Sandra Finley

May 012011
 

Hello Ken, Tara, Linda M, Varya, Linda H, Karen, Brenda, Tracy, Claudette, Ashton, and Miranda,    

This is altogether funny!  Usually I am sending petitions such as the one you sent me regarding the CBC.   Now here I am on the receiving end! 

It is wonderful to be living amongst so many people who care so passionately.   I thought you might like to know that the second largest group of people who have emailed me during the election is  CBC supporters. 

Maybe I am too radical on CBC TV:  we were in South Africa a number of years ago.  They had public television, lots of educational programmes, with NO commercials!   If South Africa can do that, why not us?!    (I listen to CBC Radio;  I seldom watch TV, partly because there are so many commercials.) 

Corporate interests and their buddies would like to be rid of the CBC. 

I believe that the Corporations use the air waves at the pleasure of us, the citizens.  I think air waves are part of “the Commons”, like water.   But the Corporations (not referring to the CBC) seem to think that THEY OWN the air waves.   The length of commercials has grown longer and longer, and so on – – right down to a decision to keep Elizabeth May out of the televised leadership debates!

It seems to me that the various parts of a society should be working together.  At the very least, citizens should have more say in the content of what comes into their homes and the minds of children, in particular.   The amount of violence is just one of the problems.   Could we not strive for more noble values?

A well-informed citizenry is essential to democracy . . .  but I am preaching to the choir!   

I have been and will be fighting with you, all the way, when it comes to funding for the CBC. 

For those of you who do not know,  I have run an activist email network for more than 10 years,  working on various issues.  In the end, most things are connected.  If you go to www.sandrafinley.ca ,  to the “categories” in the right-hand side bar, you will get an idea of the work of the network.  You are welcome to go on the distribution list if it would be of benefit to you.

 By the way:  the single largest group of people from whom I have received emails is disease-related.  It strengthens my conviction that we need to join the organizations for disease and for developmental problems together in an effort to stop the poisons we are putting into the environment and directly into our bodies. 

Our immune systems are different, we each have a different history of known and unknown exposure to poisons that are neuro toxins, teratogens (interfere with normal cell development) and so on.  We each now have a “body burden” of poisons, and the Earth has a “body burden”. 

You may be interested in: 

2011-04-23  ONE disease, different manifestations. Proposal: “Disease” organizations form a coalition to stop the poisons. 

Work is now underway.

 I know you are supporters of different political parties, and maybe no political party.   And some people may not vote for the Greens but still believe that Elizabeth May would make a very positive contribution to the governance of Canada (already has). 

I would like to extend an invitation whatever your persuasion:  please feel free to join us at The Bassment (Jazz Society) on Monday night (Election night).

8:00 pm

Let us know if you’re coming (so we can plan food, etc.).

Robin already has it up on facebook  – – you can respond there, or email me.

 Exciting times – will be the best party in town!

 (The Bassment is Downtown, 202 4th Avenue North, kitty-corner from the Library, in the renovated basement of the old Post Office.  Entrance on north side of the building.)

 We may well be celebrating the making of history! 

 There is a very good chance that Elizabeth May will be electedI know her personally.  We kept bumping into each other during the years when she was the Executive Director of the Sierra Club and became friends.  She is intelligent, warm-hearted and caring, with amazing energy, dedication and integrity.  She understands the issues and is the reason why I joined the Green Party.  I know that if she is to achieve her potential, there have to be people in every province to help build Green support. 

We cannot poison the place where we live, and our bodies, too. Elizabeth has been a strong voice and active force through all the years at the Sierra Club – I am confident that she, working with others in the Green movement, is our best choice when it comes to driving the change-in-thinking that is urgently needed.

Best wishes,

P.S.   You can watch a special preview (“May in Your House”—a 30-minute TV special that shares the extraordinary story of Elizabeth and the values that are the core of the Green Party.  This mini-documentary explores the practical, realistic Green Party approaches to real problems faced by Canadians: climate change, jobs, health care, education, pensions, youth unemployment, and more.

Apr 262011
 

From: lcdentalclinic  AT  mcsnet.ca
To: mercury AT  ec.gc.ca

Subject: Letter of Notice of Objection
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:40:26 -0600

Please find attached a formal letter as notice of objection respecting the notice published in the Canadian Gazette Part 1, volume 45, No. 9, dated February 26, 2011 regarding proposed Regulations Respecting Products Containing Certain Substances Listed in Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.

Yours truly,
Nestor B Shapka, B.Sc, DDS

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

Notice of Objection Exempn Dental Amalgam

 

Apr 242011
 

Pulling together the information for this update on drones (UAV’s or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles)  made me sick-to-my-stomach.

Sending it to you I am centred, calm and happy.   Because I know many of you will take a few minutes to do the simple “REMEDIES”!   

Canada is the 13th highest military spender in the world after more than a decade of yearly increases, and many more years of increases are planned.  But that’s not what makes me sick, although it should.

Hi Steve, 

The drones are now deployed along the Canada-U.S. border from Vancouver as far east as Lake-of-the-Woods,  maybe further. 

A  TRAINING program related to drones is being established in a new facility at the Saskatoon airport.  I say this after looking at the Bachelor of Science in UAV’s now in the U.S. schools; the wording is too similar to the School here and the players are the same.   I do not believe the “nonmilitary” description.  

Federal education and stimulus money is being used to create nonmilitary drone education programs. The Department of Aviation at the University of North Dakota, located in Grand Forks and the operator of the test and training site at Grand Forks AFB, now offers the first Bachelors of Science program in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations. The Aviation Maintenance Technology program at Northland Community and Technical College, located in Thief River Falls, Minnesota just 40 miles east of Grand Forks, will soon offer courses in the repair of UAVs.

North Dakota (Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, MN)  and Saskatchewan are not far apart. 

Sask is a second gateway to the tar sands.   It’s why they are trying to get “small” nuke reactors here.  Brad Wall, our Premier, may as well be Stephen Harper.  Wall “co-chairs” with the Americans the “largest on the planet” Canada-U.S. Western Energy Corridor. 

/Sandra

– – – – – – – – – –  – – – – —

The developments are unnerving militarization coming from the U.S. with Canadian collaborators.   

This is an action-based network.  The immediate opportunities (“remedies”) to the militarization are to fight Lockheed Martin’s involvement in Canadian affairs by making F-35 stealth bombers an election issue and by refusing to cooperate in the Canadian census because of Lockheed Martin’s involvement.    /Sandra

 CONTENTS

  1. BRIEF BACKGROUND
  2. THE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE DRONES ALONG THE CANADIAN BORDER (THE MILITARIZATION)  ARE PROPAGANDA
  3.  SECRECY IS COMMON:   2011-02-08  Canada kept U.S. border talks under wraps 
  4.  COMMENTARY
  5.  DRONES HIT LIBYA:  2011-04-23  Attack of the drones: Obama approves the use of unmanned aircraft in Libya conflict.  (This is the first time I’ve seen pictures of the kids at Creech Airforce Base at the console of the remote-control station.)
  6.  DRONES PUT IN PLACE ALONG CANADA-U.S. BORDER,  2007 – PRESENT
  • 2007-02-12  UAV Tested For US Border Security (Canadian border)
  • 2008-12-05  Predator UAV Set for U.S.-Canada Patrol
  • 2009-02-18  US/Canada Border Increasingly Militarized, Unmanned drone prowls over the lonely prairie.  G&M
  • 2011-01-26   Unmanned plane patrolling stretch of Canada-U.S. border
  • 2011-01-27  Unmanned Spyplane For Canadian Border Security
  • 2011-04-22  The Drone-ification of America.  (correction: .. of NORTH America)
  • 2010-11-01  (Drone training in Canada)  Saskatchewan Aviation Learning Centre Grand Opening at SIIT.

7.  IN THE U.S.

  • 2011-04-24   The Verdict: Guilty of Protesting the Drones
  • 2011-04-16   Drones Fly Through Congress to Enter US Skies
  • 2010-10-10   Stunning victory: Breaking the law to obey a higher law (Lockheed Martin’s unmanned drones, Creech Air Force Base).

8.  U.S. IN THE BUSINESS OF CREATING TERRORISTS

  •  2011-04-13  Pakistan Moves to Curb More Aggressive US Drone Strikes, Spying

REMEDIES:

9.   Send this email to as many people as you can.  Talk about it.

10.  LET’S MAKE THE STEALTH FIGHTERS AN ELECTION ISSUE  (scroll down)  (www.ceasefire.ca action, Steve Staples)

11.  TEN REASONS  THE F-35 STEALTH FIGHTER IS WRONG FOR CANADA  (scroll down)  (Steve Staples)

12.  www.ceasefire.ca   has good information, actions and frequent updates.

13.  May 2:  Do not vote for any political party that supports the purchase of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth bombers  (I appended the positions of the four parties.)

14.  May:  refuse to cooperate with Lockheed Martin Corporation’s involvement in the Canadian Census.

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

(1)   BRIEF BACKGROUND   

In 2006 there was the report in Macleans Magazine from the “President of the Americas for Lockheed Martin Corporation”, Ron Covais, about the “how to” of the SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) for getting what the corporate leaders, working with Government officials, want.  

 The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) surveillance of the Canada-U.S. border has been in the works at least since 2007.   That was the same year as police were trained, disguised and deployed at the SPP Montebello meetings, to turn peaceful protest violent.

 (2008).  Through trying to stop the involvement of Lockheed Martin (American military)  in the Canadian census we have followed things like the “Canada First Defence Strategy” which gives “compatible doctrine”, etc. with the American war machine.  It followed on the heels of the “Troop Exchange Agreement” with the U.S..

 In November 2008 the Ottawa Citizen reported “American officials are pressuring the Federal Government to supply them with information on Canadians .. Canadian officials have said .. will meet the new standard .. by 2011 .. but there’ll be tremendous pressure (from the U.S.) to get there faster.”

 In March 2010 we circulated the information about the plan to roll out armored vehicles in cities across Canada, followed by the March 2011 update:  Vancouver, York (Toronto), Ottawa and Saskatoon – –  armored vehicles. 

That’s a small sampling.  Go to Lockheed Martin, Census, War Economy  for more details.

Step-by-step they continue to move ahead.  The Council of Canadians has been terrific at battling them every inch of the way.

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

2.    THE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE DRONES ALONG THE CANADIAN BORDER, THE MILITARIZATION, ARE PROPAGANDA

The justifications (propaganda) for the militarization are:

  • “The War on Terror”
  • “The War on Drugs”

 Both are bogus arguments.   

In the press releases about the UAV’s  (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or “drones”)  deployed along the Canada-U.S. border (see the “CONTENTS”)  there are a number of references to the marijuana that has been seized as a result of the UAV’s.   UAV’s cannot see marijuana inside a truck.  Drones are a ridiculously expensive way of doing whatever it is they are doing.  The use of propaganda is pernicious. 

REGARDING:

  • THE WAR ON DRUGS, see:  2011-04-24  “The War on Drugs” is a bogus war, propaganda for increasing police and military presence.
  • THE WAR ON TERROR:   all you have to do is look at some of the news articles on UAV’s (see the “CONTENTS”).   As mentioned, pulling them together made me sick-to-my-stomach.  The terrorists are clearly the American Military.  “America is scary “because a declining superpower losing both political and economic dominance but still preserving military supremacy is a dangerous mix.””    AGREED!
  • THE ROLE OF PROPAGANDA IN A MILITARISTIC STATE .  See:

2010-03-05  Love, Hate & Propaganda, the art of mass persuasion (WW2) on CBC

2010-03-06   Propaganda. Kitty Werthmann, Austria, 1938 (The Sound of Music) “the state, little by little eroded our freedom”

2010-03-10    Propaganda, Democracy: Imagining “the other”. Ralston Saul. The Cellist of Sarajevo. 

 AND  read “The Animal Farm” by George Orwell!

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

(3)   COMMENTARY

Happy Beautiful Easter Day.  I think we had better all wake up from the dead. 

Yesterday, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s)  started dropping bombs on Libya (2011-04-23  Attack of the drones: Obama approves the use of unmanned aircraft in Libya conflict).  Civilian casualties from UAV’s in Libya have started.

2011-04-24   The Verdict: Guilty of Protesting the Drones   is in follow-up to  2010-10-10   Stunning victory: Breaking the law to obey a higher law (Lockheed Martin’s unmanned drones, Creech Air Force Base),  the Father John Dear story. 

It is striking how

  • (2010-11-01  (Drone training in Canada)  Saskatchewan Aviation Learning Centre Grand Opening at SIIT)  echoes  this paragraph from
  •  2011-04-22  The Drone-ification of America  (correction: .. of NORTH America)    

Federal education and stimulus money is being used to create nonmilitary drone education programs. The Department of Aviation at the University of North Dakota, located in Grand Forks and the operator of the test and training site at Grand Forks AFB, now offers the first Bachelors of Science program in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations. The Aviation Maintenance Technology program at Northland Community and Technical College, located in Thief River Falls, Minnesota just 40 miles east of Grand Forks, will soon offer courses in the repair of UAVs.

The Drone-ification article continues:

Added to that, an amendment to the House version of the bill legalizing drone testing in American airspace set September 30, 2015 as a deadline by which to have general use of drones. The University of North Dakota is also offering a 4-year degree in piloting drones in what is soon expected to be a $20 billion industry.

Clearly, Congress, the Defense Department, the Obama administration and the military contractors who drive the wars all have strong financial interests in having drones crisscrossing the skies of America. They know that this spy technology will be the next big money-making scheme for those who profit from war and the machinery of war. But you can rest assured that the introduction of drones into American airspace will not only further fuse the American government, the American economy and the military industry, perpetuating needless foreign interventions at the expense of civilians abroad and Americans at home but it will serve as yet another nail in the coffin for American civil liberties.

TRY THIS!   My Canadian version of the preceding.  The wording is transportable.  Talk about “harmonization”!:

Federal stimulus money is being used to create drone education programs. The Saskatchewan Aviation Learning Centre located in Saskatoon,  a joint effort between Lockheed Martin ($3.5 million), Boeing, the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technology (SIIT), SIAST, Western Economic Diversification (Minister Responsible Lynn Yelich), the Government of Saskatchewan, and the Saskatoon Airport Authority,  now offers the first Bachelors program in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations. The Aviation Maintenance Technology program at SIIT  will soon offer courses in the repair of UAVs through the Saskatchewan Aviation Learning Centre.   The Commercial Pilots programme at  SIAST  will soon be located in the same new facility at the Saskatoon Airport.

Clearly  the Defense Department, the Harper administration, and the military contractors who drive the wars all have strong financial interests in having drones crisscrossing the skies of North America. They know that this spy technology will be the next big money-making scheme for those who profit from war and the machinery of war. But you can rest assured that the introduction of drones into North American airspace will not only further fuse the North American government, the North American economy and the military industry, perpetuating needless foreign interventions at the expense of civilians abroad and North Americans at home but it will serve as yet another nail in the coffin for North American civil liberties.

2011-04-13  Pakistan Moves to Curb More Aggressive US Drone Strikes, Spying   makes you wonder how anyone can believe that the terrorists are not the American Corporations.

Back to   2011-04-22  The Drone-ification of America.  (correction: .. of NORTH America):

This EXCERPT is critical.  It tells the same story as told by William Hartung in his book “Prophets of War:  Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex” (Jan 2011).  You can find details of it by going to www.sandrafinley.ca  and typing  “Hartung”  into  “Search”.

But the real motivator, as is usually the case in Washington, is money — to be exact, money in the form of job creation (which ultimately translates into electoral votes) and campaign contributions from military contractors. In total, Boeing spent $2.57 million and Lockheed Martin spent $2.4 million in campaign contributions to those running for Congress in 2009-2010.

Indeed, elected representatives on both sides of the aisle benefit equally from the push for more widespread use of drones. For example, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), a sponsor of the amendment who, by the way, received $10,000 from Lockheed Martin (a manufacturer of drones and missiles used by drones) during his 2010 re-election campaign, is looking to preserve 1,215 jobs at a base in Mattydale, N.Y., while also potentially creating “millions of dollars in radar research contracts for local defense companies.” In other words, Schumer is hoping he can get enough donations and win over enough voters to maintain his seat in Congress.

On the House of Representatives side, Reps. John Mica (R-Fla.) and Candice Miller (R-Mich.), the driving forces behind the drone amendments that ended up in the House bill, didn’t hesitate to talk up the advantages drones would bring to national security and the economy. They also didn’t hesitate to take campaign contributions from companies involved in the production of drone technology. In his 2010 re-election campaign, Mica received contributions from Boeing, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon amounting to $10,000 each, while Miller received $10,000 each from Honeywell and Ford, and $8,500 from General Dynamics. Maurice Hinchey (D – NY), a member of the 43-person drone caucus, received $10,000 each from Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Honeywell, as well as $9,500 from L-3 Communications in 2010.

Unfortunately, there are few in Congress who are not complicit in helping to advance the agenda of the military industrial complex. Even President Obama, ironically enough the winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize who received $870,165 from defense contractors during his 2008 campaign . . .

YES:   Libya hit by drones.  BUT Pay attention to what they are doing with drones in North America, and here in Saskatoon.

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

10. Let’s Make the Stealth Fighters an Election Issue  (www.ceasefire.ca action, Steve Staples)

Dear Sandra –    

It’s been a pitched media battle with Harper’s Conservatives and his corporate defence lobby since I last wrote you.

And as you will read below, it’s about billions of dollars in military sales, deceit, corporate and government collusion, and an orchestrated campaign to deceive Canadians.
The campaign of deceit is aimed directly at Ceasefire.ca and at people like you. That’s why I hope that you’ll make your donation today.

Your donation is needed now to stop Harper’s plan to build “Fortress North America,” ringed with fleets of U.S. weaponry like the F-35 stealth fighters, ready to deploy at the Pentagon’s command for the next “shock and awe” bombing campaign.

This may be our most difficult and challenging campaign ever.

Billions of dollars are involved: the Harper Conservatives and the corporations are staking everything on seeing this fighter deal go through, no matter what the cost.
The Harper government has launched a massive public relations blitz to counter F-35 critics like us.

Many senior Cabinet ministers, Conservative MPs, retired and serving generals, lobbyists, and military-funded academics have been drafted to support Harper.

And we are on the front lines of this media battle.

Only two days after an article against the F-35 that I co-wrote was printed in the Chronicle Herald, Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose shot back. They said I was “misleading and inaccurate,” and that spending $16 to $21 billion on stealth fighters is “the right decision for the Canadian Forces.”

But the truth is that Peter MacKay is intentionally misleading Canadians. I was in the CTV studio when he told the interviewer about the “contract” for the warplanes – when he knows that there is no contract.

That’s why they are so afraid. The Conservatives have made a huge mistake by agreeing to buy the planes without bothering to settle on a final price or benefits to Canada.  This is just plain deceitful, and unacceptable for a member of the government, especially a Cabinet minister.

As well, Harper has brought in the corporations to attack critics like the Rideau Institute.

The powerful Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC) has joined the government in taking political shots at the opposition parties, and making false accusations.
The CEOs even sent a “spy” into our press conference. An AIAC senior vice-president tried to sneak into our media event in Parliament, claiming to security staff that he “was invited.”

Later, the aerospace corporations slammed our statements against the F-35 in a press release of their own.

I am very concerned that the media are not doing enough to expose the PR campaign that is going on. That’s why we have to watch every report and challenge reporters’ assertions, or readers will not learn the truth.

For instance, I was shocked to see a huge article in the Ottawa Citizen by two retired Air Force generals “dispelling myths” and promoting the F-35.
But the Citizen did not reveal that the co-author, retired General Paul Manson, was also the former head of Lockheed Martin Canada’s Board of Directors – the U.S. company standing to make billions in profits from the F-35.

I immediately contacted the newspaper, exposing the General as a lobbyist. As Embassy magazine later reported the incident:

Luckily, Steven Staples, director of the Rideau Institute and a long-time thorn in the side of the military establishment, outed Manson’s Lockheed Martin association in a letter to the editor the following day.

But the story doesn’t end there. Now we’ve learned that the F-35 stealth fighter deal is connected to Harper’s plan to build a security perimeter around Canada and the United States – a Fortress North America.

I first became aware of a potentially new deal when I was on a panel in Ottawa with a well-connected former Foreign Affairs official.
When he mentioned the possibility of a new security perimeter deal, I immediately pointed out that Canada would end up with our foreign and defence policies being faxed to us from the Pentagon.

Days later, that same official confirmed my fears. He told the Globe and Mail that talks were taking place, and that Prime Minister Harper promised President Obama that “if we have to look at perimeter defence . . . we’re ready to do it.”

The latest round of Canada-U.S. border security talks, launched in February by Harper and Obama, could result in a massive expansion of North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) – the joint U.S.-Canada military aerospace command for North America.

Will Harper push Canada into George Bush’s Star Wars missile defence scheme? How far will Harper go?

Now that the secret negotiations are out in the open, a public relations campaign has already begun for deeper military integration with the United States.

A few weeks ago I was invited on CTV’s Power Play to debate Retired Lieutenant-General George Macdonald, the former Canadian head of NORAD.  General Macdonald was an early believer in Canada joining Bush’s Star Wars, and now, as a paid lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, he is pushing for Canada to buy the F-35 stealth fighters.  And guess what? He is also lobbying reporters to support expanding NORAD on a massive scale to include land and sea military operations.

The military establishment is ready to give away our sovereignty and independence. Why are so many generals, who have sworn to defend Canada, so ready to sell out to the Pentagon?Don’t they care about Canada?

The generals, the CEOs, and the Harper Conservatives are betraying our national independence, and our values as international peacekeepers.

That’s why it is so important to make your voice heard. I hope that we can count on your support for 2011.

Maclean’s Magazine called me “the most outspoken critic of the purchase,” and I will continue to try to live up to that compliment. I’ll challenge this government on the F-35 deal and expose the defence lobby at every turn.

We have already hired a campaign person to work with peace groups and with our 20,000 Ceasefire.ca supporters to make our work more effective.  It’s working already. Together, we’ve sent more than 5,000 messages to Harper saying “No Stealth Fighters!” during our historic “Be Heard on March 3rd” day of action.

And there is more to come. We have new research reports in the works to expose the growing militarism in Canada, rising military spending, and the danger of “Fortress North America.”
Our goal is to raise $15,000 to launch our “No Stealth Fighters” campaign for 2011.

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

 11.    Ten reasons the F-35 stealth fighter is wrong for Canada

By Steve Staples and ceasefire.ca

March 3, 2011

Today ceasefire.ca launches a petition against the purchase of F-35 stealth fighters for the Canadian military. Check out the petition by clicking here or use the nifty form below, and read 10 plus one great reasons to sign.

1.     The F-35 is for “shock and awe” combat missionsIts stealth capability and weapons are intended for U.S.-style first strike attacks, a role Canada does not need to play.

2. The F-35 is way too expensive

According to National Defence’s estimates, the cost of purchasing 65 U.S.-built F-35 stealth fighters is between $16 and $21 billion — the most expensive military project in Canadian history.

3. The government’s finances are in bad shape

The annual federal deficit is expected to reach $56 billion this year, and cuts to social programs are expected.

4. The F-35 is ill suited for the arctic

Its stealth characteristic is not needed, and only one engine instead of two puts pilots at risk of being stranded in the far north by an engine failure.

5. Little, if any, of the $16 billion will stay in Canada

Unlike previous military contracts, in this one the Harper government has not required the U.S. manufacturer Lockheed Martin to invest “dollar-for-dollar” in Canada.

6. It is costing Canada job opportunities

Buying any other aircraft would allow the government to require “Industrial and Regional Benefits.” Instead, the Harper Conservatives just hope we’ll get contracts from Lockheed Martin.

7. The F-35 is still a model airplane

The F-35 is still being tested and production is years behind schedule, leaving operating and maintenance costs completely unknown.

8. There was no competition

In a sweetheart deal, the Harper Conservatives committed to Lockheed Martin rather than inviting other firms to put in proposals, increasing the cost by an estimated 20 per cent.

9. There is no hurry to replace our CF-18s

Canada’s current fleet of CF-18s just completed a $2.6 billion upgrade, and could easily remain in service until the mid-2020s.

10. There is no Russian arctic threat

NORAD’s U.S. commander said he sees no military challengers in the arctic, and he is focused on preventing another 9/11 type of attack.

PLUS There is no contract to break

Despite the government’s commitment to Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth fighter, there is no signed contract and therefore no firm price expected until 2013, or even later.

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

POSITIONS OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES ON F-35 STEALTH BOMBERS

  1. Conservatives –  Stephen Harper has been doing the deal on F-35s  in private, which is consistent with 2011-02-08   Canada kept U.S. border talks under wraps

 Browsing the literature, there are a number of Lockheed Martin people moved into positions in the Government.  I wonder if anyone has done a consolidated list?    

2.    Liberals – Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said that to prevent further abuse, a future Liberal government will cancel the F-35 stealth fighter deal and hold an open competition to replace Canada’s CF-18s.  . . . .   “We need an open debate about whether these are the right planes, and to make sure we’re getting them for the right price,” he stated.   http://www.liberal.ca/newsroom/news-release/liberals-will-cancel-f-35-deal-and-hold-an-open-competition/ )

3.   NDP  New ships not jets, say NDP   . .   Layton did not write off the F-35 plan completely.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/CanadaVotes/News/2011/04/08/17922646.html

By Kristy Kirkup, Parliamentary Bureau  

NDP Leader Jack Layton makes his way to a roundtable discussion on his party’s crime prevention plan at Youth Resource Centre in Surrey, B.C., on April 7 2011. The NDP leader announced Friday that his party will invest in shipbuilding instead of F-35s. (CARMINE MARINELLI/QMI AGENCY)

ESQUIMALT, B.C. – Jack Layton wants to focus on shipbuilding investments instead of F-35s purchases, and table a ‘defence white paper’ to pinpoint domestic and foreign policy priorities.

“The New Democrat defence plan will focus Canada’s forces on defending Canada and Canadians,” Layton said Friday, on a campaign stop on Vancouver Island. “We will provide stable support to Canada’s troubled shipbuilding industry by focusing on a dependable policy of domestic procurement.”

The NDP plan commits to maintaining the defence investment outlined in the 2011 budget – $21 billion a year.

“Our defence policy is broken,” said Layton. “And it’s time for us to fix it.”

Layton’s defence plan puts Canada’s joint support ships at the heart of the procurement policy instead of fighter jets. The Parliamentary budget officer reported the Tory government’s plan to buy a fleet of F-35 jets to replace the aging CF-18s will cost about $30 billion.

“The current CF-18 fleet’s operational life extends to 2017 at the earliest,” said Layton. “Our current ships have reached the end of their operational lives. They need to be replaced immediately.”

Layton did not write off the F-35 plan completely.

“The time frame on the planes and whether or not we need those kinds of planes should be the subject of a national discussion before we make that kind of commitment,” said Layton. “That’s why we’re suggesting a white paper.”

The NDP leader says his defence announcement meshes with promoting jobs in the shipbuilding sector.

The party unveiled its policy in the B.C. riding of Esquimalt-Juan, where there is a naval base at CFB Esquimalt.

4.      GREEN PARTY   Six questions about the jet fighters

16 July 2010 – 5:31pm

OTTAWA – The Government’s announcement regarding the purchase of 65 F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed-Martin raises a number of questions and concerns. Elizabeth May, Leader of the Greens, says that these are questions for which Canadians deserve an answer.

Where is the security policy rationale for $9 billion in fighter jets?

What happened to the additional $7 billion contract in maintenance?

In what scenario are we fighting air to air combat?

Why have we ignored the criticism in the US Congress of Lockheed-Martin on these very jets for 50% cost over-runs, to date?

What happened to the spending freeze in the defence budget to fight the deficit?

What are the opportunity costs of this giant spending spree while Canada’s schools close, health care suffers, infrastructure crumbles, and greenhouse gases soar? 

“The opposition party – the Liberals – have already indicated that this deal will be reviewed and potentially cancelled if they are elected.  It therefore becomes the fiscal responsibility of the Conservatives – as a minority government on the eve of an election – to ensure that any contract signed has a no-penalty opt-out for at least one year.   Failure to do this due diligence will reflect directly on the Conservatives and they will be the ones held accountable for any future penalties,” said Eric Walton, International Affairs critic.

Apr 242011
 

4.8 Ending the war on drugs

In 2008, according to the Treasury Board, Canada spent $61.3 million targeting illicit drugs, with a majority of that money going to law enforcement. Most of that was for the “war” against cannabis (marijuana). Marijuana prohibition is also prohibitively costly in other ways, including criminalizing youth and fostering organized crime. Cannabis prohibition, which has gone on for decades, has utterly failed and has not led to reduced drug use in Canada.

After analyzing the recommendation of the Canadian Senate’s 2002 Special Committee on Drugs and the examples of strategies used by some European countries, the Green Party of Canada has come to the conclusion that it is time to legalize the adult use of marijuana. Furthermore, the Greens believe that drug addictions should be treated as a health problem, not as criminal offences.

Green Party MPs will:

• Legalize marijuana by removing marijuana from the drug schedule.

• Create a regulatory framework for the safe production of marijuana by small, independent growers.

• Develop a taxation rate for marijuana similar to that of tobacco.

• Establish the sale of marijuana to adults for medicinal or personal use through licensed distribution outlets.

• Educate the public about the health threats of marijuana, tobacco and other drug use.

• Launch a public consultation on the decriminalization of illicit drugs, considering the current high costs of the law enforcement effort.

• Provide increased funding to safe injection sites, treatment facilities and addict rehabilitation.

Apr 242011
 

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/934675–canada-kept-border-security-talks-with-u-s-under-wraps-report

document Published On Tue Feb 8 2011

Prime Minister Stephen Harper shakes hands with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington last week. Prime Minister Stephen Harper shakes hands with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington last week.

MARK WILSON/GETTY IMAGES

Les Whittington and Tonda MacCharles Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA—The federal government deliberately kept negotiations on a border deal with Washington secret while it planned ways to massage public opinion in favour of the pact, according to a confidential communications strategy.

The 14-page public relations document recommended that talks keep a “low public profile” in the months leading up to the announcement by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama. At the same time, the government would secretly engage “stakeholders” — interested parties such as big business groups and others — in a way that respected “the confidentiality of the announcement.”

In advance, the government departments involved — including industry, foreign affairs, international trade and citizenship and immigration — were to “align supportive stakeholders to speak positively about the announcement,” according to the strategy prepared by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’ officials.

On Friday, Harper and Obama signed off on a plan that for the first time envisions throwing up a single security ring around the perimeter of Canada and the U.S. The wide-ranging blueprint calls for increased cooperation between the two countries’ police, border and intelligence agencies; an integrated Canada-U.S. exit-entry system using high-tech identification techniques and more sharing of information about Canadians with U.S. authorities.

At least three major business organizations — the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Canadian Trucking Alliance — quickly issued statements praising the framework agreement Friday.

The document was prepared last fall, when the Canada-U.S. talks were being conducted without any public notice.

Under “communications challenges,” the document lists: “Greater information sharing is part of the initiative. The safeguarding of privacy and sovereignty will be of concern for Canadians.”

It also says Canadians may be too sanguine about security to see the need for the deal. “The Canadian public may underestimate the security threat to Canada.”

The confidential government document also contains a list of “high risk” stakeholders — those in Canada who might raise strenuous objections to stepped-up Canada-U.S. security arrangements.

Officials surmised that Jennifer Stoddart, the federal privacy commissioner, would be worried by plans to share more personal data on Canadians with U.S. authorities. “Will raise concerns re information sharing and protecting private information,” the document says of Stoddart. In response, the government should stress that “we value and respect our separate constitutional and legal frameworks that protect privacy, civil liberties and human rights.” It also recommended “ongoing engagement by officials” with Stoddart.

Advocacy and civil rights groups such as the Council of Canadians, led by Maude Barlow, were also expected to react negatively because of “privacy concerns.” The strategy paper again recommended that Conservatives should stress Canada’s protections for human rights and privacy. It also suggested that cabinet ministers be made available to the media to counteract Barlow’s statements.

Refugee and immigration organizations were considered “high-risk stakeholders” and expected to react by saying the new U.S.-Canada border measures will limit immigration. The recommended response was to say that the deal “will accelerate legitimate travel” and won’t change Canadian immigration and refugee policy. Another high-risk stakeholder was expected to be the Mexican government, which “may raise concerns about not being included in the vision.”

A separate list of “medium risk” stakeholders included academics, who will “expect proof of economic benefits” and may be worried about privacy and sovereignty, and the media, which will “look for specifics” that would be announced later. Also considered a “medium risk” are U.S. critics, who will see the new deal as a “threat to U.S. jobs.”

Now that Canada and the U.S. have begun work on implementing the deal, the Liberals and NDP say they are planning to bring cabinet ministers before a Commons committee to find out the details of the plan.

The public campaign to persuade Canadians that a muscular security deal won’t trade away Canadian rights was clearly underway Monday.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, appearing at a Senate committee on national security and defence, painted it as “necessary” to the free flow of cross-boarder trade, and “beneficial” to Canada.

The Americans, he said, bring greater resources, “assets” and much-appreciated expertise to border security, citing joint efforts during the Olympics security operations.

Asked later whether Canadians should be concerned about a new regime that might see random searches or seizures at the border, Toews said there’s little need to worry.

“I don’t think that is a concern that they should have, but those are the kinds of questions that need to be asked and discussed.”

Apr 242011
 

 http://www.truth-out.org/verdict-guilty-protesting-drones/1303656830 

The Verdict: Guilty of Protesting the Drones

Sunday 24 April 2011

by: John Dear, Truthout 

A MQ-1B Predator unmanned aircraft system takes off for a training mission at Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.(Photo: Senior Airman Larry E. Reid Jr. / US Air Force)

On Thursday, 13 of us stood in a Las Vegas courtroom to hear the verdict from Judge Jansen regarding our September trial for trespassing on April 9, 2009, at Creech Air Force Base (AFB), headquarters of the US drone operations. Last September, the judge had dramatically announced that he would need at least three months to “think” about the case. 
 
After telling us how “nice” it was to see us, the judge presented each of us with a 20-page legal ruling explaining why he found us guilty. “You argued a defense of necessity,” he said, “when an inherent danger is present and immediate action must be taken, such as breaking a no-trespassing law to uphold a higher law and save life. In this case, no inherent danger was present, and so I find you guilty.” 
 
Guilty! My friends and I have tried every legal means possible to stop our government from its terrorist, drone bombing attacks on civilians in Afghanistan, and so we journeyed to the drone headquarters at Creech AFB near Las Vegas on Holy Thursday to kneel in prayer and beg for an end to the bombings. This nonviolent intervention is determined to be criminal – not the regular drone bombing attacks on children in Afghanistan and Pakistan. 
 
I expected this ruling, but it was sad nonetheless. The judge missed a great opportunity to take a stand for justice and peace, to do the right thing, to help end terrorism. Instead, he sided with the war machine. Worse, he dismissed the loss of life caused by our drone attacks. “It does not matter that civilians are being killed by our drones,” he said in effect. His ruling indicated that some lives are not worth as much as others.
 
Before he sentenced us, we each spoke briefly about our action and why we crossed the line. This testimony was the best, most moving part of our ordeal, so I thought I would share excerpts from my co-defendants remarks. 
 
Brian Terrell of the Catholic Worker told the judge that the evil work of Creech AFB does involve immediate, present danger – to the children and people ofAfghanistan. He cited a recent interview with a young drone operator, who sits in front of a computer screen at Creech. “The war is 7,000 miles away andthe war is 18 inches away,” the Air Force operator said. “7,000 miles, the distance from Creech to Afghanistan,” Brian explained. “Eighteen inches, thedistance from his face to the screen. This distance is an illusion. And it’s a very dangerous illusion. The purpose behind our action was to dispel that illusion because it is very close and the danger we were addressing was and is imminent.” 
 
Brian should know. He and Kathy Kelly were just back from a three-week trip to Afghanistan where they met victims of US drone attacks. 
 
“In Afghanistan, I met a family displaced by a drone attack in the Helmand Province,” Kathy told the judge. “One man showed me the photos of his children’s bloodied corpses. The drone attack killed his spouse and his five children. In the Charahi Qambar refugee camp, I sat next to Juma Gul, a nine year old girl whose arm was amputated by the same drone attack. She was punished horribly even though she committed no crime. We want to be in solidarity with her. 
 
“It’s criminal for the US to spend 2 billion dollars per week for war in Afghanistan that maims, kills and displaces innocent civilians who’ve meant us no harm,” she said. 
 
 “I deplore the high tech technology used for mass killing which destroys and pollutes this sacred planet,” Sister Megan Rice said. “I had to enter the base in order to obey higher orders. I have listened to the voice of the victims of drone warfare. These weapons are aptly named drones, predators, reapers.” 
 
“We each have a responsibility to work for justice and to act in defense of human life,” Libby Pappalardo said. “The use of drones has increased hatred and violence in our world. I have tried to work through the system, but it isn’t enough. This is an emergency situation. Our country is worse off because ofthe violence of war and militarism. It’s necessary to take this next step. I will continue to struggle for human rights and nonviolence so that all the world’s children can feel safe and embraced by peace and hope.” 
 
“I went to Creech to express my deep sorrow and outrage over the fact that my country was engaged in what I believe were acts of terrorism in the use ofdrones against my brothers and sisters,” Eve Tetaz said. “I cannot remain silent. I think of Moses’ words: ‘I set before you this day life and death, good and evil. Therefore, choose life that you and your family may live.’ It is my prayer that you will be with us in speaking this truth to justice, that one day our nation will lead the world in the attempt to turn swords into plowshares and learn war no more so that the God of peace, mercy, justice and compassion will bring about law and justice. I invite you and all those who are present in the court to join us.” 
 
“As a veteran, I care about our guys over there,” Dennis DuVall said. “Every time there’s a drone strike, most of the victims are innocent women and children and old men like me. The younger men are considered militants. Each attack results in revenge attacks.” 
 
“Last Spring I was in New York City during the nuclear disarmament march in Times Square when a car bomb was almost detonated. It’s ironic that I wasprotesting drone warfare at Creech AFB where they’re directing drone attacks and a year later I was almost an unwitting victim of a revenge car bomb attempt in Times Square. The young man who built the bomb, Faisal Shazad, said he was motivated by drone attacks against Pakistan. There is a greater harm. If this isn’t necessity, what the hell is? We cannot run from the consequences of our drone air war 7000 miles away. Eventually, it’s going to come home to us. We’re going to be the victims.” 
 
“We are attacking people in an Islamic country,” Brad Lyttle said. “We are shooting missiles and killing them in an arbitrary manner. It is generating great hatred, and these people have the means to access weapons to cause us tremendous harm. We need to establish peaceful, just ways to resolve disputes. This is the message I would like to have people examine and think about. We have to develop non-military means for achieving justice and therefore peace.” 
 
“I’ve been hearing about the Afghan youth peace volunteers who work for peace and nonviolence in their land,” said Mariah Klusmire. “As long as they’re working for peace in their country, I will too, and no punishment can stop me from working for peace.” 
 
“Through our presence, we were trying to make the imminent danger posed by drone warfare less remote,” Steve Kelly said. “Our presence there was making the connection that would otherwise seem remote. We weren’t there to do civil disobedience. We were there to make an intervention. Our intention was lawful. I’m disappointed and saddened that you came to the wrong conclusion.” 
 
“As a follower of Jesus as my Lord and Savior, I take seriously his second commandment, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself,'” Judy Homanich said. “As themother of two wonderful children – my precious daughter, Sarah, who is just starting her adult life and my gone but not forgotten son, David, whose faith, courage and compassion continue to inspire me – I prayerfully acted in solidarity with all mothers, daughters, wives and sisters here and around the world who suffer loss due to war. My son David’s death, at age 21, was due to cancer not war, but I understand the heart-wrenching, life-changing pain of losing a child, a loved one. The US government kills countless innocents in drone attacks and calls it collateral damage.” 
 
“President Obama should heed his own words, spoken in October, 2010, while in India,” Judy continued. “He said nothing ever justifies the slaughter ofinnocent civilians. But the US drone attacks continue. This criminal long distance killing makes us all less human and less safe. I have a duty to bear witness against this killing and I will continue to do so.” 
 
“We are all one family,” Fr. Jerry Zawada said. “The huge numbers of innocent people being killed by drones is something I have to stand up against. We think of people on the other side of the border or the ocean as being different from ourselves. They’re not. That’s my family and your family too. We are one family. We have to take risks for one another.” 
 
For my two cents, I named these drones as illegal, immoral and impractical, and said they are bad for us politically, economically, socially and spiritually. I said that crossing the line onto Creech was an act of prayer for an end to these terrorist drones, and for an end to war itself, for new nonviolent ways to resolve conflict. We were obeying a higher law, taking our case to a Higher Power. 
 
In the end, the judge sentenced us to time served. We didn’t go to jail, and meanwhile, our drones continue to drop bombs. A new report says unauthorized US drone strikes last year claimed nearly 1,200 lives. According to Pakistani sources, our drone attacks kill almost 50 civilians for every “militant” we target. 
 
Together, through our action and our courtroom testimony, we argued that we can do better than drop bombs through these drone machines. As we left, we pledged to continue to speak out against the drones, to try to wake one another up about the US wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to stir theembers of the peace movement to speak out and take action for a new world of nonviolence. We give thanks for the opportunity to witness to peace, and we go forward determined to promote peace with everyone. 
 
As Father Jerry said, we are all one family.

Apr 242011
 

Note:  “The  (“Predator”) drones are made by closely held General Atomics of San Diego and armed with air-to-ground Hellfire missiles made by Lockheed Martin Corp.”   (info from http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-04-24/u-s-drone-hits-libyan-target-as-misrata-fighting-continues.html

This posting is part of a short series that takes you from these drone attacks on Libya to the education programmes (Bachelor degrees)  that now exist for nothing more than Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.  The ones in the States need to be compared to the one in Saskatoon.

Attack of the drones: Now Obama approves the use of unmanned aircraft in Libya conflict

By David Gardner
Last updated at 2:39 PM on 23rd April 2011

 

Turning up the heat: President Barack Obama has approved the use of drone attack aircraft in LibyaTurning up the heat: President Barack Obama has approved the use of drone attack aircraft in Libya

America turned up the heat on Colonel Gaddafi last night by approving the use of killer Predator drones in Libya.

The first U.S. drone attack on pro-government forces was aborted last night because of bad weather.

But U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates confirmed that President Barack Obama has given military chiefs the go ahead to launch the state-of-the-art unmanned aircraft that have been so effective in Iraq and against Taliban militants along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan.

Although Mr Obama has maintained the coalition campaign against Libya was not specifically targetting Colonel Gaddafi, the drones could be used in a pinpoint attack on the Libyan leader or his sons.

Deployment of the Predators is meant to send a message to critics who have complained that the Obama administration is not pulling its weight in Libya to help the embattled rebels.

At the same time, the president can sell the move to a sceptical public by insisting that no American lives are being put at risk.

Top brass: Defense Secretary Robert Gates, left, and Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright announced the move at a Pentagon press conferenceTop brass: Defense Secretary Robert Gates, left, and Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright announced the move at a Pentagon press conference

‘It is a more politically acceptable escalation that allows an arm’s length show of force,’ said one senior Pentagon official.

Mr Gates told a Pentagon news conference that the U.S. Air Force drone is an example of the military capabilities the president is willing to contribute to help combat Gaddafi.

 

 

Marine General James Cartwright confirmed yesterday’s Predator mission was scrapped.

He said the weapon allows low-level precision attacks on enemy forces. Experts claim the drones could be a game changer because they could allow strikes against Gaddafi troops ensconced in heavily built-up areas.

Armed response: Deployment of the Predators is meant to send a message to critics who have complained that the Obama administration is not pulling its weight in LibyaArmed response: Deployment of the Predators is meant to send a message to critics who have complained that the Obama administration is not pulling its weight in Libya

 

Remote combatant: Predators are flown remotely, usually from the Creech Air Force base, outside Las Vegas. That no Americans will be put at risk will help the President sell the move to a sceptical publicRemote combatant: Predators are flown remotely, usually from the Creech Air Force base, outside Las Vegas. That no Americans will be put at risk will help the President sell the move to a sceptical public

 

Heads up: The Predator is armed with two Hellfire missiles, has a range of 3,200 km and can stay in the air for as long as 24 hoursHeads up: The Predator is armed with two Hellfire missiles, has a range of 3,200 km and can stay in the air for as long as 24 hours

The Predator is armed with two Hellfire missiles, has a range of 3,200 km and can stay in the air for as long as 24 hours.

Gaddafi has made little use of his aircraft since the international no-fly zone was enforced, meaning the effectiveness of the allied air mission was limited.

The drones allow commanders to target the tanks and other artillery the government forces have been using to push back against the rebels.

The Predators are flown remotely, usually from the Creech Air Force base just outside Las Vegas.

The US action came as rebel troops claimed the capture of the Wazin border crossing with Tunisia following fighting outside the desert town of Nalut, about 140 miles southwest of Tripoli.

Fierce fighting: Rebel fighters carefully move into a building where government troops are trapped during street fighting on Tripoli Street, downtown MisrataFierce fighting: Rebel fighters carefully move into a building where government troops are trapped during street fighting on Tripoli Street, downtown Misrata

 

War zone: Rebel fighters run for cover inside a building on the frontline in Tripoli street. President Obama had been accused of not doing enough to help the insurgentsWar zone: Rebel fighters run for cover inside a building on the frontline in Tripoli street. President Obama had been accused of not doing enough to help the insurgents

 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379389/Libya-war-Obamas-attack-drones-President-approves-use-unmanned-aircrafts.html#ixzz1KSfrzSAk

Apr 232011
 

These three related postings affect our survival on this planet.  They were all written during the election period: 

  • 2011-04-23  ONE disease, different manifestations. Proposal: “Disease” organizations form a coalition against poisons.
  • 2011-04-23  Science and logic. Depression is DETERMINANT of heart disease?… Depression and heart disease are both SYMPTOMS of poisoning. You have one, you may have the other.
  • 2011-04-20  MS, Parkinson’s, Autism, Fibromyalgia, Cancers, Mental unhealth = one disease?

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

Hello Dawn, 

You raise an issue that is near and dear to my heart.   The question of  mind-body-spirit health is a complex issue that is intertwined with our understanding of human behavior, our economic models, values, educational systems, etc. 

I have had the luxery of being able to run an activist email network, full-time, on a volunteer basis for 11 years now.  We learn more when we share information, more than we could ever learn on our own. 

Recent work is about the degree to which many of our ailments are really ONE disease, manifested in different ways.  

Some people are uncomfortable with jumping around in a discussion about Multiple sclerosis that also addresses depression, alzheimers, and dementia.  And mercury poisoning at the same time as poisoning from chemicals.  But neuro toxins produce different outcomes in different people.  Poisons do not poison one select part of your body.  They disperse and deposit in different places.  The symptoms of the poisons manifest in different ways,  in one body, at different times over the life-cycle.   And they manifest differently in different people, of course.   There is a common cause of MANY diseases, even psychological ones:  poisons.    

Excerpts from:

2011-04-23  ONE disease, different manifestations. Proposal: “Disease” organizations form a coalition against poisons.

“We have come to a better understanding of how our immune systems work.  Is there a direct causal relationship between a poison and developmental problems or a particular disease?   …  Nothe same poisons in various combinations with other poisons (stresses on the immune system) will have different health outcomes for different people. 

Immune systems 

  • have different strengths and weaknesses
  • in different people,
  • affected by their life experience and
  • affected by the DNA that gets passed down from generation-to-generation. At least some of the time, DNA that has been damaged by poisons is passed down, in its damaged form.  

Scientists most often research DIRECT causal relationships between poisons and a particular disease.  They draw the wrong conclusions because they do not take into account the nature of our immune systems.  

Here’s the problem if we accept the usual cause-and-effect direct relationship worldview:

  • I say:  poison X contributed to my likely symptoms of MS
  • Someone else (Peggy) says:  the likely cause of my MS was poison Y that was sprayed on corn which we frolicking young people snitched out of a market garden at midnight for a corn roast.
  • The scientist says:  there is no causal relationship between X and MS.  Nor is there a causal relationship between Y and MS.
  • Someone else says:  the same poison X is the likely cause of my fibromyalgia
  • And someone else says:  it was poison Y that caused my cancer.
  • The scientists says:  there is no causal relationship between X and fibromyalgia;  nor between Y and cancer. 

The statements regarding poisons  X, Y and Z and a causal relationship with diseases A, B  and C are not contradictory, but science treats them as though they ARE contradictory.  In their mind the hypothesis about cause-and-effect fails. 

The chemical Y freshly-sprayed on the cornfield probably played a causal role in Peggy’s MS.   AND the very slow, almost continuous, release of small amounts of mercury (X) that I kept swallowing because it was in my saliva from my dental amalgams probably played a causal role in the onset of MS symptoms for me.   I had a series of health problems,  the mercury poisoning caused different symptoms at different times. I battled to address a symptom,  in time a different symptom would present itself.   It is not an easy, single expression of the poisoning.  And in many cases the immune system can keep the poisonous effects under control for a long time.  It can take 10 to 15 years before some cancers reach a stage where they are identified.  They are slow-acting, but nonetheless lethal.  Dementia and alzheimers do not develop over-night.   

Let me relate some of the information on my blog,  www.sandrafinley.ca   to your comments.  

(1)   Psychological factors are determinants of disease (e.g. recent links between depression and heart disease)

Yes, there is a link between depression and heart disease.  It is not necessarily a causal one.  Both are symptoms of poisoning by heavy metals and/or chemicals.  You have one, you may well have the other.  I refer you to the information at Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams. 

(2)   Influence the course and management of illness once it exists (e.g. the role of depression and lifestyle in coping with conditions like obesity and diabetes) and can become episodic or chronic conditions themselves (e.g. mood and anxiety disorders)

Heavy metals like mercury off-gased from dental amalgams are swallowed with saliva.   They play havoc in the gastro-intestinal tract, interfering with the body’s ability to properly metabolize food.   Diabetes is linked to poisons ingested.   Conditions become episodic, yes.   Get a shot that contains a heavy metal;  a few days later you will have a disease “episode”.  Condidtions become chronic.  Yes, in the case of mercury from dental amalgams the off-gasing never stops.  Mood and anxiety disorders – definitely.  We are dealing with neuro toxins.

(3)    Psychological factors and interventions are as critical to assessing the cognitive capacity of a senior ….

Alzheimers and dementia affect the cognitive capacity of seniors. 

I include “mental unhealth”  in “one disease”.   The literature and the experience of people who suffer from mercury poisoning establishes a clear link with brain functioning, including states-of-mind.   Refer to   Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams.     

If you read through the science at the link, you will find a number of references:  depression is also an effect of poisoning by heavy metals.   Many seniors have had “silver” fillings (dental amalgams, 50% mercury) in their mouths for decades.   The situation is exacerbated when they are given flu shots.   The literature is again very clear:  the pharmaceutical companies use heavy metals like mercury and aluminum as preservatives in vaccines.  The research shows that seniors who have received flu shots for more than 10 years have an increased risk of alzheimers.  What would one expect from direct injections of a poison as powerful as mercury?    

(4)   Research shows that 50% of adult mental health problems and disorders start in childhood and 70% before the age of 24.   

I am not saying that ALL mental health problems are the result of poisoning.  HOWEVER, I would agree entirely with your statement based just on what I know about poisoning by heavy metals and other ingredients through vaccinations and mercury in the Mother’s amalgams which crosses the placental barrier; that same mercury deposits in the fatty tissue, in particular (but in other places as well).  The nursing infant receives another hit of mercury.  Then start the vaccinations.  Most no longer contain thimerasol.  But they contain aluminum, another heavy metal.  Yes, of course, mental health problems and disorders start in childhood.  They are far worse today because infants and young adults receive far more vaccinations than ever before.  The numbers are in the material at Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams. 

(5)   the World Health Organization predicts that depression will be the second leading cause of disability adjusted life years for all ages and both sexes by 2020,

Yes:  the poisons we have been putting into the environment and into our bodies began a dramatic rise after world war two with chemicals.  The chemical companies have promoted and propagandized more and more uses and need for chemicals.  Not only is there a “body burden” for individuals, there is a body burden for the Earth.  We cannot escape from it.  To the poisoning by chemicals, add the poisoning from heavy metals through vaccinations.  Both the chemicals and the heavy metals are neuro toxins.  Both cause depression, but not solely depression.

(6)   YES:  according to the Public Health Agency of Canada 1 in 5 Canadians will face a psychological disorder in a given year.  There isn’t one sole explanation, but again, poisons make a substantial contribution.

(7)    I can accept:  the Mood Disorders Society of Canada reports that mental disorders account for more of the global burden of disease than all cancers combined.  There isn’t one sole explanation, but again, poisons contribute.

(8)    up to 40% of disability claims made to large employers are for mental conditions.  Removing poisons would save a lot of money. 

(9)    according to the Centre of Addiction and Mental Health, mental disorders cost the Canadian economy tens of billions of dollars annually. Removing poisons would save a lot of money

(10)        it is the minority of persons with mental disorders who will receive treatment.  

I have received a slew of emails.  Families and people who suffer from MS feel as you do.  So do families and people who suffer from dementia.  Families and people who suffer from various forms of disabilities (developmental problems) also cry for help.  Disabilities are often the consequence of invisible, odourless poisons.  It seems to me that the most effective strategy is for people from all these areas to get together and force an end to the poisons.  No one should be injected with vaccines that carry heavy metals.  It is insane to put mercury into our mouths;  Canada has recently been working on a law to prohibit the importation of products that contain mercury – – except for dental amalgams.  It’s not permissible anywhere, except in our mouth and if injected straight into our bodies.  Some European countries have banned dental amalgams.  We need to do the same.  Right now.

People are needed to help people who suffer greatly from the poisons we are putting into the environment. 

From my point-of-view, I do not support simply allowing the status quo to continue.  It is not acceptable that we normalize disease and do nothing more than ensure a continuing supply of patients for the medi-care system.  We will break the bank.  We are poisoning every other form of life on the Planet, in addition to ourselves.  

The good thing is that people are waking up.

I invite you to share this information with your colleagues.  Thank-you for writing.  It gives me the opportunity to put information into the right hands.  (At various times in the past I have sent information such as Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams.    to William Albritton, Dean of Medicine and to Maura Davies,  CEO of the Health District.  Various other health people have also been in receipt.

Invest in prevention?  You bet!  And there is so much that can be done IMMEDIATELY!   Different groups and many people are working on this.

Please call if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

——————–
Date: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 2:10 PM
Subject: Health Services in Canada

Ms. Sandra Finley
Green Party
Saskatchewan

Canada’s success and effectiveness depends in no small measure on the health of its citizenry.  An important, but all too often neglected, aspect of health is psychological health.  Psychological factors are determinants of disease (e.g. recent links between depression and heart disease), influence the course and management of illness once it exists (e.g. the role of depression and lifestyle in coping with conditions like obesity and diabetes) and can become episodic or chronic conditions themselves (e.g. mood and anxiety disorders).  Research shows that 50% of adult mental health problems and disorders start in childhood and 70% before the age of 24. Canada’s population is aging and facing a number of chronic lifestyle-related conditions. Psychological factors and interventions are as critical to assessing the cognitive capacity of a senior as they are to helping individuals make the behavioural changes necessary to successfully managing their health.

As concerns psychological disorders specifically, we know that

– the World Health Organization predicts that depression will be the second leading cause of disability adjusted life years for all ages and both sexes by 2020,

-according to the Public Health Agency of Canada 1 in 5 Canadians will face a psychological disorder in a given year,

– the Mood Disorders Society of Canada reports that mental disorders account for more of the global burden of disease than all cancers combined

– up to 40% of disability claims made to large employers are for mental conditions

– according to the Centre of Addiction and Mental Health, mental disorders cost the Canadian economy tens of billions of dollars annually and

-it is the minority of persons with mental disorders who will receive treatment

It is not a question of whether Canada has significant and unmet needs when it comes to its psychological health.  Further, it is no longer a question of can we afford to better meet the mental health needs of Canadians but how can we afford not to do so.

As the country’s largest group of regulated and specialized mental health care providers, psychologists play an important role in Canada’s mental health.  However, as publicly funded institutions such as hospitals, schools and correctional facilities face funding pressures that impact their salaried professional resource, psychologists increasingly work in private practice – where they often have long wait lists for service despite the fact that their services are not accessible to Canadians with low income or no extended health insurance through employment.  The governments of Canada need to do a better job at providing access to needed psychological service for Canadians.  Further, the significant and unmet service needs when it comes to mental health must be targeted when the 2004 Accord on health and social transfers is considered for renewal in 2014.

Access to mental health services and supports is related to need of Canadians but also to the supply of providers.  Canada’s mental health human resources cannot meet the demand let alone the need. There are not enough providers and there are not enough supports for family and peer care givers. We must invest in graduate training of psychologists and other mental health workers. This will reduce the strain on primary care as well as give Canadians better access to the care they need.  We need to invest in mental health human resources so that, as the 2004 Accord points out, the right person gets the right service, at the right time, in the right place and from the right providers.

Finally, we would like to underscore the importance of the Accord’s continued attention to investing in research when it comes to Canada’s mental health. Psychology is a science-based profession and its attention to evidence-base care is a hallmark of practice.  It is critical that we support the full range of biopsychosocial inquiry into mental health issues and interventions upon which people’s health and wellness depends.

We urge you, a member or aspiring member of our national leadership to affirm your commitment to Canada’s health and specifically to fund the research, health human resource and services upon which Canada’s health depends.  We further ask that you address the very significant and short shrifted needs when it comes to Canada’s psychological health and wellbeing.  Invest in the psychological prevention, promotion and treatments critical to Canada’s health.

Sincerely,
Dr Dawn Phillips

Apr 232011
 

Dear Jacki, 

RE:   Where do you stand on improving Canada’s animal protection laws? 

NOTE:   “Tammy” asked the same question;  “Emily” asked a closely-related one.    This reply to you is an elaboration on my replies to them. 

The question of how we treat animals is mainly a question of:

  • Culture and Ethics (Values).

It is also a question of:

  • Our choice of Economic Models (Industrialized food production for example).
  • Obsolete economic indicators.  Any increase in “Gross Domestic Product” (GDP) is used to convince ourselves that we are making “progress”.  GDP does not measure depletion of natural resources.  It is basically a measurement of how fast we are going through resources and filling up our garbage dumps.   The amount of food produced, with no regard to how many animals are slaughtered only to end up in a garbage bin is not calculated.  Nor is the pollution of water supplies.
  • It is also a question of the hold of corporations in Government and in our Universities.  If the Universities were doing their job we would not still be using economic indicators that are taking us down a road to annihilation. 

We need to get at ROOT CAUSES of our inhumanity in relation to animals.   

If a society is healthy, sharing and caring, laws are not needed to tell people what is right and wrong.   But as you point out, we DO need them.  So WHY?  Most people understand without being told that our treatment of animals is not right. 

Part of the answer, VALUES, is at: 

2010-02-25 Understanding why we flounder, help from John Ralston Saul “On Equilibrium”

(Sometimes I have to read Ralston Saul a couple of times before I get what he’s saying.)

We are making decisions based on UTILITARIAN values (making money).  You can go to the link for the helpful elaboration that Ralston Saul offers.  My way of saying approximately the same thing is that we have been brain-washed into thinking that CORPORATE values are OUR values.  They are not. 

If we understand and address root causes like VALUES, we will clear up other problems, too. 

Another part of the answer to “WHY” are we cruel, oddly enough, relates to understanding the HISTORY OF DEMOCRACY.   Democracy with its humanitarian values has been around for more than 2,000 years.  But it comes and goes.   We are FORGETFUL.  The adoption of utilitarian values is a sign that we are moving away from democracy and its values.   Democracy inevitably comes under attack.  Or, maybe it is always that democracy (power is exercised by the people) has to fight to keep its power. 

In the past, people have wrestled power away from a ruling elite of Church and Rulers.   Today democracy (that’s us) in Canada, the U.S. and elsewhere is in a battle to take back power from the ruling elite of large Corporations working with Government.

I hope you see that your battle on behalf of animals is a critical part of the effort to regain democracy (democratic VALUES).  There are many other efforts on many different fronts that will, I believe, take us to a new economy,  one based on “caring and sharing”.  If we don’t make the transition, we will destroy our existence here on Earth.  The Earth and her other creatures will be glad to be rid of us! 

But back to your questions.

I think it is better to make a decision of who to vote for, based on what people have actually DONE.  (I don’t like to say what I “will” do in regard to animal cruelty.  I can tell you what I have done.  And will continue to do.)   You don’t have to be an elected MP to help make things better in the world for all life forms,  as you know – because that is what you are doing.

I sometimes look at the bigger picture.  Our cruelties come in many different forms.

For the human animal we have normalized cancer, disease, developmental problems, still-births, infertility, etc.  They are the consequence of the more and more poisons we put into the environment.  But of course,  other animals now also suffer from cancer, disease, developmental problems, still-births, infertility, etc.   We are poisoning not just ourselves, but other creatures as well.   Things like the Tar Sands and the BP “spill” in the Gulf of Mexico are atrocities committed against aquatic creatures, birds, etc.  Heart-breaking.

We do terrible things to animals directly, too, as you point out. 

Two areas in particular that I have worked in are:  the genetic modification of animals (“enviro-pig”, fish) and intensive livestock operations.  

In my experience,  it is when we combine the efforts of many different people, working in many different areas but all making contributions toward a better world, we make a difference.  I’ve run an activist email network for more than 10 years.  We work together, sharing information. 

Some of the following is repetition, it’s from the email to Tammy: 

My particular area is in trying to understand WHY we do these things that we should not be doing.  From the various “battles” I’ve engaged in, it most often comes down to the fact that corporations and corporate values are running the show, instead of democracy and humanitarian values.  

So I tackle “corporatocracy” whenever the opportunity arises. 

 Until we are able to get back to Government that does its job of regulating the corporations, controlling them, instead of the reverse,  I do not believe that the things you want will be achieved.  The Government is not working for us;  the corporations have the money and the power.   Laws can be enacted – –  in many cases we have the laws,  but they are not enforced. 

The good news:  people are waking up.      

You could visit my blog, www.sandrafinley.ca  – – try the “categories” in the right-hand sidebar.    Our efforts to stop genetically-modified pigs are under “Genetic Modification”.  I appeal to people on a basis that I think will get them mobilized.  And I sometimes try to make light of things that are serious.  To try and maintain sanity! 

Regarding ILO’s (Intensive Livestock Operations),  you could go to:  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=611   Issues are intertwined.  This one is about water, but it’s also about stopping the inhumane treatment of cattle and pigs.  Strategically, it’s easiest to tackle it from the water side.   People who might not respond in the interests of the cattle, will respond if they understand that their water supply is threatened.   You get a win on both fronts.   You can fight to get a law in place;  you can also stop the ILO from ever happening in the first place.  

About 8 years ago, we worked hard to stop the re-zoning of the Great Sand Hills for oil and gas exploration (that battle is not on the blog).  The Great Sand Hills are home to many endangered species.  Preservation of habitat is important.  Again, it was a case of having laws, but you discover that the laws are only as good as the engagement of citizens to challenge the breaking of the laws.  Left to themselves, the Government will let the corporations get away with murder. 

It’s great that you are pitching in!   

In my experience, more and more people are standing up and saying:  we want a different economy and a different way of being in the world.  And we’re making it happen.  It takes a lot of work, but the change has started and it is gaining momentum, I believe. 

Please get back if you have further questions. 

Best wishes, 

——————–

Hello Jill, Shirley and Troy, 

I hope you don’t mind if I respond with the same email I just sent to Jeffery. 

I see patterns and then try to address that larger picture.   Your email about the seal hunt is related to:

  • the email about the sled dogs that were “used” to entertain tourists at the Olympics and then slaughtered when the business fell off after the Olympics
  • the way that cattle and pigs (and chickens) are treated in  intensive livestock operations.

Those are related to my work:

  • to stop the genetic-engineering of animals like pigs and fish
  • some time ago, working to stop the re-zoning of protected habitat for endangered species in the Great Sand Hills of Saskatchewan (being done to accommodate the oil and gas industry)
  • I’ve worked to stop intensive livestock operations, too

 And so on. 

Here’s what I think:

  • We have laws but the laws are often not enforced.   And the Governments today (current Provincial Govt and Federal Govt) are systematically breaking down the protection laws that were created back in the 1970’s.
  •  We are strongest when we are working together.   Your work for the seals makes my hand stronger.  And the work of “Emily” and other people to stop other forms of cruelty to animals adds again to your strength and mine.

 NOW, it’s time to get at the root cause:  WHY are we treating other species the way we do?   Or WHY do we allow it to happen?   If we fight that, maybe we can bring the change that is needed.  

 (I have run an activist email network for more than 10 years.   We have lobbied hard for many things that are very important, that we shouldn’t even have to lobby for, because they are so obviously the right thing to do.   In the end,  we don’t get what is needed,  or it takes many years of battling.  WHY is that?) 

I believe it’s because we have been told that our values are corporate values.  Too many people have accepted that.  We are now at a time of saying, “No.  Those are not our values.  We actually CARE about the Earth and her creatures,  all of them.”   We are not here on Earth to mindlessly consume and make money.  Those are not our two goals in life. 

 I need your email.  It’s more ammunition that I can add to my arsenal.  

I hope you will see that you are working shoulder-to-shoulder  with me, and with Jaimie and Tammy, etc.  We will arrive at a place where our fellow creatures are treated with respect.  We should not need books and books of laws and regulations that don’t get enforced.  If we have a moral code or ethics – – humanitarian VALUES that we uphold – –  a new way of being in the world  – – it seems to me that we will have STRONGER laws (unwritten).  We should be able to make it taboo to treat animals cruelly.  

I say this all the time in my network:  it takes a critical mass of people, joined together, working to create a better world to make the changes.  We don’t have to have EVERY single person,  just a critical mass of determined people.  

We are taking back our power.   Too often, if you petition the Government (in my experience)  you give away your power.   You wait for them and the change doesn’t happen.   This way it WILL happen. 

You may want to look at the “categories” in the right-hand sidebar of my blog, www.sandrafinley.ca

Or specifically,  you may be interested in clicking on:    2011-04-23 The role of values when it comes to governing ourselves. Cruelty to animals a case in point. 

I would also like to extend an invitation to you.  There is a very good chance that the leader of the Green Party of Canada will be elected on May 2.  I know Elizabeth May personally.  She is the reason I got involved in the Green Party.  I have a great deal of respect for her intelligence, integrity and dedication to the best interests of the environment and of everyone.   

I’ll send the invitation in a second email:   Green Party, Making History in North America!  Party Time!!  Monday, May 2  Saskatoon – at The Bassment (Jazz Society). 

If you come, please be sure to introduce yourself! 

Thanks for getting in touch and being a voice for those who don’t speak our language.

/Sandra

= = = = = = = =  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:13 PM
Subject: Where do you stand on improving Canada’s animal protection laws?

Ms. Sandra Finley
Green Party
Saskatoon-Humboldt
Saskatchewan

As a voter in your riding — and someone who counts myself among the 95% of Canadians who think that animal pain and suffering should be reduced as much as possible, even when these animals are raised to be slaughtered (see www.wspa.ca/poll) — I would like to know where you stand when it comes to improving Canada’s animal cruelty laws?

Do you count yourself among the 78% of Canadians who would like to close the loophole requiring that neglect be willful in intent? Or the 84% who would make it a more serious crime to brutally and viciously kill an animal? Would you support Brigadier’s Law creating a new offence for poisoning, injuring or killing a police dog or horse?

Would you commit to modernizing Canada’s three-decades-old regulations governing the humane transport of farm animals? Do you support the campaign for a Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare?

Having reviewed the positions of those political leaders who responded to the animal welfare survey at www.voteforanimals.ca, I would appreciate knowing your personal position on these important national animal welfare issues.

Sincerely,