid in your stomach, not too much. Don’t just assume that an acid stomach means you’re too acidic.

·       Chew your food slowly and thoroughly. Enjoy every bite!

The beauty of balance

The subject of body pH may be having it’s 15 minutes of fame — but if it helps you to tune in to what’s going on in your body and eat a healthier diet, I’m all for that. Indeed, there are some people whose pH levels warrant attention — but you won’t know until you test your pH, and you may need a good functional medicine practitioner to guide you. Even so, pH is only one, albeit fundamental piece of the puzzle. To my mind, pH is a helpful indicator of overall balance in the body. But it’s just the tip of the iceberg, and no amount of trendy drinks or diet plans will make it more than that.

That being said, paying attention to your pH is one place you can begin to make an immediate positive change to preserve your long-term health. If it feels like a good place for you to start taking better care of yourself, I encourage you to do so. From there, it’s my hope that you will continue to listen to your body and help it find balance on all fronts, including your hormones, your emotions, and your lifestyle.

This article is in Digestive Health

 

2016-01-30 Tories (Britain) lobbying to protect Google’s £30bn island tax haven

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Occupy Movement  No Responses »
Jan 302016
 

OFFSHORE BANKING  (includes Tax Havens)

It’s worth the time to try and understand a bit of the huge role played by offshore banking.   It is estimated that half of the world’s GDP flows through tax-sheltered secret bank accounts and trusts – – trillions of dollars.

Maybe you think it’s not a big deal, you live in Canada and it’s not all that bad here.   (??)

Opposition figures react angrily to news that government has objected to EU’s proposed blacklisting of Bermuda as ‘unhelpful’

 

 Bermuda

Bermuda, the British overseas territory where Google is believed to have amassed £30bn of profits from non-US sales. Photograph: Alamy

 

Britain has been privately lobbying the EU to remove from an official blacklist the tax haven through which Google funnels billions of pounds of profits, the Observer can reveal.

Treasury ministers have told the European commission that they are “strongly opposed” to proposed sanctions against Bermuda, a favoured shelter for Google’s profits and one of 30 tax jurisdictions in Brussels’ sights.

The disclosure is made in a memorandum circulated among Tory MEPs in Brussels that describes potential “countermeasures” against blacklisted tax havens as “unhelpful”.

Google is expected to announce on Monday that it has amassed £30bn of profits from non-US sales in Bermuda, where companies are not liable to pay corporation tax. The UK is Google’s largest non-US market, accounting for 11% of its global revenues, according to documents filed in America.

The revelation follows widespread condemnation of the “sweetheart” deal struck between HMRC and Google that saw the internet giant agree to pay only £130m in back taxes on the estimated £7.2bn that it earned in profits over the past decade.

Despite the outcry, chancellor George Osborne has insisted that the settlement is a “major success” and denied being soft on tax avoidance.

However, an investigation by this newspaper can reveal:

■ Britain has complained to the European commission about an EU blacklist designed to hit tax havens, including Bermuda, describing it as “misleading and deeply unhelpful” and rejecting suggestions of “countermeasures”.

■ Tory MEPs were instructed on six different occasions last

year to vote against proposals that would clamp down on multinationals that engage in aggressive tax avoidance.

■ A transcript of an interview from 2006 with Real Business magazine has emerged in which David Cameron says he believes Google has “headquartered” elsewhere because “we’re no longer tax-competitive”. Osborne warned in the same year that Gordon Brown’s government was “pricing Britain out of the future” with its tax demands on the search company.

The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said that the revelations marked out government ministers as “hypocrites”. He said: “The mask has finally slipped. The Tories have been saying they want to clamp down on tax avoidance to the British people, but when they think our backs are turned they are telling their MEPs to oppose any measures to make it happen.

“The truth is they run a ‘don’t know, don’t care’ approach to tax avoidance.”

Liberal Democrat MEP Catherine Bearder said: “It is shameful that the government talks tough on tax avoidance at home, while secretly opposing the measures needed to tackle it abroad.

“This hypocrisy has got to end. Britain must start being part of the solution to tax avoidance, not part of the problem.”

On six occasions in the past year, Tory MEPs opposed proposals designed to squeeze more money out of big companies, including a vote last month on imposing sanctions on companies using tax havens. In November, Tory MEPs also voted against mandatory country-by-country reporting on tax receipts and the automatic exchange of information on tax rulings across borders.

In October they opposed the automatic cross-border exchange of information relating to companies’ tax planning within the EU.

And Tory MEPs voted in July against giving assistance to tax administrations in developing countries to tackle tax evasion. In March and January, Conservative and Ukip MEPs voted against a report calling for action to tackle tax avoidance, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning and a motion calling for the commission to commit to clamping down on tax fraud through legislation.

The MEPs’ voting record will have been a boost to Google which regards many initiatives emanating from the EU as a major risk to its business.

According to the latest accounts filed with the EU’s register of transparency, Google has 10 employees lobbying in Brussels, where it spent £2.7m on promoting the goals of the company in 2014.

The internet giant also held 67 meetings with members of the European commission last year, including with a senior official who works with the European commissioner, Pierre Moscovici. Moscovici last week announced plans to clamp down on “aggressive tax avoidance”.

A Treasury spokesperson said: “It is simply wrong to suggest the UK is anything other than at the international forefront of tackling aggressive ‎tax planning, avoidance and evasion.

“The government has led the way in the G20 to strengthen international rules that counter aggressive tax planning by multinational companies, and supported global tax transparency through the automatic exchange of information, which will help HMRC to crack down on tax evasion.

“All of the UK’s Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories are early adopters of this new global standard. This is all in addition to introducing the world-leading diverted profits tax which stops companies ‎moving profits to tax havens.”

2015-07-06 For Statemt Defence?

 X1B Postings  No Responses »
Jan 292016
 

Sent: July 6, 2015  (to lawyer)

I drafted details that might be helpful in formulation of my Defence to the Amended Statement of Claim.

Does not meet criteria for a Statement of Defence, but contains details helpful to my memory!

RESPONSE TO   Solo v. Finley

AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM

July 6, 2015

1.   GENERAL

1.1   Through verbal and written requests from the Defendant’s lawyer to the Plaintiff’s lawyer, the Defendant sought a list of statements she has made that are defamatory, that could then be removed from blogged documentation. Protected: specific deffam   (More than 6 requests, not including phone calls.)

The Defendant needed the list because she is not aware of any statements that are defamatory.

1.2 The amended Statement of Claim does not provide defamatory statements.   Nor does it provide evidence of invasion of privacy, also alleged by the Plaintiff.

1.3   The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant “falsely and maliciously” made him out to be various things. As far as she is aware, the information posted which was under password protection is true, or in other instances it is fair comment.

1.4   Context for the Plaintiff’s allegations and evidence that statements posted by the Defendant are true, or fair comment are the basis of the Defendant’s response to the allegations.

  1. CONTEXT AND TIME PERIODS THAT THE ALLEGATIONS RELATE TO:

2.1   VETTING PROCESS, PERSON SEEKING PUBLIC OFFICE, late summer, 2013.   Alleged defamation in relation to the Plaintiff’s business and employment relationships.

See Appended email, 2.1 VETTING PROCESS

Vetting to determine whether the Plaintiff is suitable to run as a candidate for the Green Party. The Plaintiff alleges defamation related to his business / employment associations   (Statement of Claim, Solo v. Finley, 5.c. i, ii, iii, iv, v).   The appended email shows the nature of the process, and that the background check on the Defendant was conducted in a respectful way.

2.2 PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINTS LEAD TO THREE DIFFERENT POLICE INTERROGATIONS OF THE DEFENDANT.   December, 2013 to June 2014.

2.2.1   Receipt by the Defendant of a complaint from a Green Party supporter that the Plaintiff’s use of Green Party social media was creating a bad image for the Green Party. He was using that media, among other things, to continue alleged year-long bullying of the young woman who brought the complaint.

2.2.2   The Defendant forwarded the young woman’s complaint to the Ottawa office of the Green Party. It would be adjudicated by an independent body.

2.2.3   The forwarding of the complaint for third-party adjudication caused the Plaintiff to begin a bullying and harassment campaign against the Defendant near the beginning of December, 2013.

2.2.4   The Defendant ignored the Plaintiff; she did not reply to his emails, phone, or speak with him.

2.2.5   By Christmas time, the Defendant saw a need to keep track of the harassing emails, many of which were sent in large numbers to other people in the Green Party.   She went through her email, collected and filed the emails, by date, in a file on her blog, under password protection.   The “Subject”s of the postings are meaningless, not identifiable as to content. They are buried in the blog under the meaningless file name (category) ”x”.

2.2.6   When the Police investigated the Defendant after complaints laid by the Plaintiff, she gave them the URL and password so they could see for themselves what was going on.

2.2.7   The 3 independent sets of interrogations of the Defendant by

  • Saskatoon Police
  • Duncan RCMP and
  • Parksville RCMP

all led to no warnings or charges being brought against the Defendant.

Three different Police investigations found that there was no reason to proceed against the Defendant.

 

2.3 PLAINTIFF TRIES TO GET A FRIEND OF THE DEFENDANT FIRED FROM HER JOB, 2014.

The Plaintiff tried to get a Green Party friend of the Defendant’s fired from her decades-long employment in the Saskatoon Health District.  His allegations against her led to a Disciplinary Hearing. She was exonerated.

The Union Rep recommended that she file a complaint against the Plaintiff with the Saskatoon Police, which she did. It remains on file as a deterrent to further harassment of her by the Plaintiff.

2.4   PLAINTIFF’S HARASSMENT OF AND COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE DEFENDANT TO GREEN PARTY IN OTTAWA, 2014.

2.4.1   Following very disruptive harassment by the Plaintiff, of leadership in the Ottawa offices of the Green Party,

2.4.2   The Plaintiff brought 10 charges against the Defendant to the Green Party of Canada.   The Plaintiff would again have to defend herself.

2.4.3   This period culminated in “full disclosure” to the Plaintiff. The Defendant removed the password protection, so that the Plaintiff (and the investigators) could access the documentation that the Defendant would use in her defence.

2.4.4   Once again, the finding was that there was no basis to proceed against the Defendant.

2.5   CAMPAIGN BY THE PLAINTIFF AT THE DEFENDANT’S BLOG HOSTING SERVICE, LAST QUARTER 2014.

The Plaintiff began a campaign at the Defendant’s blog hosting service, Loosefoot Consulting.   Loosefoot investigated the allegations made by the Plaintiff and concluded that the blogged information has integrity and did not offend any laws. The Defendant believes that Loosefoot consulted with their lawyer.

2.6   CAMPAIGN BY THE PLAINTIFF AT THE DEFENDANT’S DOMAIN NAME REGISTRAR, FIRST QUARTER, 2015.

The Plaintiff began a campaign to harass the Defendant’s domain name registrar into de-registering her domain name which would have the effect of taking down her entire blog.

The lawyer for the Domain Name registrar refused to deal with the Plaintiff, insisting that the matter be handled by lawyers for the Plaintiff and Defendant.

The Defendant re-instated password protection pending notification by the Plaintiff’s lawyer of what content is defamatory or invasive of privacy.

The preceding establishes CONTEXT for the Plaintiff’s allegations of defamation and invasion of privacy.  

  1. RESPONSE TO THE PLAINTIFF’S LISTING OF ALLEGED FALSE AND MALICIOUS STATEMENTS BY THE DEFENDANT

As stated in paragraph 1.3 in the preceding:

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant “falsely and maliciously” made him out to be various things. As far as she is aware, the information posted . . .is true, or in other instances it is fair comment.  

The Defendant selects a few examples from many that could be used:

3.1   EXAMPLE 1:   The Defendant is accused of defamation, “falsely and maliciously” saying . . .

  1. b. (Page 5)   “The Plaintiff is unemployed”.

3.1.1   If the Plaintiff is employed, he should not have said that he is unemployed. (“I do not want to be an unemployed activist forever.”)   The source of the statement is the Plaintiff himself.

3.1.2   Context in which the statement was made:   the candidate wanted to be a candidate for the Green Party. He was in conversation with an official of the Party who is a professor of law.   It was an important conversation.

3.1.3   There is no evidence that the Plaintiff was employed. He is, and has been known for a number of years by people active in the Green Party in Saskatoon.

3.1.4   So, he is unemployed. He confirmed his situation: “I do not want to be an unemployed activist forever.”

3.1.5   There is nothing false or malicious in the statement. It is the truth. It was reported in a matter-of-fact way.   Lots of people are unemployed.

3.2   EXAMPLE 2:   The Defendant is accused of defamation, “falsely and maliciously” saying . . .

  1. a. (Page 4)     “the Plaintiff is a liar”.

3.2.1   There are 19 examples listed by the Plaintiff under allegation 5.a..   At least 6 of these items refer to the “Airport” event (5. a. items ii, iii., xi, xvi, xvii, and xviii). So did the Defendant publish anything untrue about the so-called “Airport” event?

3.2.1.1   Context for the Defendant’s statements:

The Plaintiff selected people in Saskatoon with the same surname as the Defendant and phoned them at 5:00 – 5:30 AM on December 28th, 2013.

He woke up these people, asking for the Defendant’s phone number.

One of the wakened people happened to be an 80 year old second cousin. He, thinking it was an emergency, provided the phone number of the Defendant’s Mother.

The Plaintiff phoned the Defendant’s Mother, asking for the time of the Defendant’s flight departure, which the semi-awake Mother provided, before asking, “Who is this?”.

The Plaintiff was evasive but after insistence by the Mother replied, “Mike from the Green Party”.

The Plaintiff then went to the Airport at 6:00 AM – 6:30 AM, found the Defendant and her daughter in the line-up to check in, and began making accusations to which the Defendant replied, and which was the truth, “I don’t know what you are talking about”.

A man next in line offered to take the Plaintiff out the door of the Airport.

The Defendant responded saying no, she needed to call the Police or Airport Security.

A Westjet attendant had been observing, she stepped in and took control saying, “No. I am calling Security.” which she did.

The Plaintiff left before Security could be summoned.

At no point did the Plaintiff, in his accusations make any reference to a Demand Letter.   Nor, in his ensuing emails did he make any reference to a Demand Letter.

Not until about two weeks later, after the Defendant laid a complaint with the Green Parties of Canada and Saskatchewan over the Airport event did the Plaintiff respond with accusations against the Defendant, using the defence of a Demand Letter.

The Airport event was December 28th.

The Plaintiff HAD sent a Demand Letter to the Defendant on December 23rd:

From: Ashu M. G. Solo [mailto:amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us]

Sent: Monday, December 23, 2013 10:51 PM

To: Sandra Finley; Daeran Gall

Subject: YOU NOW HAVE 15 DAYS

FINLEY AND GALL,

YOU NOW HAVE 15 DAYS TO COME UP WITH $500,000, AS PER THE ATTACHED DEMAND LETTERS, OR YOU’RE GONNA HAVE TO ANSWER TO YOUR LIES IN COURT.

ASHU M. G. SOLO

I SUGGEST THAT YOU LOOK AT YOUR FUTURES AND ACCEPT THIS OFFER.  FINLEY HAS TO LOOK AFTER HERSELF AND HER DAUGHTER AND DOESN’T WANT HER MONEY AND ASSETS SEIZED AND HER INCOME PERMAMENTLY GARNISHED.  GALL HAS TO LOOK AFTER HIIMSELF AND WHOEVER AND DOESN’T WANT HIS MONEY AND ASSETS SEIZED AND HIS INCOME PERMAMENTLY GARNISHED.

ASHU SOLO

The truth is that the Plaintiff did not talk about or present a Demand Letter at the Airport. He came with verbal accusations that, at the time, made no sense to the Defendant.

It was only later, when an email exchange between radio host John Gormley and the Plaintiff was sent to the Defendant that the motivation for the harassment at the Airport could be guessed at.

The Defendant contacted the Gormley show and confirmed that the email exchange (“thread”) is legitimate. The Defendant gave Gormley the opportunity to veto the posting of the email thread, which Gormley did not do.

The Defendant surmises that the Plaintiff was desperate to know whether the Defendant was in receipt of the email thread (which at the time she was not).   The Defendant points out that maybe she is wrong about the surmisal.

The Plaintiff was highly motivated by something that caused him to phone people he did not know at 5 o’clock in the morning and then come to the Airport to go after the Defendant.

The Plaintiff needed an alibi to defend himself against the complaint to the Green Parties by the Defendant over the events of December 28th, and concocted a lie that he was serving a Demand Letter at the Airport.

3.3   EXAMPLE 3:   The Defendant is accused of defamation, “falsely and maliciously” saying . . .

  1. a. (Page 4)     “the Plaintiff is a liar”.

There are numerous examples in the communications sent by the Plaintiff to other people where he states that the Defendant is harassing and bullying him. Just one:

From: Facebook [mailto:update+mryg52wa@facebookmail.com]

Sent: December-28-13 12:13 AM

To: Sandra Finley

Ashu   M. G. Solo commented on a link   you shared.
Ashu   wrote: “Sandra Finley, stop harassing me and spreading lies about me. I   won’t tolerate your bullying. I”m making an ethics complaint against you   and suing you for libel and slander.”

The one and only communication between the Defendant and the Plaintiff happened when the Plaintiff came to the Airport.

The attacks beginning in December 2013 and continuing, have all been one-way, from the Plaintiff to the Defendant.   The Defendant has never harassed or bullied the Plaintiff, nor told lies about him.

So once again, the statement by the Defendant that the Plaintiff tells lies is a statement of fact.   He manufactures deliberate lies that are not of the “little white lie” kind.   Defamation is not an issue.

3.4 EXAMPLE 4, related to the VETTING PROCESS

  1. a. i.   (“The more I look the more I think he is trying to invent himself . . . he is using the internet to build a fake profile.”)

There is no defamation here. The author of the statement took time to carefully review information that the Plaintiff himself posted on the internet. The individual searched, without success, for information that would support the Plaintiff’s profiling of himself. The individual was trying to make sense of what was found. The statement is a fair comment.

4. RESPONSE TO THE PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGED INVASIONS OF PRIVACY BY THE DEFENDANT

There is no privacy to invade when the information is obtained from public spaces like Government and University websites.

5.   APPENDED, 2.1 VETTING PROCESS   (Email demonstrates nature of process and attitude of respect in collection of background information on the Plaintiff.)

From: Sandra Finley Date: Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:10 AM Subject: Ashu To: (Ava), “Penny. GrnMsg Swartz” , KaitlynGRNMSG Harvey , PatriciaGRN Farnese , MarkGRN Bigland-Pritchard , LarryGRN Waldinger
I would appreciate if you would keep this confidential.

As I said I would do, I started some background research.

Candidates have to pass scrutiny.

(1)     QUESTION:  What caused the GPC to say that Ashu would not  get endorsed (highly unlikely) to be a candidate?

ANSWER:  It is possible that they came across the appended  Not Every Public Prayer is Anti-Atheist Bigotry  which goes back to the Dinner for volunteers.   From an atheist blog.  Written by an atheist who is ethnic.   Like Ashu.  You might want to read the whole thing.   But the appended excerpt says it pretty well.

The high-lighted statement by Ashu is a significant distortion.   Furthermore, (Mayor) Don Atcheson apologized and suggested a remedy.

It is understandable that Atcheson stopped replying to emails from Ashu.  I would have done the same thing, under the circumstances.    You get nowhere with people who twist the truth to suit their ends.  And the conditions for cooperation are eliminated.

Candidates for political parties get examined.

(2)    QUESTION:  what about Ashu’s employment?

From his C.V. :

Principal/Interdisciplinary R&D Engineer and Mathematician at Maverick Technologies America Inc. Director/Interdisciplinary Researcher at Solo Research Lab, Maverick Technologies America Inc.

I did a search on the company’s website for Ashu+Solo.    No Results

Maybe he is no longer with them.  Wikipedia describes it as a company of 500 people.

http://www.mavtechglobal.com/about-us

In tracking down Ashu’s research papers (“more than 475”,  “484”), see

http://www.mavericktechnologies.us/amgsolo-ppe-pe-cpp-cp.htm

Note that this page was designed and put up by Ashu.

From the bottom of the page:

Copyright © 1984-2011 by A. M. G. Solo. All rights reserved.

Web site written by A. M. G. Solo. Web site designed by A. M. G. Solo except for the graphics art designs.

Email: amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us

This page of this Web site was last modified on July 24, 2011.

The page has 4 links to research papers by Ashu.  Click on them:  they are all the same paper, and the paper is 3 pages long.   Read the conclusion of the paper.

Ashu’s claims about inventing new disciplines are to be questioned, I would say.

The paper has this:

Ashu M. G. Solo

Maverick Technologies America Inc., Suite 808, 1220 North Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, U.S.A., email: amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us

Maybe I will call the company.   

–          – – – – – – — –  – —  

Bottom of http://www.polnetics.com/

Ashu  provides

Cdn. Address: Maverick Technologies Inc., as

510 Saskatchewan Crescent East, Saskatoon, SK S7N 4P9

Close to my place.

Near the Broadway Bridge.  Which building?  If it’s the condos, would they have individual unit numbers?

He lists:  Principal/New Fields Instructor at Trailblazer Intelligent Systems, Inc.

Who is that?  . . .   It is related to SAIC.   A U.S. defense contractor, among the top 8 contributors to politicians. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC_(U.S._company)

Operations

In fiscal year 2003, SAIC did over $2.6 billion in business with the United States Department of Defense, making it the ninth largest defense contractor in the United States. Other large contracts include their contract for information technology for the 2004 Olympics in Greece[9] and from 2001 to 2005, SAIC was the primary contractor for the FBI‘s unsuccessful Virtual Case File project.[10]

. .   In 2002, SAIC was chosen by the NSA to produce a technology demonstration platform for the agency’s Trailblazer Project in a contract worth $280 million. Trailblazer was a “Digital Network Intelligence” system, intended to analyze data carried on computer networks. Project participants included Boeing, Computer Sciences Corporation, and Booz Allen Hamilton. SAIC had participated in the concept definition phase of Trailblazer, beginning March 2001.[11] According to science news site PhysOrg.com, Trailblazer was a continuation of the earlier ThinThread program.[12] In 2005 NSA director Michael Hayden told a Senate hearing that the Trailblazer program was several hundred million dollars over budget and years behind schedule.[13]

Campaign contributions

SAIC is among the 8 top contributors to federal candidates, parties, and outside groups with $1,209,611 during the 2011-2012 election cycle according to information from the Federal Election Commission. The top candidate recipient was Barack Obama.[14]

Enough for now.

Sandra

= = = = = = = = =  

  1. APPENDED, Not Every Public Prayer is Anti-Atheist Bigotry

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/04/23/not-every-public-prayer-is-anti-atheist-bigotry/

Not Every Public Prayer is Anti-Atheist Bigotry

April 23, 2012 By Hemant Mehta

. . ..     Barring that, though, I just don’t think I could work up a ton of rage over something this insignificant. It’s not a city council meeting, in which case I would be more angry. Even though it’s a city function, without knowing any further details, my suspicion would be that someone — the councillor or the organizer(s) — just didn’t know any better.

That brings us to Ashu Solo, one of the awardees at the dinner. He heard the blessing, got royally pissed off, wrote a letter to the mayor, and then sent it along to the rest of the city council:

“It made me feel like a second-class citizen. It makes you feel excluded,” said Solo, who is an atheist.

“It’s ironic that I’ve now become a victim of religious bigotry and discrimination at this banquet that was supposed to be an appreciation banquet for the service of volunteers like me.”…

“This is not a Christian country or a Christian city. It is a secular multicultural country and secular multicultural city with people from numerous religions as well as spiritual people, agnostics and atheists,” Solo said.

Municipal officials should not use their offices to “perform religious bigotry, as this is,” or “to impose their own religious beliefs on others,” Solo said.

Dude. You weren’t a victim of religious bigotry. The blessing didn’t go, “Thank you, Jesus, for this food. Also, fuck you, atheists. Amen.”

You weren’t discriminated against. The blessing didn’t go, “Thank you, Jesus, for this food. Also, atheists, we’re no longer accepting volunteer applications from your kind. Amen.”

I’m with Solo on the idea that (arguably unintentional) exclusion occurred. I’m with him that Christian blessings were offered despite the fact that this was a government function and

not everyone there was a Christian. That doesn’t necessarily call for a lawsuit or a complaint against the offenders. That calls for educating them on what they did wrong.

Hell, the mayor didn’t even realize this was an issue. And once he saw the letter, he suggested an alternative for the future:

[Mayor Don] Atchison said he was caught off-guard by the complaint because many of the events he attends include a prayer before meals.

“I’ve never given it any thought at all,” he said.

Atchison said he is sorry to hear Solo felt excluded.

He suggested in the future, the dinner could feature prayers from different religions on a rotating basis. There could even be a dinner with no prayer at all for atheists, he said.

Look! The mayor got educated! That’s good! And then he tried to respond accordingly! He ought to be commended for that, even if his suggestions aren’t ideal. (I would suggest getting rid of the pre-meal blessing altogether. Let people pray privately if they want to.)

What did Solo think of that?

Solo said the rotation idea will not work because there are thousands of religions.

He wants an apology from the mayor and a promise there won’t be any more prayers at City of Saskatoon events. He said if he does not receive those by next Friday, he will proceed with a human rights complaint naming the City of Saskatoon, Atchison and Donauer.

He’s threatening to file a human rights complaint?!

Over the top. Unnecessary. Makes him (and us) look crazy.

As for the mayor apologizing, I don’t know why he should have to unless he’s the one who called for the prayer…

If you can get an apology from Donauer, great. Even better would be a promise (from the mayor or event organizers) that this won’t happen again. That’s all that is needed. Not an accusation of bigotry and discrimination. Not a threat of a human rights violation.

Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill.

Not everyone understands the idea of Christian privilege. They don’t always realize that a Christian blessing may not sound welcoming for non-Christians. It’s our job to make them aware of it, calmly if possible, and aggressively so only if the action warrants it.

Solo’s reaction isn’t helping the situation here.

 

Life Animated, Interview by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now, Ron & Owen Suskind, Autism

 Empowerment, Health, Knowledge Base  No Responses »
Jan 292016
 

The interview is in 3 segments.  Pretty amazing:

  1.  http://www.democracynow.org/2016/1/27/life_animated_a_remarkable_story_of?autostart=true&get_clicky_key=suggested_related

 

2. http://www.democracynow.org/2016/1/27/embracing_autism_journalist_ron_suskind_on

 

3.  http://www.democracynow.org/2016/1/27/roger_ross_williams_the_first_black

2015 Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s commitment to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: 1. Letter of Mandate to Attorney General & 2. Quotes from Trudeau’s book, “Common Ground”

 Privacy of Personal Information; Charter Right; Surveillance; StatsCan Censuses & Surveys  No Responses »
Jan 242016
 

Liberal Commitment to the Charter of Rights and Freedom:

Prime Minister J Trudeau mandated Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould (Attorney General):

… You are expected to ensure that the rights of Canadians are protected, that our work demonstrates the greatest possible commitment to respecting the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that our government seeks to fulfill our policy goals with the least interference with the rights and privacy of Canadians as possible. 

Prime Minister J Trudeau recognizes the value of Charter Rights,  he writes in his book, “Common Ground” 2014:

(p. 192)   “I know that everyone in this room supports our Charter of Rights,” I told the crowd.  “It’s the document that forms the basis of the rights we all enjoy … The Charter of Rights protects freedoms for everyone.  You can’t pick and choose the rights you want to keep and leave behind the ones you don’t like.”    

(p. 184)   I reminded them that it had been twenty-five years since my father had given Canada the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, one of the most valued tools the world has even seen for ensuring the protection and full exercise of human rights.  “Now we are all children of that Charter,’ I said.  

 Older Entries  Newer Entries