Sandra Finley

2012-05-11 Historic judgment: (Charge #2) Bush & Associates found Guilty of torture, Kuala Lumpur.

May 272012

The Court decision below arises out of – – see 2012-04-12 (Charge #2) Bush & Associates, Kuala Lumpur.

There is excellent discussion of Charge #1, the trial held in Kuala Lumpur last year:

2011-11-28 Legal Weight of Bush & Blair Guilty decision, by Princeton University Professor (Al Jazeera)
2011-11-23 Bush and Blair found guilty of war crimes for Iraq attack

For the complete file of the international work to have Bush and his colleagues arrested and tried for war crimes, click on Arrest George Bush. Rule of Law essential to democracy.

Now, for the Historic Judgment, the Court decision on charge #2:

1. A newscast (3 minutes) on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AQCD33rWNU LINK NO LONGER VALID

2. Global Research Report, May 12, 2012

Mathaba

A solid case for the prosecution of Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld, Cheney, their legal counsel and others, for war crimes, crimes against the peace, torture, and crimes against humanity has been established at the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal with a guilty verdict on day 5 of the third major session of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the widest international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations to institute prosecutions if any of these Accused persons may enter their jurisdictions.

Global Research Director Michel Chossudovsky is a member of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission and was present throughout the Tribunal hearings. Global Research is committed to making this historic judgment known far and wide, with a view to eventually prosecuting the war criminals.

Forward this article. Post it on Facebook.

________________________________________

KUALA LUMPUR, 11 May 2012 (mathaba)

The five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered a guilty verdict against former United States President George W. Bush and his associates at the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal hearing that had started on Monday, May 7th.

On the charge of Crime of Torture and War Crimes, the tribunal finds the accused persons former U.S. President George W. Bush and his associates namely Richard Cheney, former U.S. Vice President, Donald Rumsfeld, former Defence Secretary, Alberto Gonzales, then Counsel to President Bush, David Addington, then General Counsel to the Vice-President, William Haynes II, then General Counsel to Secretary of Defence, Jay Bybee, then Assistant Attorney General, and John Choon Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney-General guilty as charged and convicted as war criminals for Torture and Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment of the Complainant War Crime Victims.

Earlier in the week, the tribunal heard the testimoniesof three witnesses namely Abbas Abid, Moazzam Begg and Jameelah Hameedi. They related the horrific tortures they had faced during their incarceration. The tribunal also heard two other Statutory Declarations of Iraqi citizen Ali Shalal and Rhuhel Ahmed, a British citizen.

Testimony showed that Abbas Abid, a 48-year-old chief engineer in the Science and Technology Ministry had his fingernails removed by pliers. Ali Shalal was attached with bare electrical wires and electrocuted and hung from the wall. Moazzam Begg was beaten and put in solitary confinement. Jameelah was almost nude and humiliated, used as a human shield whilst being transported by helicopter. All these witnesses have residual injuries till today.

These witnesses were taken prisoners and held in prisons in Afghanistan (Bagram), in Iraq (Abu Gharib, Baghdad International Airport) and two of them namely Moazzam Begg and Rhuhel Ahmed were transported to Guantanamo Bay.

In a submission that lasted a day, the prosecution showed in an in depth submission how the decision-makers at the highest level President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld, aided and abetted by the lawyers and the other commanders and CIA officials – all acted in concert. Torture was systematically applied and became an accepted norm.

According to the prosecution, the testimony of all the witnesses shows a sustained perpetration of brutal, barbaric, cruel and dehumanizing course of conduct against them. These acts of crimes were applied cumulatively to inflict the worst possible pain and suffering.

After hearing the defence of the Amicus Curiae and the subsequent rebuttal the prosecution, the tribunal ruled unanimously that there was a prima facie case made out by the prosecution.

After hours of deliberation, the tribunal, in the verdict that was read out by the president of the tribunal Tan Sri Dato Lamin bin Haji Mohd Yunus Lamin, found that the prosecution had established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused persons, former President George Bush and his co-conspirators engaged in a web of instructions, memos, directives, legal advice and action that established a common plan and purpose, joint enterprise and/or conspiracy to commit the crimes of Torture and War Crimes, including and not limited to a common plan and purpose to commit the following crimes in relation to the “War on Terror” and the wars launched by the U.S. and others in Afghanistan and Iraq:

(a) Torture; (b) Creating, authorizing and implementing a regime of Cruel, Inhumane, and Degrading Treatment; (c) Violating Customary International Law; (d) Violating the Convention Against Torture 1984; (e) Violating the Geneva Convention III and IV 1949; (f) Violating the Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention of 1949. (g) Violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter.

The Tribunal finds that the prosecution has established beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused persons are individually and jointly liable for all crimes committed in pursuit of their common plan and purpose under principles established by Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (the Nuremberg Charter), which states, inter alia, “Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit war crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any person in execution of such plan.”

The Principles of the Nuremberg Charter and the Nuremberg Decision have been adopted as customary international law by the United Nations. The government of the United States is subject to customary international law and to the Principles of the Nuremburg Charter and the Nuremburg Decision.

The Tribunal finds that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused lawyers, gave ‘advice’ that “the Geneva Conventions did not apply (to suspected al Qaeda and Taliban detainees); that there was no torture occurring within the meaning of the Torture Convention, and that enhanced interrogations techniques, (constituting cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment,) were permissible.”

The prosecution has also established beyond a reasonabledoubt that the accused lawyers “knew full well their advice was being sought to be acted upon, and in fact was acted upon, and such advice paved the way for violations of international law, the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention.”

The accused lawyers’ advice was binding on the accused Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney, each of whom relied on the accused lawyers’ advice. Others, such as CIA Director George Tenet and Diane Beaver, officer in charge at Guantanamo, relied on the accused lawyers’ advice. The prosecution had established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused lawyers are criminally liable for their acts, and for participating in a joint criminal enterprise.

The president read that the Tribunal orders that reparations commensurate with the irreparable harm and injury, pain and suffering undergone by the Complainant War Crime Victims be paid to the Complainant War Crime Victims. While it is constantly mindful of its stature as merely a tribunal of conscience with no real power of enforcement, the Tribunal finds that the witnesses in this case are entitled ex justitia to the payment of reparations by the 8 convicted persons and their government.

It is the Tribunal’s hope that armed with the findings of this Tribunal, the witnesses will, in the near future, find a state or an international judicial entity able and willing to exercise jurisdiction and to enforce the verdict of this Tribunal against the 8 convicted persons and their government. The Tribunal’s award of reparations shall be submitted to the War Crimes Commission to facilitate the determination and collection of reparations by the Complainant War Crime Victims.

President Lamin read, “As a tribunal of conscience, the Tribunal is fully aware that its verdict is merely declaratory in nature. The tribunal has no power of enforcement, no power to impose any custodial sentence on any one or more of the 8 convicted persons. What we can do, under Article 31 of Chapter VI of Part 2 of the Charter is to recommend to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission to submit this finding of conviction by the Tribunal, together with a record of these proceedings, to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Tribunal also recommends to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission that the names of all the 8 convicted persons be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and be publicized accordingly.

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

2012-05-25 Dyslexic man, learning-disabled wife charged for not filing census form

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

May 272012

By Andrew Duffy, The Ottawa Citizen May 25, 2012

Comment 37

Eric Stone, 48, said he opened the door Thursday to an Ontario Provincial Police officer, who politely informed him he was being arrested for failing to fill out the 2011 short-form census.

OTTAWA — A dyslexic Pembroke man is outraged that he’s been charged under the federal census law for failing to fill out a form that he can’t read.

Eric Stone, 48, said he opened the door Thursday to an Ontario Provincial Police officer, who politely informed him he was being arrested for failing to fill out the 2011 short-form census.

His wife, Kerry O’Neill, who suffers from a serious learning disability, also was charged.

“It floored me: I was really shocked,” said Stone, who must appear in provincial court on Tuesday.

Stone’s court summons says he has been charged under the Statistics Act with “refusing or neglecting to fill out the 2011 census form.”

The maximum penalty for violating the law is three months in jail and a $500 fine.

Stone is a former truck driver who is on a disability pension because of his schizophrenia. He said he has never read well enough to fill out a census form and doesn’t understand why he’s been targeted for prosecution this time.

“I have never filled one out in my whole life. Never. And nothing has ever come of it.”

He takes his bills to the bank to have them paid, he noted, because his reading is so poor. Stone plans to tell the judge as much on Tuesday.

“I would like the judge to understand the situation with me and my wife and that this charge is ludicrous,” said Stone.

Peter Frayne, a spokesman for Statistics Canada, said that in 2011, the vast majority of Canadians returned completed census questionnaires, but a small number “refused to comply with the law.”

Statistics Canada, he said, makes every effort to ensure that an individual has had several opportunities to complete the questionnaire before a case is referred to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.

The prosecution service, he said, determines if a case will result in charges being laid. In many instances, Frayne noted, those cases will be stayed if the individual subsequently completes a census form.

Statistics Canada referred 54 refusal cases from the 2011 census to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.

In 2006, 64 cases were referred; in 2001, there were 52 cases.

Two years ago, the Conservative government scrapped the mandatory long-form census and replaced it with a voluntary household survey.

The short census, however, remains mandatory under the law.

Statistics Canada conducts a census every five years.

In 2011, 98.1 per cent of Canadian households filled out the mandatory short-form census, according to a Statistics Canada report in August 2011. The voluntary National Household Survey, which replaced the long-form census, was filled out by 69.3 per cent of those who received one.

In 2006, the mandatory long-form census was filled out by 94 per cent of Canadian households.

There is truly grandeur in this view of life. We have much to celebrate.

Culture and Ethics, Green Party, Health, Sustainability No Responses »

May 252012

Elizabeth May will be in Saskatoon on Sunday June 3rd, as a guest speaker at the Annual Convention of the FCM (Federation of Canadian Municipalities). We are organizing two other opportunities for people to hear her speak. (I never tire of hearing her clarity.)

Author Lyanda Haupt’s words (below) and Elizabeth May give me reason to soldier on, when I wonder whether there is any hope for us, a self-destructing society!

Kerry wrote (12/05/2008):

Recently I had a discussion with a local resident who has written a book about our environmental problems. As I understood her to say, Darwinism was at the root of all our troubles. I replied:

“I will try to read your book. As I understood your introduction you used his name in vain which would be a great discredit to him. After all it was he who concluded

“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one, and that from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and wonderful have been and are being evolved.” (Origin of Species).

I think Lyanda Haupt described his view nicely in her recent book. :

“Darwin called himself a “philosophical naturalist,” both looking and thinking deeply. But here in the early twenty-first century, when any pimple-faced day camp babysitter calls himself a “naturalist,” it is a word worth reclaiming. In the nineteenth century, one who studied earthly life with reasonable depth and intelligence could claim naturalist status. But Darwin and his colleagues did not know the ecological degradation that we face today, though the seeds were surely being sown in their time.

It is in light of such words that my modern sense of a naturalist, while restoring some of the depth that the term carried in Darwin’s day, must necessarily cut further. I believe that the naturalist’s practice today must involve both an attentive study of the biological life unique to our geographical place and an attempt to bring our own lives into increasingly authentic relationship with that life. It must involve knowing our home place deeply and well enough to live elegantly within its bounds and to speak strongly for its needs.

The means by which we come to this knowledge need not be fancy. It entails the simple, daily, practical work of treating animals, trees, insects and plants – as well as the myriad foodstuffs, homes, and tools created from them – with care, respect, and as gracious a measure knowledge as we can muster over time.

In cultivating such faith, I will turn to Darwin’s good, plain, eccentric, sincere, struggling, brilliant, and humble writings again and again in my life. He reminds us, as he painstakingly learned himself, that we, too, are animals, connected to life, past and present. That we are earthly residents, with the innate capacity for attentive, authentic relationships within the sum of life as we live, work, and play at the borders of nature, science, and culture. That we become alive and embodied in our attention to life’s detail. That nothing in the natural world is beneath our notice.”

Lyanda Lynn Haupt 2006. Pilgrim on the Great Bird Continent. The Importance of Everything and Other Lessons from Darwin’s Lost Notebooks.

I’ll be interested in your perception.”

There is truly grandeur in this view of life. We have much to celebrate.

2012-05-23 Chemical damage can be inherited by offspring through unlimited generations, Interview Dr. David Crews, Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance

Epigenetics, Fluoride, Knowledge Base, Sustainability 1 Response »

May 242012

Doug writes:

HUGELY important ground-breaking research that we all need to wake up to –

Red alert for humanity: Chemical damage can be inherited by offspring through unlimited generations

(Sandra: The entire interview is important. I have copied the text from Natural News below in case the link becomes invalid. But I highly recommend you just click and listen: http://www.naturalnews.com/035965_epigenetics_inheritance_synthetic_chemicals.html#ixzz1vobWYHQR

The research is related to: 2006-03-24 Dr. Frederica Perera, the “DNA Damage Detective”. Prevention versus Cure. )

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

Thursday, May 24, 2012

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) Groundbreaking new science reveals that the harmful effects of exposure to synthetic chemicals are passed from generation to generation via “epigenetics,” causing measurable damage to future generations even if those offspring are never exposed to the original chemical. The phenomenon of “Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance” (ETI) has now been demonstrated in live animals, and if the implications of this research are fully understood, it would force human civilization to radically rethink its widespread use of synthetic chemicals in agriculture, medicine, food, construction materials, personal care products and elsewhere.

The research, led by Dr. David Crews (http://www.utexas.edu/research/crewslab ) (and including colleagues Michael Skinner, Ross Gillette and others), is entitled, “Epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of altered stress responses” and is published in the journal PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/15/1118514109.abstract ).

The study, which was funded by a sub-group of the National Institutes of Health (http://NIEHS.NIH.gov ), found that exposure to a common fungicide caused neurological and behavioral changes that were passed on to future generations of offspring, even when those offspring had no exposure to the original fungicide. Furthermore, the mechanism of “transgenerational inheritance” was epigenetic, meaning it was “above the genes.” It was not coded into the DNA of sperm and egg, in other words. Instead, the expression of the DNA was altered and inherited through some mechanism other than DNA.

As the abstract of the study sums it up:

“We find that a single exposure to a common-use fungicide (vinclozolin) three generations removed alters the physiology, behavior, metabolic activity, and transcriptome in discrete brain nuclei in descendant males, causing them to respond differently to chronic restraint stress.”
(http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/15/1118514109.abstract )

Because of the red alert importance of this breaking science news, we have completed an interview with Dr. David Crews today, and you can watch it at: http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=81C330EC0311060BEB98A7C005C57B3A

Read more about Dr. David Crews at his lab web page: http://www.utexas.edu/research/crewslab

Why chemicals threaten the future of the human species

This groundbreaking research offers a sobering revelation about the age of industrial chemicals through which we are all now living. This “age of chemicals” ramped up roughly around World War II (late 1930’s).

The conventional view of chemicals — the view advocated by the chemical industry, the cancer industry, the FDA, the EPA, etc. — is that the damaging effects of chemical exposure are NOT passed on to future generations (unless, of course, exposure happens during pregnancy). Chemicals are relatively safe, the regulators say, because the next generation is always born healthy and genetically intact.

But what this research by Dr. David Crews reveals is that chemical exposure accumulates and is inherited by offspring which then pass on the damaging effects of that exposure to their own offspring. This transgenerational “epigenetic” effect appears to go on indefinitely, forever altering the expression of the genetic code.

“I don’t see a diminution. It’s the nature of this kind of imprint. It will not disappear,” he told NaturalNews. “We are becoming a different species,” Dr. Crews told me on a separate phone call, meaning that modern humans, having been exposed to a heavy burden of synthetic chemicals for roughly 3-4 generations, now express their genetic code in a way that strongly diverges from the expression of someone living in, say, the 1920’s.

We are, in essence, ChemHumans, forever imprinted with the toxic burden of all the tens of thousands of synthetic chemicals we have foolishly unleashed onto our world, our environment and our food supply.

Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance may help explain the rise in autism, obesity and infertility

Dr. Crews explained to me that the inherited, cumulative effects of chemical exposure may be a key element behind the causes of today’s most worrisome disease epidemics: Autism, obesity, infertility and perhaps even cancer.

Autism has exploded in the last century, rising sharply from an estimated 1 in 25,000 children (http://www.autismtoday.com/articles/Epidemic%20of%20autism.asp ) to an astonishing 1 in 88 children, according to the CDC. (http://www.cdc.gov/Features/CountingAutism/)

If this trend continues, we may be looking at a near future where every other child is autistic, and at that point questions about the long-term viability of the entire human race start to become unavoidable. Dr. Crews explains that although we cannot rid our world of toxic chemical pollution, we must at least be honest and accurate about the near-term and long-term damage caused by those chemicals so that we can take immediate steps to limit exposure.

“We have permanently contaminated our world, and we are never going to be able to clean up our world. We have to recognize this fact. We have poisoned the environment. There is no turning back, but that doesn’t mean we have to continue poisoning the environment,” he says.

Dr. Crews believes that part of the answer rests in the realm of “green chemistry” where toxic synthetic chemicals used in agriculture are replaced with far less harmful chemicals that don’t trigger transgenerational (inherited) damage in humans or animals.

Watch my full interview with Dr. Crews at: http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=81C330EC0311060BEB98A7C005C57B3A

Urgent call to avoid all chemicals NOW

Anyone who fully grasps the implications of this research must immediately take urgent steps to radically and permanently reduce their exposure to synthetic chemicals.

“This recent ruling by the FDA not to ban BPA in the United States is, in my opinion, a disaster,” says Dr Crews. “It is a fundamental mistake by a regulatory agency.”

The most common sources of chemical exposure today include (this is my own list, not David Crews’):

Foods – pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, food packaging
Insect repellants such as DEET
Personal care products (lotions, hand sanitizers, cosmetics)
Plasticizers such as Bisphenol-A (BPA)
Dioxins
Hydrocarbons (gasoline, jet fuel)
Medicines and pharmaceuticals
Chemicals used in home construction materials (glues, dyes, formaldehyde, etc.)
Chemical adjuvants in vaccines

Health Ranger analysis: The genopocalypse approaches

The realization that exposure to such chemicals can cause damage three, five or even ten generations down the line should be a red alert wake-up call for everyone interested in keeping their genes represented in the human gene pool. Chemical exposure causes not just changes in neurology and behavior, but even changes in fertility. As chemical exposure accumulates generation after generation, fertility rates plummet.

I have coined the coming collapse of the human gene pool the “genopocalypse.” This term has not yet caught on across the ‘net, as many people still don’t realize what has already begun to unfold. We have already compromised our future as a species right now, even if BPA were banned tomorrow. The heavy chemical burden already unleashed on our world (and our population) will be felt for countless generations to come. And it may very well threaten the survival of not just our civilization, but our entire species.

That’s my assessment of the situation, not Dr. Crews. I’m looking at the far darker long-term implications of his research because I remain concerned about the fact that humanity is killing itself through chemicals, nuclear power, GMOs and other serious threats to our survival.

I’ve even posted an S.O.S. to the world about this very topic: http://sos.naturalnews.com

S.O.S. means “Stop Out-of-Control Science,” and it means that before we kill ourselves (and our planet) with runaway science conducted for the benefit of corporate interests, we must return to the precautionary principle and conduct science with a sense of caution rather than a drive for profit.

Do not misinterpret this as meaning in any way that I am against science. Real science is, indeed, crucial to the advancement of knowledge in our universe. The quest for scientific understanding is a journey out of the darkness of superstition and into the light of awareness. And yet too much of today’s so-called “science” has been conducted with no regard for the safety of the human race, the planet’s ecosystems or the integrity of reproductive systems in both plants and animals. Genetically Modified Organisms, for example, are a form of runaway genetic pollution that have
entirely unknown consequences for the future of food crops on our planet.

GMOs, by any rational standard, are a dangerous experiment that should only be conducted in tightly controlled (indoor, clean-room) environments, not planted in open fields where their seeds are blown away by the wind. By the same token, the mass chemical inundation of our
world today is another disturbing science experiment through which we are currently living. What will be the long-term impact of all these chemicals used in foods, medicines, personal care products and industrial processes? Nobody knows, and that’s exactly what should scare us the most.

It is a crap shoot. A roll of the dice. And the stakes couldn’t be higher: the future of human life on our planet may be either won or lost depending on the outcome. But instead of playing it safe, the chemical industry (and the FDA, EPA, etc.) have all jumped in bed with the American Chemistry Council, an organization whose sole purpose is to convince regulators, politicians and consumers that there’s no such thing as a bad chemical! They’re all good for you, and in fact the more you’re exposed to, the better your life! (Better living through chemistry, remember?)

The research of Dr. Crews and colleagues gives us a stern warning that stands in great contrast to the persistent denials of the chemistry industry. Chemical exposure damages your offspring, and it then goes on to damage their offspring, generation after generation, through an unknown number of generations.

The pesticide-sprayed strawberries you eat today, in other words, may damage your great great great grandchildren. And that’s if your offspring are even fertile in the first place, because at some point infertility may lead to a population collapse from which humans may be hard-pressed to recover.

Have we already destroyed ourselves? The questions we would be wise to consider today include:
How will life on Earth 500 years from now be impacted by our decisions today? Cities today continue to dump fluoride into public water supplies. Modern dentistry continues to absurdly insist on putting mercury fillings into the mouths of children. GMO seed companies are openly conspiring with the USDA to unleash yet more genetic pollution across our planet, even working to de-regulate “Agent Orange Corn” — a variety of GM corn that would be immune to 2,4-D, a chemical that’s 50 percent of the recipe for the plant-killing chemical weapon known as Agent Orange.

Make no mistake: We are poisoning ourselves at a level never before witnessed in human history. It is all being done for profit, to appease powerful corporations that have undue influence in government. Regulators, meanwhile, have sold out the People and betrayed us all in order to keep their corporate masters filthy rich. While corporate shareholders revel in their quarterly profits, they are precisely the same people whose children are
being poisoned by the very companies fattening their bank accounts!

We are stuck in a cycle of self destruction from which the human race may not escape. And that’s if we don’t kill ourselves with nuclear accidents first (Fukushima, anyone?)

Sources for this article include:

Learn more:
http://www.naturalnews.com/035965_epigenetics_inheritance_synthetic_chemicals.html#ixzz1vobWYHQR

2012-05-23 15 ways to use a 450-page federal budget bill (CBC)

Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category) No Responses »

May 232012

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/05/22/pol-list-budget-bill-changes.html

By Meagan Fitzpatrick

The government’s omnibus budget bill goes far beyond typical tax and spending measures

External Links Read bill C-38

The Conservatives’ spring budget made headlines two months ago with plans to save billions by cutting public sector jobs, speed up major industrial projects by streamlining environmental reviews and kill the penny.

But details of those and many other changes are still trickling out as Parliament picks apart the legislation meant to implement the budget’s promises.

Bill C-38 goes beyond tax and monetary measures to make major changes in dozens of policy areas, including the environment, natural resources and human resources. It seeks to amend or create dozens of laws, while repealling others entirely, and has been called an omnibus bill as a result.

The opposition is incensed with the size and scope of the bill. The NDP tried — unsuccessfully — to negotiate with the government to split it into smaller bills.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says it’s big because it was a big budget and the measures are needed to create jobs and grow the economy.

The opposition parties say they shouldn’t be asked to vote on legislation that lacks specifics and grants cabinet the power to make regulatory changes.

Bill C-38 has passed second reading and is now being studied by several Senate committees and the House of Commons finance committee, while a finance subcommittee is set to study the environmental review changes.

Here’s a look at some of the measures in the bill’s 400-plus pages. It’s not an exhaustive list, so be warned: there will be another budget bill in the fall.

Environmental overhaul

The government wants a “one project, one review” environmental assessment system, so it is repealing the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and replacing it with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. It allows the federal government to designate an assessment to another jurisdiction, such as a province, and for another jurisdiction’s assessment to substitute for a federal one. It sets out time limits for the completion of reviews and the minister will have the power to shut down a review panel if he thinks it won’t finish on time.

E-I, E-I – oh? ‘Suitable work?’

Employment insurance claimants are required to demonstrate they are actively seeking “suitable work” in order to receive payments. C-38 removes definitions of “suitable work” from the Employment Insurance Act and gives the federal cabinet the power to create new regulations about what constitutes suitable work and reasonable efforts to find work. The budget bill gives no details about what the new criteria will be. It also makes changes to how payments are calculated, to pay claimants based on their “best 14 weeks” of employment.

Lighter load for the auditor general

Auditor General Michael Ferguson will no longer be required to annually audit several agencies, including the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Northern Pipeline Agency and the Canadian Polar Commission. The agencies must submit annual financial reports to the minister instead. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says this move was made at the request of the auditor general.

Auditor General Michael Ferguson will have a lighter load once the budget bill passes because it removes the requirement for him to audit certain government agencies and councils. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Charity rule changes

C-38 proposes amendments to the Income Tax Act’s rules around political activities of charities. Charities aren’t supposed to spend more than 10 per cent of their budgets on political advocacy. Under C-38, donating to a charity could be considered a political activity if the donation can “reasonably be considered” to be for the sole purpose of supporting political activities. So, if one charity gives money to another charity for political purposes, it would count toward the donor’s 10 per cent limit, not just the recipient’s total. It also gives the minister of national revenue the power to withhold tax receipts from a charity or association if it devotes resources to political activities in excess of the limits.

Backlogged immigration applications eliminated

Among the amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is a move to wipe out a backlog of 280,000 applications under the Federal Skilled Worker Program. Applications made before 2008 would be deleted and the application fee refunded.

Fisheries changes

Legislation currently protects fish habitats that are defined as “spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes.” Bill C-38 would instead protect fish based on their use: bodies of water that support commercial, recreational and aboriginal fisheries or fish that support such fisheries. It rewrites the Fisheries Act’s rules against work that can cause the destruction of a fish habitat. The bill also would allow the federal government to transfer Fisheries Act responsibilities to a province with equivalent laws.

Mini tax breaks

There is some good tax news in the budget bill. It expands the list of goods and services free of GST and HST, adding some prescription drugs and more medical devices to currently exempt items like false teeth and hearing aids. The bill would also allow literacy organizations to claim a GST rebate or the federal component of HST paid on books they give away for free.

The GG gets a raise and a tax return

The bill increases Gov. Gen. David Johnston’s salary from $137,500 to $270,602 starting on Jan.1, 2013 — but he’s no longer exempt from paying income tax. His salary was hiked to offset the taxman’s bite.

Gov. Gen. David Johnston is getting a raise in the budget implementation bill, but he’s no longer off the hook with the Canada Revenue Agency and will have to start paying income tax. (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)

A new cross-border law

The budget bill creates a new law to implement the Framework Agreement on Integrated Cross-Border Law Enforcement Operations that was signed between Canada and the United States in 2009. It applies to joint operations between authorities in both countries on the seas.

Bye-bye at the spy agency

The budget bill scraps the office of the inspector general at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. The office is meant to be the public safety minister’s eyes and ears overseeing CSIS. It also makes other changes on how CSIS reports to the minister.

Closing doors

Bill C-38 shuts down several government-funded groups and agencies, including the National Council of Welfare, the Public Appointments Commission, Rights and Democracy, the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and Assisted Human Reproduction Canada.

Opening doors

It creates a new Social Security Tribunal to hear appeals of decisions made on Old Age Security, employment insurance and other benefit programs, and creates the new Shared Services Canada Department.

Not a penny more

The government announced in the March budget that the penny will no longer be made and the last ones were produced in early May. Don’t fear, however, the budget implementation bill will allow you to keep using the ones stored in your piggy banks as legal tender. (John Woods/Canadian Press)The government is phasing out the penny but is changing the law so pennies can still be used as legal tender even though they are being removed from circulation. The current law says a coin that’s been “called in” is not legal tender.

See ya SIN cards

The government wants to phase out the plastic card that displays your social insurance number, and Bill C-38 makes the necessary changes to existing laws so it is no longer required. Canadians will still have SINs, they just won’t be carried on a plastic card.

Older Age Security

The age of eligibility for OAS will rise gradually to 67 from 65 starting in 2023. C-38 lays out a complicated chart showing how that change will be phased in.

Comments (480)

2012-05-19 TO: MP Blake Richards re his private member’s bill to make it a crime to wear a mask at protests. Remember Montebello, it was the police who wore the masks.

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Peace or Violence No Responses »

May 192012

Please consider forwarding this to police and military officers you might know.

Blake Richards is the Conservative MP for the Alberta constituency called Wild Rose. He wants to make it a Criminal Code offence to wear a mask at a “riot or an unlawful assembly”.

From his blog http://www.blakerichards.ca/about.cfm

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

Should I support Blake’s call to make it illegal to wear masks at protests? . . . Email sent to Blake:

TO: blake AT blakerichards.ca

Dear Blake Richards,

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

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

DATE: 2007

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is illegal to incite violence. When it is masked police offers who are doing it, under the direction and blessing of their superiors, then implicitly sanctioned by the Government (no action to correct), we have descended to a police state.

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

OFFICIALS LEARN:

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

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

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

Another brief point: Media portray the Quebec protests as student protests over tuition hikes. They fail to note that the largest protests in Quebec happened on Earth Day and are about the failure of Governments to protect the Environment. http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=5143

Failed protection of the environment, the SPP and its successor organization, corporate influence in Universities, failing democracy, widening income gaps – – the ROOT is the same: large corporate interests being served by Governments and public institutions.

In CONCLUSION:

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

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

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

Thank-you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Sandra Finley

(address)

– – – – – – – – – – —

APPENDED: LINK TO CBC Interview with Blake Richards.

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

Most Recent Podcast

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

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

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

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

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

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Take back the University No Responses »

May 162012

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

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

Harvard To Be Tried for Research Fraud

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

by VERA SHARAV

AHRP

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Court of Appeals decision states:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tags: Alzheimer’s, Corruption, Harvard Medical School, Kenneth Jones, lawsuit, Marilyn Albert, Massachusetts General Hospital, Ronald Killiany

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

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

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

May 152012

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

There is a small role for each of us.

6 short emails. Number:

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

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

Canadians! Don’t you see?

Our Universities train our young people.

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

WHAT do the Grad students study?

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

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

The University has racked up a PILE of DEBT.

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

And they then get to dictate the priorities!

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

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

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

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

From Background Info on Lockheed Martin. excerpt:

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

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

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

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

– – – – – — – – – – – – – — – – –

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

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

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) No Responses »

May 152012

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

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

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

RECENT:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I hope you answered “Yes!”

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

I made a commitment to you that we would

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

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

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

And that’s what we did!

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

And now the government appears to be in trouble.

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

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

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

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

We must keep up the pressure on Stephen Harper.

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

We are planning more meetings with MPs.

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

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

Thank you for everything you do for peace.

In peace,

Steven Staples, Ceasefire.ca

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

Please share this message.

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

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

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) 3 Responses »

May 152012

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

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

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

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

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

Lynn writes:

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

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

Older Entries Newer Entries