Sandra Finley

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?   …  No,  the 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,

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?

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

RE: It’s time for a national response to Canada’s dementia crisis  +  MS  + Alzheimers + Parkinson’s + Cancer + autism + developmental problems + autoimmune diseases + …

Dear Renee, 

Thank-you for taking the time to write about the crisis in dementia.   I live not that far from you .   Maybe after the Election we can have a chat over coffee. 

I responded to a number of people whose email is basically the same as yours;  however, their families are afflicted by MS or Alzheimers or . .    

EXCERPT from my response to them:

These diseases and developmental problems are not separate;  they are different manifestations of the same basic problem.  The problem is that we are poisoning ourselves and our children, our water supplies, the food we eat . . .  indeed,  all creatures and all of creation.  The poisons are neuro-toxins, among other things. 

The following draws dementia and alzheimers into the discussion, although it began as a response to the question of MS.   I hope it will be helpful until such time as we might talk further. 

My home town of Luseland, SK  is said to have the highest incidence of MS,  but so are other communities in the province said to have this distinction.  My Father fought a very long battle with Parkinson’s disease,  as did other people from that relatively small community.  Cancer rates are also high in the area.  The care facilities in the nearby town of Kerrobert and elsewhere in the health district have a burgeoning population of people with dementia and alzheimers. 

The high incidence of MS was mentioned in casual conversation with Jennifer Brooke Fox when I was in Humboldt last Monday.  A large family in Luseland whose children went to school with my younger siblings:  all but one developed MS.   A fellow Girl Guide, a year younger than me, developed MS.  A friend at my Halifax workplace when I was in my mid-twenties was diagnosed with MS  –  I believe that was the first I ever heard about MS.  I have friends whose family members have MS.  I believe that I myself may well have had the onset of MS.  Through good fortune I was able to identify and remove a major culprit for me (it’s not the same for everyone amd it’s not just ONE poison). 

Something is wrong with the picture.   We have “normalized” disease and developmental problems when they are not normal at all. 

I have done a fair amount of work in the area of disease and the poisons we are putting into our bodies and into the environment.  (I’ve run an activist email network for more than ten years – when people pool information we all learn much more than any one of us can learn working alone.)

From my blog, www.sandrafinley.ca  “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?   …  No,  the 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.  

The situation SHOULD be simple:  do not put known, unnecessary poisons into the environment or into our bodies.    

We know from fish in the Arctic, for example, that poisons disperse widely in the environment and have lasting toxic effects inside the bodies of beings who live far from the production sites of the poisons.    The cellular life of human beings is basically the same as the cellular life of fish and other species.   What we are doing to them we are doing to ourselves.   

The problematic poisons are most often colourless and odourless.  You most often do not know that you are ingesting the poison.   Chemicals, radioactive wind-borne particles, various heavy metals (mercury, lead, aluminum, etc).  We put poisons directly into our water supplies.   

I tried for four years to get the City to stop using a chemical combo called vaporooter to dissolve tree roots in sewer lines.   In defending its actions,  the City (and I) discovered that for one of the chemical ingredients, there isn’t a laboratory in all of Canada that knows how to test for the presence of that chemical in water.   For the chemical ingredient that they COULD test for,  one test cost $3,000.    So you know how often they are testing for the presence of that (just one) chemical.  Unfortunately, upstream communities like Calgary and Medicine Hat, Riverhurst,  etc.  also decided to use vaporooter instead of good, old-fashioned augering to remove roots in sewer lines. 

We are very stupidly poisoning ourselves.  Some people develop MS, some develop cancer, others dementia, children are autistic (a word I had not heard until I was in my 40’s.  Today, very few people have not heard of autism.) 

  • I told you that I believe I had the onset of MS.   My particular symptoms were, among other things, chronic pins-and-needle sensations in my left upper arm and shoulder and a vertical pain in the left backside of my neck.  I worked for more than a year on it, with no success.  I thought I had a pinched nerve and tried first massage and then chiropractic treatments.  Through serendipity I was reminded of what I had forgotten:  “silver” fillings, also called dental amalgams, are 50% mercury.  Mercury is one of the most toxic elements on the planet.  I had the amalgams removed.   The symptoms of MS are gone and the “brain fog”.   That story and supporting information is at  Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams. 

I had a brief email exchange with Jock Murray from Halifax, a retired doctor who has headed up an MS centre at Dalhousie University.  (click on  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=1110  ). 

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.   

For 50 years the Cancer Societies have been collecting millions and millions of dollars to “find a cure”.   I remember reading a small book in the late 1970’s.   The author documented then:  we KNOW the causes of cancer.  We are not going to find a “cure”.  Remove the CAUSES of the disease.   Unfortunately,  there is a lot of money to be made by the pharmaceutical industry in the “find a cure” approach.    That approach says “it’s okay for you to get the disease.  Because we’re going to find a cure and in the meantime you can take all these pills and treatments.”   It is an extremely inhumane approach, not to mention costly and inane.  

The corporations that are allowed to put their poisons into the environment are not the ones who pay the price.  It is in their interest to find ways to sell and load the environment with MORE poisons.  As with our bodies, the Earth is accumulating a “body-load” of poisons.  They just keep building and building.  But we ARE the Earth – –  more than half of our body is water that keeps recycling through (as it keeps recycling from the sky, through our food crops, into our rivers and lakes, through our bodies and back up into the sky).   If radioactive particles fall in raindrops on our food supply, how do we expect that we will not ingest them?   They are invisible and you can’t smell them.

In order to fight disease, you need to build your immune system.  In many cases the drugs are another assault on the immune system.  They may offer temporary relief.  In time, in many cases, the “side effects” of the drugs become another set of health problems. 

The Green Party of course, works to protect the environment.  “Preventative healthcare” is, to me, almost the same thing.   

It may be a decade ago:  the canvasser for MS came to my door.  I asked her to show me in the brochure what the MS Society was doing for “remove the causes” of MS.   There was nothing.  I told her I would phone the national office and have a discussion, which I did.  The Executive Director at the time told me that they had 20,000 items in their data base.  There was nothing to suggest a link between MS and exposure to chemicals.   I hung up and phoned a data base maintained by a group of doctors in Florida.  They keep track of all the research that is done on chemicals.   I asked them about a possible link between chemicals and MS.  Their answer was:  given A, B, and C (which I have forgotten)  it is definitely PLAUSIBLE that there is a connection.   I sent the information to the MS Society.  Nothing happened.  No research into possible connections between MS and synthetic chemicals.   It is not uncommon to find that the pharmaceutical corporations are hugely influential in disease organizations.   In some cases they own the chemical corporations.   They are both the biotech corporations.

Today, there is a further barrier:  a criterion for funding of health research (and now for most projects) is that the project have the “potential for commercialization”.   But there is no potential for corporate profits in the removal of the causes of disease.   We have lost funding for the public interest. 

We are in a sorry state of affairs.  Hopefully more people are becoming aware.  The incidence of things like autism, MS, childhood cancers, asthma, learning disabilities,  – – the list is long  – –  Good Grief!  Can we not see what we are doing?   These diseases and developmental problems are not separate;  they are different manifestations of the same basic problem.  The problem is that we are poisoning ourselves and our children, our water supplies, the food we eat . . .  indeed,  all creatures and all of creation.   The Earth will be happy when we, as a species, are gone!! 

So what do we do about today?   And the people with MS, Parkinson’s disease, dementia, diabetes, asperger’s syndrome, depression, high blood pressure, prostate cancer, gastro-intestinal problems, auto-immune disease, learning disabilities . . .  ?

Number one we get the corporate interests out of Government, the Universities, and the medi-care system.  

Number two, remove the poisons.   We know that mercury is a neuro toxin.  So you do not put it into human beings, whether in the form of dental amalgams, or as a preservative in vaccinations.  Do not take flu shots.  They contain thimerasol which is mercury.  Research shows (no surprise) that people who have received the flu shot for more than 10 years have an increased incidence of alzheimers   … there’s a whole long list of poisons that need to be eradicated. 

Personally, I believe that disease-support organizations should recognize the extent to which they are connected.   A win for the Lung Association on removing air-borne poisons is a win for the other disease organizations.  (Inhale an invisible radioactive particle.  It will sit in your body continuously emitting.  In time you will develop cancer.  Or it could be diabetes, depending on your individual immune system.)  A win by the parents of autistic children is a win for people with MS and others with cancer or alzhemiers.   As is a win for families and people (like my daughter) who have learning disabilities – – developmental problems caused by the poisons that I can’t escape because they are everywhere.   Worse yet,  no one told me. 

Think of how powerful the force to stop the poisoning would be, if the organizations joined together, if they became a coalition working together.   What if, instead of the MS people getting together by themselves, they had their meetings in conjunction with the other “disease” organizations in Saskatoon?    What if the MS support people went to the planners of the Breast Cancer events and said, “This year, would you consider sending the money to Prevent Cancer NOW?” instead of to whoever it normally goes.     

You may want to check out “Health”, a category you’ll find in the right-hand sidebar of the blog, www.sandrafinley.ca    Also, at the top of the page “Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams.”   

In my experience, it is not elected officials who drive the change (unfortunately).  It is citizens themselves.  

We need to work together.   It is most likely that we are back into an era where our tax dollars will be used for little more than paying down debt (and buying stealth bombers to the tune of $30 billion dollars, more debt).    You may remember that the Mulroney Government ran up the debt to the point where 37 cents out of every tax dollar went to the banks for debt servicing.  Preston Manning created the single-issue Reform Party to challenge Government debt.  Paul Martin’s Government cut social programmes, we spent years paying off debt, to the point where 14 cents out of every tax dollar was spent on debt servicing.  Not bad!   BUT in the last three years, the Harper Government has out-done Mulroney.  They racked up the highest-ever deficit.  Three years of deficits and we now have more than $110 billion dollars of debt to re-pay.   Brad Wall is doing the same thing in Saskatchewan as his predecessor, Grant Devine, did:  driving up the debt.  It makes me furious.  We will be back in a place provincially (as well as federally) where a third of our tax dollars go to debt servicing.

The Parties will tell you the wonderful things they will do for you.  No – we are back into an era where the banks will pay great dividends to the wealthy and to their CEO’s, because of the public debt.   Especially with the $6 billion in tax-cuts to corporations if the Conservatives have their way.  It is quite frustrating. 

HOWEVER!  Hopefully, your lobby joined with other lobbies joined to efforts by the Green Party will secure programmes that provide care and assistance.  These are exciting times with more and more people mobilizing to create a new economy based on caring and sharing, for the Earth and for others.   The Green Party has well-thought out policies to help with caregiver supports and income security.  This email will be too long if I go into that, too!   Please refer to  http://greenparty.ca/issues/vision-green . 

I fully support your work.  I hope that the on-going efforts of my network are a contribution –  www.sandrafinley.ca  is a continuing record of those “battles”.  

When you weave together the accumulated information,  I think it is most likely that the escalation in dementia is due to the neuro toxins (poisons) we are receiving, not only through the environment, but through direct input into our bodies.  Exactly the same situation as with MS.  And, as I say,  if people don’t get dementia, they get Alzheimers or other ailments.

The pharmaceutical companies are putting ingredients like mercury (in the form of thimerasol) and aluminum (another heavy metal) into vaccinations.  Research shows that people who have taken the flu shot for more than 10 years have an increased incidence of alzheimers.   Repeated injections of mercury – what do you expect?   The situation is made worse by the mercury in dental amalgams (“silver” fillings)  – a slow, small, but continuous release of mercury into the body.  Countries in Europe have banned dental amalgams.   In my experience (and I have worked on many issues)  lobbying the Government is often ineffective because the corporate interests, the interests in making money, are too great.    

If it is okay with you, I will be back in touch with you.   The timing is now – – I believe we have the building blocks in place to mount a coordinated effort at the University to work with the toxicologists and medical people to start dealing with the situation so we can stop the creation of all these diseases and developmental problems.  We have created an industry based on making people tragically sick. 

It is really ONE dis-ease  with many different manifestations,  all caused by the numerous poisons we are putting into the environment and directly into our bodies.   

In solidarity,

Happy Easter,

It is indeed a time of re-birth, of excitement – – a new way of seeing ourselves in the World. 

Sandra Finley

= = = = = = = = = ==

Dear Debra,

Earlier in April I responded to a few people regarding dementia.  And then people with a family member who suffers from MS.  Then came the families of people with Alzheimers. 

 I have run an activist email network for more than ten years, working at different times on different poisons and their impacts on health. 

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”.

I hope you will read the documentation I sent earlier to others.  Please click on:  2011-04-23 ONE disease, different manifestations. Proposal: “Disease” organizations form a coalition to stop the poisons. 

 Today, I sent an update, as follows:

Each of you contacted me concerning disease.   It was very helpful.  I am able to make stronger and stronger arguments to say 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.

 I was at a meeting in the village of St Denis on the east side of Saskatoon.   In the conversation following, women there spontaneously voiced their concerns about the amount of disease in the community.   It may have been prompted by the fact that many people were absent because they were attending prayers for a woman who had died very suddenly from leukemia.  She was 62 years old.

Sherbrooke Community Centre yesterday  was an opportunity to introduce the idea that many different diseases and developmental problems are the manifestation of one thing:  slow poisoning from a variety of sources.  Before I left Sherbrooke it was arranged that I will be back in touch with Administrators to work out their participation in a project.  I think we can create a fairly powerful force for change.  

The Green Party has very solid, well-thought out plans in aid of care-givers and people who are afflicted.   It makes it easy for me to be a representative of the Green Party. 

A large part of our health policy has always been PREVENTION.   Personally,  I think it is terribly inhumane to say, “It’s okay for you to get the disease.  We’ll treat you and search for a cure.”  After 40 and more years of promising to “find a cure” for cancer,  we need to understand:  we know the CAUSES and we have to remove them.  That is the only way that the disease trend-lines can be reversed. 

Families and individuals bear heavy loads because of the diseases and developmental problems.  I know because of my Father’s long years of dealing with Parkinson’s disease.  If people could just understand:  there isn’t a SINGLE cause, it’s a matter of cumulative impacts on immune systems – –  but that’s said in

I will keep you posted on developments.   In the meantime,  I would like to invite you to join us on Monday evening, 8:00 pm for a celebration.  

There is a very good chance that Elizabeth May will be elected.  I 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.

But back to lighter fare:  Please consider coming to the celebration.

 Best wishes,

/Sandra

——————-
Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:52 PM
Subject: Better caregiver supports, income security and research benefit people with MS

Ms. Sandra Finley
Green Party Saskatoon-Humboldt
Saskatchewan

I am writing to ask you to support issues that are of real importance to people affected by multiple sclerosis (MS). MS is an often disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord.  Unfortunately, Canada has one of the highest rates of MS in the world, with an estimated 55,000 to 75,000 people living with the disease across the country.

People with MS need your commitment right now.

– People with MS need answers. It’s time to set aside funds for a clinical trial of the CCSVI procedure. Earmarking funds ensures there won’t be a delay, if and when the scientific evidence shows a clinical trial should proceed.

– Caregivers need support. It’s time to help family caregivers by providing a range of supports including tax credits and benefits and other programs to ease the daily load for all caregivers.

– People with MS need secure incomes. It’s time to ensure people with MS have the incomes they need. This means making Employment Insurance sickness benefits more flexible so people can work part-time and receive partial benefits. It also means making the disability tax credit refundable – to actually put money in people’s pockets.

– All people with brain conditions need a national brain strategy. Regardless of diagnosis, people living with brain conditions share similar needs and challenges. It’s time for a national brain strategy to accelerate research and improve the quality of life for millions of Canadians.

Multiple sclerosis has a profound impact on the ability to earn a living.  Most people with MS are diagnosed between the ages of 15 and 40, just when they are finishing school, starting careers and beginning families.  MS progresses in unpredictable ways. For many people, unexpected periods of worsening are followed by equally unpredictable periods of improvement – and then more worsening. This takes a devastating toll on people with MS and their families.

I urge you to support these issues to help people with MS and their families. It would be great if you would become a champion during this campaign – and in Parliament if you are elected. I will look forward to hearing how you will support action on MS.

Yours sincerely,

——————–
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:10 PM
Subject: It’s time for a national response to Canada’s dementia crisis.

Ms. Sandra Finley
Green Party Saskatoon-Humboldt
Saskatchewan

Dear Ms. Finley,

During this election campaign, Canadians are looking to elect politicians who will provide leadership on the most important health issue facing Canada. Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias impact over half a million Canadians and more than 100,000 new dementia cases are diagnosed each year. According to Rising Tide: The Impact of Dementia on Canadian Society published by the Alzheimer Society of Canada last year, the economic burden of dementia in Canada is $15 billion a year; without a plan to address this crisis, costs will spike to $37 billion by 2018.

On behalf of the millions of family carers, physicians and those with dementia, I am asking you to answer three questions during this campaign. Your party’s leaders are being asked the same questions.

————–
Question 1
————–
Canada lags behind our international partners in the development of a national brain strategy to address the growing dementia crisis. Australia, S. Korea, UK and other Countries in Europe already have plans in place; we need leadership at the national level.
If your party forms the next government would you commit to meeting the needs of the 500,000 Canadians with dementia with a national brain strategy within the first 90 days of the next parliament?

————–
Question 2
————–
In 2008, Canadian families and friends spent approximately 231 million hours providing care for people with dementia. This number is expected to more than triple by 2038, reaching 756 million hours. The financial and social burden on informal caregivers will be unsustainable.
If your party forms the next government would you commit to a comprehensive and universal package of support programs for family caregivers during the next session of parliament?

————–
Question 3
————–
Budget 2011 contained important measures for dementia research, caregiver support, and improved health care delivery.  Despite promising recent leads, the causes of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias remain unknown and there are no effective treatments.  Canadian researchers rank among the best in the world, but they need more funding to follow the many clues that will lead us to the breakthroughs we will need to conquer this disease.

If your party forms the next government would you support these investments and commit to the $100 Million contained in the Budget for brain disease research as a first step towards a comprehensive permanent federal research program?

Today, Canada has no strategy or plan to address the dementia crisis we face, and our commitment to address it pales in comparison to other G20 countries.  Our study, Rising Tide: The Impact of Dementia on Canadian Society was released in 2010, and provided evidence for the enormous and rapidly escalating health, economic and social impact of this devastating disease.  We have been told by politicians that there is no appetite for another national health-related strategy. Yet national strategies have been developed for a long list of other health issues, many of which have far less impact on the health of Canadians than neurological conditions.

We know that a rising tide of dementia is coming; the need for a national brain strategy has never been more apparent and more urgent than now.

Sincerely,

Apr 222011
 

Background 

The Fukushima disaster has resulted in a sharp decline in the prospects for nuclear power around the world and a corresponding sharp drop in share prices.  On the assumption that this “bad PR” is merely temporary the following article urges investors to “buy into uranium” now while the price is low so as to garner high returns on their investments later. 

Now is the time for concerned citizens around the world to speak out loudly and clearly with words and actions to ensure that the uranium market does not rebound!  

Gordon Edwards.

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

(Click on the link in order to see the graphs.)

The Nuclear Renaissance Lives

Don’t Buy the Hype, Buy Uranium

By Luke Burgess
Friday, April 22nd, 2011 http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/nuclear-renaissance-uranium-buy/1499  

Leaking radioactive material from the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant has poisoned the entire global uranium market.

Every nuclear- and uranium-related asset on the market has suffered drastic devaluations.

The price of uranium oxide (U3O8) — the most commonly-traded physical form of the nuclear fuel — fell some 32% from $74 to nearly $50/pound in the spot market immediately following Tōhoku earthquake.

Since that time, however, uranium prices have recovered a little bit. But the price of U3O8 remains 24% lower than it was right before the Fukushima disaster.

Uranium stocks have fared no better.

Companies involved in all aspects of the uranium industry — from exploration to production and processing — have also suffered serious market losses. In the past six weeks alone:

  • Cameco (NYSE: CCJ) has fallen 37%
  • Denison Mines (AMEX: DNN) is down 44%
  • Uranerz Energy (AMEX: URZ) dropped 36%
  • Uranium One (TSX: UUU) has lost 39%
  • USEC (NYSE: USU) is off 33%
  • Uranium Resources (NASDAQ: URRE) has slumped 38%
  • Ur-Energy (AMEX: URG) fell 42%

For a broader look, the Global X Uranium ETF (NYSE: URA) — which tracks 23 of the largest uranium companies — plummeted 31% on the day of the earthquake and is still some 28% below pre-crisis levels.

 Fearful investors have hurried to sell off their uranium assets, fearing the Fukushima disaster will force governments to tighten industry restrictions or worse, abandon their pursuit of nuclear power as an alternative energy source all together.

But the knee-jerk reaction in the uranium market has been grossly overdone.

You see, uranium has only been a publicly-traded commodity for only a few years…

In May 2007, the NYMEX began trading uranium futures in monthly contracts. This introduced a much higher degree of speculation into the uranium market as trading became available to investors outside of the mining industry.

And it was these very emotional speculators who oversold the uranium market following the Fukushima disaster.

But it’s only a matter of time until investors snap back to reality and the uranium market begins to rapidly recover.

It’s at this point that investors recognize the truth: The Fukushima disaster does not fundamentally alter the global demand for uranium oxide.

The Energy Bull You Don’t Want to Want to Miss

Our analysts have traveled the world over, dedicated to finding the best and most profitable investments in the global energy markets. All you have to do to join our Energy and Capital investment community is sign up for the newsletter below. You’ll also get our free report, Oil Outlook: Investing in 2011 by our resident energy expert, Keith Kohl.

The Nuclear Renaissance Will Continue to Power Forward

There are still over 440 nuclear power plants around the world that will continue demanding the energy fuel. Each year, these plants require approximately 79,000 tonnes of U3O8; but current mine production is only able to supply 60,000 tonnes of U3O8 annually.

The near 20,000-tonne supply deficit has been covered by secondary sources, including stockpiled uranium held by governments and utilities. But it’s well-known that many civil uranium stockpiles — including those from the once-massive stockpiles of ex-Soviet warheads — have been largely depleted.

And with over 50 new nuclear power plants under construction right now (and 200 more planned in spite of the Fukushima disaster), global demand for uranium will soon begin to greatly exceed available supplies.

There’s no doubt in my mind that nuclear industry will soon rapidly recover.

You know as well as I do that people have very short memories. Call to mind the following recent examples:

  • Massey Energy (NYSE: MEE) didn’t stop mining coal after a massive explosion killed 29 miners at the company’s Upper Big Branch in April 2010.
  • Chile only briefly halted mine production following a cave-in that left 33 miners trapped 2,000 feet vertically underground at the Copiapo copper/gold mine in August.
  • British Petroleum (NYSE: BP) didn’t stop producing oil from the Gulf of Mexico after the oil spill last summer.

And those are just recent examples that are specific to natural resource industry. The Fukushima disaster is the same sort of situation.

Global nuclear energy interests will spearhead cleanup efforts in Japan and continue to promote new technologies. Governments will mandate new safety inspections, and they’ll write laws to include more frequent safety reviews and stricter standards for new nuclear power plants.

These moves should help alleviate most of the mainstream fears and quiet any loud, uninformed voices…

Then the industry can go back to business as usual.

China has already announced it will resume nuclear plans in just a few months. Here’s the latest from MarketWatch:

China’s Nuclear Plans Could Resume by Summer
April 22, 2011
By Chris OliverHONG KONG (MarketWatch) — China’s plan to build more nuclear power stations to meet the nation’s growing energy needs could soon be back on track after a safety review is set to completed this summer, according to a mainland news report Friday.

The central government will assess the report and decide if safety improvements are needed, though Chinese experts believe Beijing will resume its nuclear-power ambitions, perhaps with some minor changes, the China Daily reported.

The report cited former industry regulator and Nuclear Power Technology Corp’s senior official Lin Chengge as saying the pace and scale of China’s building will be adjusted, but dramatic changes are unlikely.

The Chinese government has laid plans to increase the country’s nuclear capacity from the current 10 gigawatts (GwE) to 80 GwE in the next nine years. And the country is clearly moving its nuclear sector forward as it needs to, despite the Fukushima disaster.

Besides, it’s foolish to think that other world governments, major financial institutions, and corporations (all of which have billions tied up in the nuclear industry) are not going to let the nuclear sector fall without a decent fight…

There’s just too much money at stake.

The Diagnosis is Worse than the Ailment

There’s no doubt that the radiation leaking from Fukushima has created serious risks.

But the hard truth is, there is no current form of energy production that is without risk: Mining for coal is dangerous, oil rigs and pipelines can explode, and hydroelectric dams can be breached.

In the end, the market’s overreaction to the Fukushima disaster may be worse than the accident itself if it delays the nuclear renaissance.

With all the wars, uprisings, and general violence in the region, the need to reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil has never been greater. With oil prices rising past $120 and $130 per barrel, uranium investments will once again be seen as a hedge against the Middle East…

And today’s investors will be rewarded from a power rebound in the market as the majority of the heavy selling seems to be drying up.

Remember, it’s still expected there will be some 700 nuclear reactors operating worldwide within the next few years. These reactors will nearly double the demand for global uranium supplies.

If you can think ahead a bit, it’s not difficult to see how panic in the uranium market right now is making for an incredible buying opportunity.

Fear has created a frenzy in the uranium market; we’ve seen investors irrationally sell off their assets without considering market fundamentals or intrinsic value. And everything we know from history tells us that the market will eventually recover to come back stronger than ever.

It’s a no-brainer. And all investors need to do now is step up to the plate and take a swing at a slow, easy pitch.

Right this very second, the uranium market is panicking. As you know, uranium companies have seen their market valuations nearly cut in half!

There’s still a lot of fear sloshing around in the market. But this sell-off has naturally created an unprecedented opportunity for us as investors.

That’s why for the past three weeks, I’ve been scrambling to put together a new report…

My #1 Uranium Stock for 2011

A veteran geologist recently told me about a rapidly developing uranium district in Argentina’s Rio Negro Province, where property was being snapped up by major names in the mining industry.

Experts recently discovered this region is geologically similar to other regions known to host world-class uranium deposits. That means there could be billions of dollars in untapped uranium reserves waiting to be discovered…

And since the whole story has been kept such a secret, a small handful of companies have staked most of the prime exploration land.

In fact one small exploration company was able to get its hands on a massive 1.2 million acres of prime uranium property. This 25-cent stock was worth over $1.00 before the Fukushima disaster; once the fanaticism dies down, I expect share prices to strongly rebound.

That’s why, for the past three weeks, I’ve raced to put together a new video report that details this small uranium exploration company. In this video, I give you the whole story — including more details on the Argentinean uranium region and exactly why I’m so excited about this opportunity.

The tragedy in Japan and subsequent fear in the market have presented us with an incredible opportunity to take a position in the uranium market.

The Wall Street investment houses and financial institutions are still under pressure not to own uranium assets; but growth prospects for nuclear power continue to remain strong, as do the prospects for its yellow cake fuel.

The uranium market will survive the Fukushima catastrophe. And once the fear and emotion settle down, I expect uranium prices to rebound from their current lows to their pre-Japan crisis highs of over $70 per pound.

Sooner or later, the money that was taken out of uranium stocks will be put back in.

And that makes right now one of the single best times to invest in uranium.

There are plenty of great opportunities in the market now for investors to buy uranium stocks. But some are better than others…

Be sure to check out my #1 uranium stock of 2011.

Good Investing,

 Luke Burgess
Editor, Wealth Daily
Investment Director, Hard Money Millionaire and Underground Profits

Apr 222011
 

My stomach quakes.  Read the last three paragraphs of this article.  It’s a description of what Lockheed Martin and Boeing are doing in Saskatoon.   As soon as the Election is over, this needs to be tackled.  It’s bloody scary.  And I don’t scare easily. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/campaign-contributions-defense-spending_b_852708.html

John W. Whitehead

Attorney and author

The Drone-ification of America
Posted: 04/22/11 03:49 PM ET

 “Although it is hard to predict where the drone infrastructure will grow, if other defense contracting projects are a reliable guide, the drone-ification of America will probably continue until there is a drone aerodrome in every state and a drone degree program to go with it.”–Richard Wheeler, Wired (Feb. 28, 2011)

The U.S. government has a history of commandeering military technology for use against Americans. We saw this happen with tear gas, tasers and sound cannons, all of which were first used on the battlefield before being deployed against civilians at home. Now the drones — pilotless, remote controlled aircraft that have been used extensively in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan (at least 600 civilians have been killed in drone attacks in Pakistan since the United States started targeting insurgents in that country) and were most recently approved by President Obama for use in Libya — are coming home to roost (and fly) in domestic airspace.

As USA Today reports:

Police agencies around the USA soon could have a new tool in their crime-fighting arsenal: unmanned aircraft inspired by the success of such drones on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. Local governments have been pressing the Federal Aviation Administration for wider use of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs — a demand driven largely by returning veterans who observed the crafts’ effectiveness in war, according to experts at New Mexico State University and Auburn University. Police could use the smaller planes to find lost children, hunt illegal marijuana crops and ease traffic jams in evacuations of cities before hurricanes or other natural disasters.

Attached as an amendment to the “Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Act” (S.223), the legislation allowing drones to fly in general American airspace has already cleared Congress, thanks to support from military contractors and a lack of opposition from those who should know better — including an American populace preoccupied with rising gas prices, a dismal economy and endless wars abroad. The only thing lacking is Obama’s final stamp of approval, which is expected at any moment.

Of course, there’s been a lot of predictable political chatter about how the introduction of drones equipped with weapons and surveillance devices into general airspace will help with national security and in the domestic fight against terrorism. 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 and yet was expected by many anti-war protesters to rein in George Bush’s run-away war machine, has marched in lockstep with the war hawks, essentially maintaining the status quo in the war in Iraq, ramping up the war in Afghanistan, and interjecting America into the conflict in Libya. And in fact, Obama’s 2012 military budget provides strong funding for drones with intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, with $4.8 billion set aside just “to develop and procure additional Global Hawk Class (RQ-4), Predator Class (MQ 1/9) and other less expensive, low-altitude systems.”

The practical impact of these drones, which can range in size from 15 ounces to 34,000 pounds with a wing span bigger than a Boeing 737, will be felt by all members of society, regardless of how law-abiding one might be. Certainly these unmanned vehicles could be used for legitimate purposes, such as search-and-rescue missions, etc., but living as we do already in a semi-surveillance state with our constitutional rights in peril at every turn, these drones, which can be armed with surveillance devices, as well as weapons, are yet another building block in a total control society.

Drones have already been used in a limited capacity domestically to patrol the border between the U.S. and Mexico and at peaceful political rallies to intimidate and track protesters. However, researchers at Auburn University, charged with studying the risks associated with unmanned aircraft, predict that drones will be used by police departments in 5-10 years.

Unfortunately, drones are not foolproof gadgets. In fact, they have a history of malfunctioning in mid-air. As David Zucchino reported in the Los Angeles Times, “The U.S. military often portrays its drone aircraft as high-tech marvels that can be operated seamlessly from thousands of miles away. But Pentagon accident reports reveal that the pilotless aircraft suffer from frequent system failures, computer glitches and human error.” For example, the first drone sent to the Texas-Mexico border in the summer of 2010 experienced a communications failure which led to “pilot deviation.” UAVs had to be temporarily grounded while technicians received more training. Fortunately, no one was hurt.

The U.S. military was on the verge of launching fighter jets and even entertained ideas about a possible shoot-down when an errant Navy drone veered into restricted airspace near Washington, DC, in August 2010. The incident only served to reinforce concerns about drones let loose in American skies. “Do you let it fly over the national capital region? Let it run out of gas and hopefully crash in a farmer’s field? Or do you take action and shoot it down?” said Navy Adm. James Winnefeld Jr., head of Northern Command. “You don’t want to shoot it down over a populated area if you can avoid it.” Even so, Winnefeld is pushing to get more drones into the air, citing the need for a slower and lighter aircraft that could be used to monitor events such as outdoor sports games, political conventions or inaugural activities.

Apart from the safety concerns, of which there are many, the widespread use of drones domestically also poses certain security and privacy risks. As one blogger notes, “One has to wonder if the cost of these high tech machines would be balanced by their potentially limited uses or if departments would be forced to expand the uses in order to even employ the drones. Like SWAT battering rams and armored vehicles, would departments feel compelled to use the drones more often than necessary simply to justify their cost?”

There’s also the problem of drones being hacked into and potentially hijacked. After all, it’s happened before. In 2009, it was discovered that Shiite insurgents had hacked into Predator drones with a software program that cost only $26 and gained access to video footage shot by the spy planes. One can only imagine what a technically proficient hacker in America might be able to do with the wealth of information he could potentially take from these drones, not to mention what a terrorist could do with a fully-armed, remote-controlled airplane. If there’s one thing you can be sure of, it’s that these drones will be equipped with weapons. In fact, the Pentagon actually wants some drones to be able to carry nuclear weapons. The destruction brought about by a mid-air collision or sudden communications failure with a drone carrying weapons would be devastating.

This is not a problem that’s going to go away quickly or quietly. Indeed, the government is making sure that drones will be around for some time to come. As Wired magazine points out:

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.

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.

Apr 212011
 

I was elected to the Senate of the University of Saskatchewan last year.  The April meeting of Senate is today.

Will you tell me what you think? . . .

I have thought that people in public institutions would automatically declare a conflict-of-interest and step down from any task that might be perceived to be a conflict-of-interest.

CONTENTS

1.  NANCY HOPKINS IS THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN.  SHE IS A LAWYER.

2.  NANCY HOPKINS IS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CAMECO (DIRECTOR SINCE 1992)

3.  NANCY HOPKINS, Cameco shares and options: $1,843,273 in 2009;   $1,001,871 in 2008

4.  NANCY HOPKINS CHAIRS THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY

5.  GRANT ISAACS, FORMER DEAN OF THE COLLEGE OF COMMERCE,  NOW SENIOR VICE-PRESIDENT OF CAMECO.  CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF U?

6.  RICHARD FLORIZONE, VICE-PRESIDENT OF FINANCE U OF S, CHAIRED THE INDUSTRY-STACKED “URANIUM DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP” FOR THE BRAD WALL GOVERNMENT. LIED TO THE PEOPLE OF SASKATCHEWAN THAT ACID RAIN IS NO LONGER A PROBLEM WHEN NORTHERN SASKATCHEWAN IS DYING FROM ACID RAIN FROM TAR SANDS DEVELOPMENT.  CAMECO PLAZA AT THE UNIVERSITY.  “SMALL” REACTORS FOR TAR SANDS.  FLORIZONE ,  CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF U?

7.  GEORGE IVANY, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE U OF S, ON CAMECO BOARD OF DIRECTORS

8.  THE GOVERNMENT GIVES $30 MILLION TO THE U OF S, EAR-MARKED FOR THE NUKE INDUSTRY

9.  ON-CAMPUS NEWS, MARCH 17, 2011 SAYS FUNDING IS NOW $47 MILLION

10. PRESIDENT’S REPORT TO SENATE APRIL 16, (PAGE 16 OF MEETING MATERIAL) “Govt of Sask .. will provide $30 million …”

11. TAR SANDS DEVELOPMENT NEEDS VAST AMOUNTS OF ELECTRICITY, NUKE WOULD BE NICE FOR CAMECO AND FOR NEXEN, SUNCOR, ETC.  TAKE A LOOK AT WHO IS ON CAMECO’S BOARD

12. THE PEOPLE OF SASKATCHEWAN SAID “NO” TO NUKE. THE UNIVERSITY IS THE BACK-DOOR FOR FUNDING THE INDUSTRY.

13. FUKISHIMA REACTORS IN JAPAN, A DISASTER.  WHO MADE THE MONEY AND WHO PAYS THE COSTS?

14. SO LET’S SEE. IF THE WORLD SAYS “NO” TO NUCLEAR, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE VALUE OF NANCY HOPKINS’ $1.8 MILLION DOLLARS (AT DEC 2009) WORTH OF CAMECO STOCKS AND OPTIONS? GOVERNMENT MONEY SENT TO THE UNIVERSITY IS GOOD FOR CAMECO, AND FOR NANCY. MOVE THE “SMALL” REACTORS THROUGH FOR TAR SANDS DEVELOPMENT. CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST?  ACCEPTABLE? WHAT DO YOU THINK?

15. IF THIS IS WHAT I FOUND IN 20 MINUTES, I WONDER WHAT I’D FIND IN A FEW DAYS OF FOLLOWING THE MONEY?

16. THE PEOPLE OF SASKATCHEWAN BUILT THE UNIVERSITY, THEY OWN IT. IT IS VALUABLE. IT IS UP TO US TO PROTECT OUR INVESTMENT.  NANCY HOPKINS SHOULD NOT BE THE CHAIR OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT.  IN FACT, I DON’T THINK THE UNIVERSITY IS IN A POSITION TO MAKE THE SELECTION. IF ANYONE SHOULD KNOW CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST, AND REFUSE TO BE PART OF IT, THEY SHOULD.

(There is info in this that needs to be available on-line, before I have finished it. Apologies for sending it incomplete. Wish us well at Senate Meeting!)

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — –  – —

1.  NANCY HOPKINS IS THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN.  SHE IS A LAWYER.

http://www.usask.ca/university_secretary/board/board_members.php

Ms. Nancy E. Hopkins ( Chair )

A BComm graduate of the university in 1977 and a law graduate in 1978, Nancy Hopkins has been cited in the Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory as a leading practitioner in her field. A partner in the firm of McDougall Gauley LLP, Hopkins currently serves on various boards throughout the city and province. Her previous volunteer work includes president of the Saskatchewan Legal Education Society and chair of the Saskatchewan Police Commission. Hopkins has received various honours for her contributions to the community and her profession, including being named one of Saskatchewan’s Women of Influence by Saskatchewan Business magazine in 2004. She has lectured in the Canadian Bar Admissions Course and at the U of S, where she taught wills and corporate planning. Hopkins was appointed to the board in 2005 and elected as chair in 2010.  She presides over the board meetings and acts as the public spokesperson.  She also serves on the governance and executive and the human resources committees.

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — –  – —

2.  NANCY HOPKINS IS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CAMECO (DIRECTOR SINCE 1992)

http://www.cameco.com/responsibility/governance/board_of_directors/nancy_hopkins/

Nancy E. Hopkins

Saskatoon,

Saskatchewan, Canada

Director Since: 1992

Nancy E. Hopkins, Q.C. is a partner with the law firm of McDougall Gauley, LLP in Saskatoon, where she concentrates her practice on corporate and commercial law and taxation. In addition to the public company boards listed below, Ms. Hopkins is vice-chair (Now Chair), of the board of governors of the University of Saskatchewan, chair of the board of the Saskatoon Airport Authority and serves as a director of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. Except for the public companies listed below, she has not served on any other public company boards over the past five years.

Ms. Hopkins has a bachelor of commerce degree and a bachelor of laws degree from the University of Saskatchewan. She is an honourary member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Saskatchewan.  …

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — –  – —

3.  NANCY HOPKINS, Cameco shares, DSUs and options: $1,843,273 in 2009, $1,001,871 in 2008

Securities & Options Held Table

Total amount of equity at risk (Cameco shares, DSUs and options): $1,843,273 in 2009, $1,001,871 in 2008

“DSUs” refers to deferred share units under Cameco’s DSU plan for Directors.

4. The total value of Cameco shares and DSUs was calculated as follows: for 2007, based on $39.57, the 2007 year-end closing price of a Cameco share on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX); and for 2006, based on $47.20, the 2006 year-end closing price of a Cameco share on the TSX.

9. The Board of Directors has determined that Joe F. Colvin is independent as three years have passed since the end of Mr. Colvin’s term as President and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute. Gerald W. Grandey, Cameco’s President and CEO, was a member of the Nuclear Energy Institute’s executive and compensation committees during the last ten months of Mr. Colvin’s term.

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — –  – —

4.  NANCY HOPKINS, CHAIRS THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY

Excerpt from email from University Secretary (full text follows):

Nominations for the candidacy for the position may be submitted to Ms. Nancy Hopkins, Chair, Board of Governors and Chair, Search Committee for the President.

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — — —

Here is the exchange (I emailed the University Secretary to find out the process for selection of the next President of the University).

Tue 3/15/2011 8:26 AM

RE: University:  Search for New President to replace Peter Mackinnon

Thank you, Sandra, for your questions regarding the process for the search for a new president.  There will be an opportunity to discuss the selection of the Senate member to serve on the presidential search committee at the April 16th Senate meeting, as presented by Bev Dubois, chair of the Senate Nominations Committee.  My responses regarding the process and Senate’s involvement are found below.  Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions regarding this very important task.

Regards,

Sandy Calver

Acting University Secretary

Questions:

1.     Does the appended memo on the selection process for senior administrators apply to the search for a new president?

Yes, the newly approved search and review procedures approved March 4, 2011, by the Board of Governors will apply to the presidential search; the new procedures can be found at:  http://www.usask.ca/university_secretary/policies/search_proc.php.  The principles and associated procedures can be found beginning on page 29 of the joint committee report.

2.     If so, does the current president play the same role in the selection of his successor?

The current president is not involved in the search for his successor, search committees report to the Board of Governors through the president, except the search committee for the president, which reports directly to the Board.

3.     The Search Committee includes “ …   and, typically, a Senate representative”.    What is the process for selecting the Senate representative?

Under the new procedures, the Senate Nominations Committee selects the Senate member to serve on the presidential search committee.  The Senate Nominations Committee met recently and determined that expressions of interest from Senators willing to serve on the search committee be requested at the April 16th Senate meeting, to be considered subsequently by the Senate Nominations Committee.

4.     Saskatchewanians will possibly have people who they think would be good candidates for the position of President of the University of Saskatchewan.  What does the University recommend as the best avenue through which people of the Province can input their recommendations to the selection process?

Nominations for the candidacy for the position may be submitted to Ms. Nancy Hopkins, Chair, Board of Governors and Chair, Search Committee for the President.

5.     I presume that the process has a time-line with deadlines.  What is the time-line?

The search committee is to be constituted by July; following the search committee will determine its own timelines within the framework of the search and review procedures, with a view to making an appointment by July 1, 2012.

6.     In the interests of transparency,  I as a Senator, will appreciate being informed as the administrators of the process become known.

Regular updates on the process and progress towards appointing a new president will be communicated to the university’s governing bodies and stakeholders.  In addition, broad consultation regarding the accountabilities for the position as stated in the search and review procedures, as follows:  “For a Presidential Search, the committee will provide the opportunity for interested members of the University community to provide written comments on the strategic goals and objectives of the University, and on the progress made or problems encountered in achieving those goals and objectives” (no. 9, pg. 35).

________________________________________

From: McBain, Norma

Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 11:27 AM

To: Sandra Finley

Cc: Calver, Sandra

Subject: RE: University:  Search for New President to replace Peter Mackinnon

Ms. Finley,

By copy of this e-mail I am forwarding your message to the Acting University Secretary, Sandra Calver for reply.

From: Sandra Finley      Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 10:52 AM

To: McBain, Norma

Subject: University: Search for New President to replace Peter Mackinnon

TO:  Norma McBain

Office of the University Secretary

University of Saskatchewan

Phone:  (306) 966  4635

Fax:  (306) 966  4530   norma.mcbain   AT   usask.ca

Dear Norma,

RE:   Process for selection of the new President for the University, Peter Mackinnon’s memo, Jan 28, 2011

Do you mind forwarding this to the appropriate person for response?    The questions arise out of my role as a University Senator.  I understand that I am to help represent the voice of the citizens of Saskatchewan in the governance of the University.

Questions:

1.     Does the appended memo on the selection process for senior administrators apply to the search for a new president?

2.     If so, does the current president play the same role in the selection of his successor?

3.     The Search Committee includes “ …   and, typically, a Senate representative”.    What is the process for selecting the Senate representative?

4.     Saskatchewanians will possibly have people who they think would be good candidates for the position of President of the University of Saskatchewan.  What does the University recommend as the best avenue through which people of the Province can input their recommendations to the selection process?

5.     I presume that the process has a time-line with deadlines.  What is the time-line?

6.     In the interests of transparency,  I as a Senator, will appreciate being informed as the administrators of the process become known.

Thanks!

Sandra Finley

 

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

http://www.usask.ca/president/news_and_events/news_items/Clarification-and-Update-on-Search-Processes.php

MEMO

TO: President’s Advisory Council, all faculty, USSU President, GSA President

FROM: Peter MacKinnon, President and Brett Fairbairn, Provost and Vice-President Academic

SUBJECT: Clarification and Update on Search Processes

DATE: January 28, 2011

Colleagues,

We write to acquaint you with the university’s current selection processes for deans and other senior administrators–a topic widely discussed on our campus in recent weeks and months. As of late, search processes in general have been a topic of media stories, most notably regarding two searches, where misleading and inaccurate statements have been made.

Just yesterday, University Council concluded its discussion of our university’s senior search and review procedures. This topic has been the subject of more than a year of careful and thoughtful work by a joint board-council committee.

The report of the Joint Committee on the Review of the Search and Review Procedures for Senior Administrators confirms that our practices are appropriate for an institution of our kind in the 21st century. The committee has brought forward changes of a housekeeping nature together with some updates, modifications and clarifications. Perhaps most significantly, the committee has developed clear statements for our university that also detail the principles underlying our search and review processes. The committee’s work will no doubt be helpful to future committees, their members, the provost, president and Board of Governors. Now that University Council discussions on search processes have concluded, the report will next be presented to the Board of Governors for review at their March meeting, with a view to a final decision.

You are encouraged to view the committee report, which can be found online in the University Council agenda for Jan. 27, page 106: http://www.usask.ca/university_secretary/council/Council%20Meetings/agenda_archives/2011_Jan_CouncilAgendaFinal.pdf.

As the report indicates, confidentiality and respect for participants are among the important principles for searches. While we can discuss the procedures, out of respect for the individuals involved in the searches, we avoid public comment about individual searches and urge others to show the same discretion.

…/2 Clarification and Update on Search Processes Page 2

The new report does not change the fundamentals of our process. As detailed in the University Act 1995, deans and other senior administrators are appointed by the Board of Governors on the recommendation of the president. The board and president are assisted by large, multi-stakeholder search committees which include: members of the faculty of the college concerned; students; representation from the Board of Governors; the provost or designate; deans or other senior administrators; and, typically, a Senate representative.

The search committee is invaluable in the process and we want to take this opportunity to thank all members of search committees for their dedicated efforts. It is important to note the search committee is responsible for a number of tasks including:

• Reviewing the position profile and needs of the college

• Identifying candidates

• Collecting information about the candidates and assessing this information rigorously, collectively, and in confidence. Information assessed by the committee includes feedback from presentations done in the colleges during open searches.

• Interviewing candidates

• Keeping colleges informed on the progress of the search

Both the provost’s office and a search consultant support committees to do this work.

At the conclusion of its process, the committee is encouraged to deliberate in a way that provides a range of committee members’ perspectives on all final candidates, promotes internal consensus, and helps the provost frame a recommendation to the president. The president makes his recommendation to the board, and the board makes the final decision with the knowledge of what the search committee has reported.

The value of the search committee’s report lies in the advice it provides about all candidates. This important advice helps guide the provost, president, and the board in the processes leading up to the appointment. The university’s board and administration are represented within the search committee, hear all the discussion, and are participants throughout the process. The result is normally consensus. In 14 of 15 senior administrator searches co-ordinated by the provost’s office over the last five years, the university offered the position to the candidate favoured unanimously or by a wide majority of the search committee.

Search procedures for senior administrators are very different from search procedures for faculty members. In faculty searches, a committee comprised of faculty members and the department head make a recommendation, first to the dean and ultimately to the provost. No appointment is made by the provost without a positive recommendation from the search committee. The procedures for faculty searches can be found in Section 13 of the USFA collective agreement at http://www.usask.ca/hrd/docs/USFA_Collective_Agreement_2010_2012_Agreed_Language.pdf.

Please feel free to share this memo with others in your college or unit as you see fit.

…/3 Clarification and Update on Search Processes Page 3

If you have any further questions about search committee procedures, please contact the provost’s office by phone at 966-8484 or by email at provost@usask.ca<mailto:provost@usask.ca>.

Sincerely,

Peter MacKinnon Brett Fairbairn

President Provost and Vice-President Academic

= = = =  = = = = = = = = = = =

POTENTIAL NEW PRESIDENTS FOR THE UNIVERSITY:

Grant Isaacs, former Dean of the Edwards School of Business at the University, hired to be a senior Vice-President at Cameco (a million-dollar a year job).  It is rumoured that Grant is a contender to become President of the University.

Richard Florizone, Vice-President of Finance for the University, Chair of the “Uranium Development Partnership” industry-stacked Committee established by the Government, whose contribution to the public consultation process from a position of respect and influence was to tell Saskatchewanians that the acid rain problem in Canada has been fixed. It was known that some locations in Northern Saskatchewan are past “critical load limits” for acidification from Tar Sands development as early as 2003.  (Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment.)  Richard Florizone, in his position of VP of Finance has a funding relationship with Cameco.  He is considered by some to be a contender for the President’s job.  With Nancy Hopkins, Chair of the Selections Committee, also on the Board of Cameco?

– – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – — –  – —

IN THE INTERESTS OF FULL DISCLOSURE:

I graduated from the U of S, College of Commerce, with honours in 1971.

I am the Green Party candidate for Saskatoon-Humboldt, a former leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan.

I am a participant in the Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan which has spearheaded the dissemination of information on the nuclear industry to people in the Province. In 2009, through public consultations, citizens of Saskatchewan overwhelmingly said “no” to nuclear.

– – – – – – – – – – – – —

Corporate interests want “small” reactors for tar sands expansion (they need huge volumes of electricity or energy for heating up the tar so it will flow. The Government is working with the industry and the University to circumvent the public wish.

This past week members of the Coalition presented a petition with 4500 signatures to the Legislature.  Which caused Wall to back down from high-level radioactive waste dumping in the Province.  But he’s still holding out on the “small” reactors. It is public money being used for nuclear, after the people said “no”  (cut through the spin and propaganda).

Public money comes to the University already ear-marked.  And the conflicts-of-interest at the University with Cameco people are outrageous.   It is not surprising that Arts funding decreases.

I am doing a public event in Humboldt on Monday.  Part of campaigning.  Information on what’s happening in Sask on the nuke issue.  Sent the following to Humboldt reporter.

The Province announced  $30 million to the University;

the On Campus News for March 17 says that the amount is now $47 million for the Nuclear Studies Centre at the University.

There are serious and unacceptable conflicts-of-interest between the Board of Governors of the U of S and the Board of Cameco.

The Public Consultations in the summer of 2009 clearly rejected nuclear development in the Province.  The Nuclear Industry working with the Government is using the University as its backdoor entry point.

The corporations have way too much money.  Provincially (not federally)  Election rules allow them to contribute to political parties (but the Green Party of Sask does not accept corporate or union contributions).   There is a revolving door between Government officials and the industries they are supposed to regulate (Dwain Lingenfelter is a prime example.).

We do not have democracy, we have corporatocracy.

Wish us well at Senate Meeting!

Apr 202011
 

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 also 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?

– – – – – – – – – – – – –  —  – — – – – – – – –

The cries for help

But don’t you see

Your dis-ease is the

Same as my dis-ease

In different form 

Poisons maim

Contort and kill life

One dis-ease, different manifestations

Come out of your dis-ease silo

Join us

Our cause is the same

Same foe – the poisoners

And their collaborators inside Government

Inside the Universities.

The cries for help echo and re-echo

Unite and sing.

NOTE:   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.     Mental unhealth is not addressed in the following which was written to people whose advocacy work is related to Multiple Sclerosis (MS).   It certainly COULD have been included.  

(I have added to the original of this email.)

Dear Sandy, Stan, Michelle, and Bernadette, 

I sincerely appreciate your efforts around Multiple Sclerosis (MS).  

My home town of Luseland, SK  is said to have the highest incidence of MS,  but so are other communities in the province said to have this distinction.  My Father fought a very long battle with Parkinson’s disease,  as did other people from that relatively small community.  Cancer rates are also high in the area.   MS, Parkinson’s, cancer.  One place.

The high incidence of MS was mentioned in casual conversation in Humboldt just yesterday.  A large family in Luseland whose children went to school with my younger siblings:  I believe all but one developed MS.   A fellow Girl Guide, a year younger than me, developed MS.  A friend at my Halifax workplace when I was in my mid-twenties, was diagnosed with MS  –  I think that was the first I ever heard about MS.  I have friends whose family members have MS.  I believe that I myself had the onset of MS.  (Through good fortune I was able to identify and remove the particular culprit poison for me (it’s not the same for everyone)). 

Something is wrong with the picture.   We have “normalized” disease and developmental problems when they are not normal at all. 

I have done a fair amount of work in the area of disease and the poisons we are putting into our bodies and into the environment.  (I’ve run an activist email network for more than ten years – when people pool information we all learn much more than any one of us can learn working alone.)

From my blog, www.sandrafinley.ca  “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?   …  No,  the 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.  

The situation SHOULD be simple:  do not put known, unnecessary poisons into the environment or into our bodies.    

We know from fish in the Arctic, for example, that poisons disperse widely in the environment and have lasting toxic effects inside the bodies of living beings who live far from the production sites of the poisons.    The cellular life of human beings is basically the same as the cellular life of fish and other species.   What we are doing to them we are doing to ourselves.  

We KNOW that mercury from unregulated industry in China (or any other country) is carried by the wind and affects our health here in North America.   European countries have banned dental amalgams; others require that the water from dental offices cannot “go down the drain” into the “waste-water” or sewer system.   Health Canada recently put forward legislation to ban the import of most products that contain mercury.  (We petitioned to ban dental amalgams, too.)

The problematic poisons are most often colourless and odourless.  You most often do not know that you are ingesting the poison – – chemicals, radioactive wind-borne particles, various heavy metals (mercury, lead, aluminum, etc).  We put poisons directly into our water supplies.   I tried for four years to get the City to stop using a chemical combo called vaporooter to dissolve tree roots in sewer lines.   In defending its actions,  the City (and I) discovered that for one of the chemical ingredients, there isn’t a laboratory in all of Canada that knows how to test for the presence of that chemical in water.   For the chemical ingredient that they COULD test for,  one test cost $3,000.    So you know how often they are testing for the presence of that chemical.  Unfortunately, upstream communities like Calgary and Medicine Hat (and I believe Outlook),  etc.  also decided to use vaporooter instead of good, old-fashioned augering to remove roots in sewer lines. 

We are very stupidly poisoning ourselves.  Some people develop MS, some develop cancer, children are autistic (a word I had not heard until I was in my 40’s.  Today, very few people have not heard of autism.) 

I told you that I believe I had the onset of MS.   My particular symptoms were, among other things, chronic pins-and-needle sensations in my left upper arm and shoulder and a vertical pain in the left backside of my neck.  I worked for more than a year on it, with no success.   The neck pain at night often interfered with sleep.

I had a brief email exchange with Jock Murray from Halifax, a retired doctor who has headed up an MS centre at Dalhousie University.  (click on  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=1110  – for that and more info.)

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 and B  are not contradictory, but science treats them as though they ARE contradictory.  The hypothesis about cause-and-effect fails because they do not take into consideration how the immune system works. 

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.  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.   The experience of people whose immune systems are struggling with the overload of poisons is often the same:  one health problem after another  TREATED as though they are separate and unrelated.    It is in hindsight,  if the source of the poison is removed BEFORE IT DOES PERMANENT DAMAGE, that the sick person typically sees that the disease is one and the same,  complex manifestations as the body, mind and spirit struggled against the poison(s).

For 50 years the Cancer Societies have been collecting millions and millions of dollars to “find a cure”.   I remember reading a small book in the late 1970’s.   The author documented then:  we KNOW the causes of cancer.  We are not going to find a “cure”.  Remove the CAUSES of the disease.   Unfortunately,  there is a lot of money to be made by the pharmaceutical industry in the “find a cure” approach.    That approach says “it’s okay for you to get the disease because we’re going to find a cure and in the meantime you can take all these drugs.”   It is an extremely inhumane approach, not to mention costly and inane.  The corporations that are allowed to put their poisons into the environment are not the ones who pay the price.  

In order to fight disease, you need to build your immune system.  In many cases the drugs are another assault on the immune system.  They may offer temporary relief.  In time, in many cases, the “side effects” of the drugs become another set of health problems. 

The Green Party of course, works to protect the environment.  “Preventative healthcare” is, to me, the same thing.   You can have unhealthy people in a healthy environment; you do not have healthy people in an unhealthy environment. 

It may be a decade ago:  the canvasser for MS came to my door.  I asked her to show me in the brochure what the MS Society was doing for “remove the causes” of MS.   There was nothing.  I told her I would phone the national office and have a discussion, which I did.  The Executive Director at the time told me they had 20,000 items in their data base.  There was nothing to suggest a link between MS and exposure to chemicals.   I hung up and phoned a data base maintained by a group of doctors in Florida.  They keep track of all the research that is done on chemicals.   I asked them about a possible link between chemicals and MS.  Their answer was:  given A, B, and C (which I have forgotten)  it is definitely PLAUSIBLE that there is a connection.   I sent the information to the MS Society.  Nothing happened.  No research into possible connections between MS and synthetic chemicals. 

Today, there is a further barrier:  a criterion for funding of health research (and now for most projects) is that the project have the “potential for commercialization”.   But there is no potential for corporate profits in the removal of the causes of disease.   We have lost funding for the public interest. 

We are in a sorry state of affairs.  Hopefully more people are becoming aware.  The incidence of things like autism, MS, childhood cancers, asthma, learning disabilities,  – –  the list is long  – –  Good Grief!  Can we not see what we are doing?   These diseases and developmental problems are not separate;  they are different manifestations of the same basic problem.  The problem is that we are poisoning ourselves and our children, our water supplies, the food we eat . . .  indeed,  all creatures and all of creation.   The Earth will be happy when we, as a species, are gone!!

So what do we do about today?   And the people with MS, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, asperger’s syndrome, depression, high blood pressure, prostate cancer, gastro-intestinal problems, auto-immune disease, learning disabilities . . .  ? 

Number one we get the corporate interests out of Government, the Universities, and the medi-care system. 

Number two, remove the poisons.   We know that mercury is a neuro toxin.  So you do not put it into human beings, whether in the form of dental amalgams, or as a preservative in vaccinations.  Do not take flu shots.  They contain thimerasol which is mercury.  Some vaccinastions contain aluminum, another neuro toxin … there’s a whole long list of poisons that need to be eradicated. 

Personally, I believe that disease-support organizations should recognize the extent to which they are connected.   A win for the Lung Association on removing air-borne poisons is a win for the other disease organizations.   A win by the parents of autistic children is a win for people with MS.   Think of how powerful the force to stop the poisoning would be, if the organizations are united! 

In my experience, it is not elected officials who drive the change.  It is citizens themselves. 

 We need to work together.   It is most likely that we are back into an era where our tax dollars will be used for little more than paying down debt (and buying stealth bombers to the tune of $30 billion dollars, more debt).    You may remember that the Mulroney Government ran up the debt to the point where 37 cents out of every tax dollar went to the banks for debt servicing.  Preston Manning created the single-issue Reform Party to challenge Government debt.  Paul Martin’s Government cut social programmes, we spent years paying off debt, to the point where 14 cents out of every tax dollar was spent on debt servicing.  Not bad!   BUT in the last three years, the Harper Government has out-done Mulroney.  They racked up the highest-ever deficit.  Three years of deficits and we now have more than $110 billion dollars of debt to re-pay.  

The Parties will tell you the wonderful things they will do for you.  No – we are back into an era where the banks will pay great dividends to the wealthy and to their CEO’s, because of the public debt.   Especially with the $6 billion in tax-cuts to corporations if the Conservatives have their way.  It is quite frustrating.

HOWEVER!  Hopefully, your lobby joined with other lobbies joined to efforts by the Green Party will secure programmes that provide care and assistance.  These are exciting times with more and more people mobilizing to create a new economy based on caring and sharing, for the Earth and for others. 

I fully support your work.  I hope that my on-going efforts are a contribution.  You may want to take a stroll around www.sandrafinlcy.ca   

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley   (candidate, etc.)

———-  ———-
Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:52 PM
Subject: Better caregiver supports, income security and research benefit people with MS

Ms. Sandra Finley
Green Party Saskatoon-Humboldt
Saskatchewan

I am writing to ask you to support issues that are of real importance to people affected by multiple sclerosis (MS). MS is an often disabling disease of the brain and spinal cord.  Unfortunately, Canada has one of the highest rates of MS in the world, with an estimated 55,000 to 75,000 people living with the disease across the country.

People with MS need your commitment right now.

– People with MS need answers. It’s time to set aside funds for a clinical trial of the CCSVI procedure. Earmarking funds ensures there won’t be a delay, if and when the scientific evidence shows a clinical trial should proceed.

– Caregivers need support. It’s time to help family caregivers by providing a range of supports including tax credits and benefits and other programs to ease the daily load for all caregivers.

– People with MS need secure incomes. It’s time to ensure people with MS have the incomes they need. This means making Employment Insurance sickness benefits more flexible so people can work part-time and receive partial benefits. It also means making the disability tax credit refundable – to actually put money in people’s pockets.

– All people with brain conditions need a national brain strategy. Regardless of diagnosis, people living with brain conditions share similar needs and challenges. It’s time for a national brain strategy to accelerate research and improve the quality of life for millions of Canadians.

Multiple sclerosis has a profound impact on the ability to earn a living.  Most people with MS are diagnosed between the ages of 15 and 40, just when they are finishing school, starting careers and beginning families.  MS progresses in unpredictable ways. For many people, unexpected periods of worsening are followed by equally unpredictable periods of improvement – and then more worsening. This takes a devastating toll on people with MS and their families.

I urge you to support these issues to help people with MS and their families. It would be great if you would become a champion during this campaign – and in Parliament if you are elected. I will look forward to hearing how you will support action on MS.

Yours sincerely,

= = = = = == = =  == = =

Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:46 AM
Subject: We need more action on mental health and mental illness~

I am a constituent in your riding and a mental health professional/person with lived experience of mental illness. Polls consistently rank health care as the number one concern of voters in this election. Mental illness and poor mental health have a profound impact on Canadian society. Mental illness affects individual Canadians of all ages and in all segments of the population, and is prevalent in all regions, including rural and urban areas. It is estimated that each year, at least 1 in 5 Canadians will develop a mental illness. The economic costs associated with poor mental health and mental illnesses are also significant, both in terms of their impact on business and on the health care system. I am seeking your views on the following important issues.
1) Does your party platform contain
 anything related to mental health or mental illness?
2) Do you support
 parity between resources made available for treatment of mental and
 physical health problems?
3) Less than one-third of persons with mental
 health problems receive needed services. What will your party do to enhance
 access to mental health services and address the shortage of mental health
 professionals in Canada? And in this riding?
4) Will your party commit
 to increasing funding to mental health and mental illness research?
5)   What will your party do to support individuals, families, the workplace and
 communities when it comes to mental health and mental illness?

Apr 162011
 

http://www.truth-out.org/lobbying-report-drones-fly-through-congress-enter-us-skies/1302937200

Lobbying Report: Drones Fly Through Congress to Enter US Skies
Saturday 16 April 2011
by: Nick Mottern, Truthout

Within weeks and possibly days, President Obama is likely to sign into law a bill that will bring unmanned aerial vehicles – drones – into US general airspace, crisscrossing the country in company with passenger planes and other human-carrying aircraft.

The story of how planes without on-board pilots will gain entry into our crowded airspace, where birds are life threatening, possibly within the next three years, is one involving campaign contributions, jobs and fear. As we will see, safety appears not to be the top priority.

I became aware of the pro-drone legislation from a February 10, 2011, Syracuse Post Standard report that Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York) was supporting an amendment to the pending Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill (S. 223) that would create test zones for the introduction of drones into general airspace.

Senator Schumer was interested in the pro-drone amendment because MQ-9 Reaper drones, killer drones that are flying over Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, are stationed at Hancock Air Base near Syracuse. However, FAA safety restrictions have limited drone flights out of Hancock.

“If Schumer’s legislative move succeeds this week,” said the Post Standard, “it would help ensure the future of 1,215 jobs at the (air) base in Mattydale (New York) and potentially lead to millions of dollars in radar research contracts for local defense companies.”

Bad Drones – Good Drones?

Drones have a grisly war history of misidentification. For example, on April 11, 2011, The Los Angeles Times carried a story of how a failure of US Air Force drone operators at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada to accurately identify the enemy led to the deaths in February 2010 of at least 15 non-combatant Afghani men, the wounding of 12 more and the deaths of a woman and three children.

“Technology can occasionally give you a false sense of security that you can see everything, that you can hear everything, that you know everything,” said Air Force Major Gen. James O. Poss, who oversaw the Air Force investigation, according to the Times. “I really do think we have learned from this.”

The newspaper said that survivors were compensated with $2,900 and families of the dead got $4,800.

Drones like the Reaper are also used for assassination, killing people without trial or conviction, a violation of international law, compounded by the problem of misidentification.

The Reaper can also be used strictly for surveillance and there are a variety of drones that can perform either killer or surveillance functions. Drones are also being produced for commercial uses, which include scanning land and oceans for agricultural, mining and fishing enterprises.

Given the deadly record of drones, I and others in New York State and elsewhere, moved to lobby Senator Schumer to end his support of the drone amendment.

Drone Envy

We knew we were starting very late. On February 15, we presented a letter (appearing at the end of this article) at Senator Schumer’s Peekskill, New York, office urging him to abandon the drone amendment. He did not respond and his staff did not provide any information to us until well after the FAA reauthorization bill, with the pro-drone language embodied in an omnibus amendment, cleared the Senate on February 17.

According to Open Secrets.org, Senator Schumer received $10,000 for his 2010 re-election campaign from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin is one of at least 50 companies making drones of various sizes and types and it produces Hellfire missiles, used by drones and other aircraft. Lockheed employs 2,200 in Syracuse.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) also supported the drone amendment, saying in a press release: “This bill is about making southwest Ohio a critical part of this high-growth initiative. UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) could be used for a host of important purposes, from patrolling the border, to surveying Kandahar province, to combating drug smuggling and it’s critical that Wright-Patterson Air Force Base plays a key role in their development and testing. I’ve worked on a bipartisan basis – first with (former) Sen. (George) Voinovich and now with Sen. (Rob) Portman – to enable the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright Patterson and the Springfield National Guard to test unmanned aerial systems in Southwest Ohio.”

Among other Senate supporters of the drone amendment were Sens. Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) and John Hoeven (R-North Dakota), whose state seeks to be a center of drone development and where the University of North Dakota claims to be the first in offering a four-year degree program for drone pilots “hoping to take the sticks in a field expected to swell to a $20 billion industry over the next decade.”

Senator Hoeven said on the Senate floor, in support of the amendment:

“We’re already flying UAVs in airspace all over the world. Now we need to open the skies for them at home to make our nation more secure, our communities safer and our economy more dynamic, creating jobs and opportunities in our country. If we don’t you can be sure other nations will.”

(Note: Open Secrets shows no major aerospace companies contributing to Senators Brown or Hoeven in 2010; Senator Conrad received $22,600 in 2010 from Carlyle Group, which owns ARINC, a company with drone business.)

With Senate approval of the FAA bill, our anti-drone lobbying shifted to the House of Representatives where the FAA reauthorization (H.R. 658) containing pro-drone amendments similar to those in the Senate was still under consideration. While the senate drone legislation did not set a deadline for drone entry into general US skyways; a House amendment, which was ultimately approved, sets a deadline of September 30, 2015, for integration of commercial drones.

Gliding on Zephyrs of Cash

I thought that it might be possible to strip the drone amendments from reauthorization bill with last-minute floor action by one or two House allies. However, as I watched the House action on the FAA bill on C-Span on March 31, it became clear that the Republican leadership was determined to win every amendment that it put forward and to crush amendments put forward by Democrats. None of the members of Congress we hoped would act, including Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), Brian Higgins (D-New York) and John Tierney (D-Massachusetts), wished to make a comment, much less a fight, over the amendments and it may have been they felt is was not worth the effort.

Had there been more time for contacting Congressional aides and identifying drone supporters, it would also have been clear that there was strong aerospace industry activity in both houses of Congress for the drone amendments.

The drone amendments that ended up in the House bill came from Rep. John Mica (R-Florida), chair of the House transportation Committee, and Rep. Candice Miller (R-Michigan), a member of the transportation and homeland security committees and also a member of the Congressional Unmanned Systems (drone) Caucus, comprised of 43 members of the House.

Congressman Mica did not speak in any detail on the floor of the House about his drone amendment, referring to it only as being included in an omnibus amendment package. He introduced into the record a letter from the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry group, saying: “Without a doubt, UAS (unmanned aerial systems) will have a tremendous impact on the aerospace industry and aid in driving economic development in many regions across the country. How quickly new job creation and economic benefits become a reality however depends on the progress and timeliness of UAS integration efforts.” The Mica amendment package was approved 251-168.

Congresswoman Miller’s remarks in support of her amendment, which was approved by a voice vote, focused on the use of drones for law enforcement and border security:

“My amendment is designed to help expedite and to improve the process by which FAA works with government agencies to incorporate unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs as they’re commonly called, into the National Airspace System. Currently, Mr. Chairman, law enforcement agencies across the country, from Customs and Border Protection to local police departments, et cetera, are ready to embrace the new technology and to start utilizing UAVs in the pursuit of enforcing the law and protecting our border as well.

“However, the FAA has been very hesitant to give authorization to these UAVs due to limited air space and restrictions that they have. I certainly can appreciate those concerns; but when we’re talking about Customs and Border Protection or the FBI, what have you, we are talking about missions of national security. And certainly there’s nothing more important than that. It was a very, very lengthy exercise to get the FAA to authorize the use of UAVs on the southern border. While they’re finally being utilized down there, we are certainly a long way from fully utilizing these technologies.”

After the pro-drone amendments passed the House, Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-California) chair of the Congressional drone caucus, released a statement saying that the House FAA bill “promotes the safe integration of unmanned systems into national airspace. Carefully integrating these systems by 2015 will improve our border defenses, public safety and emergency response systems.

“Although this bill is a step in the right direction, I have concerns with the FAA’s languid Certification of Authorization requirement for public unmanned systems.”

Congressman Mica received the following contributions for his 2010 re-election campaign from these companies involved with drones, according Open Secrets:

Boeing – $10,000
Honeywell – $10,000 (makes engines for the Reaper and Predator drones)
Lockheed Martin – $10,000
Raytheon – $10,000

And for Congresswoman Miller in her 2010 race:

Honeywell – $10,000
General Dynamics – $8,500
Ford – $10,000 (Ford engines are used in a Boeing drone, although as a Michigan representative if is likely she would get Ford money in any case)

Congressman McKeon received the following contributions among those for his 2010 campaign:

Lockheed Martin – $52,000
Northrop Grumman – $50,500
Boeing – $28,900

His combined contributions from “defense aerospace” and “defense electronics” were $232,900.
Help fight ignorance. Click here for free Truthout email updates.
We were hoping that Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-New York) might assist in opposing the drone amendments given his opposition to our wars, in spite of his membership on the drone caucus. But we found that his aide wanted to talk only about Hinchey’s opposition to the wars, not about drones. In 2010, the following contractors with interests in drones were among his major contributors:

Lockheed Martin – $10,000
Boeing – $10,000
Honeywell – $10,000
L-3 Communications – $9,500

All the biggest aerospace contractors have an interest of one kind or another in drone manufacture. The top Congressional aerospace campaign contributor in 2009-2010 was Boeing, $2.57 million, followed by Lockheed Martin, $2.4 million, according toOpen Secrets.org.

A Department of Defense summary of the 2012 Obama military budget notes:

“The fiscal 2012 budget continues strong funding for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that enhance intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. The base budget includes </b>$4.8 billion<b> to develop and procure additional Global Hawk Class (RQ-4), Predator Class (MQ 1/9) and other less expensive, low-altitude systems.” [Emphasis added.]

Time magazine reported in 2008 that Barack Obama’s campaign “pocketed $870,165 from defense contractor sources, 34% more than the $647,313 in contributions McCain’s campaign received from the same sector.”

At this writing, the Senate and House versions of the FAA reauthorization bill, which cover a wide range of aviation concerns, will be submitted soon to a conference committee made up of members of both houses of Congress. A compromise bill will be presented to both houses for a vote and then sent to the White House for signature. The conference committee could meet as early as the week beginning April 18, if not before. Action should be completed at the latest by May 30, when the current FAA authorization expires.

Observations

1. Safety

It is obvious that many in Congress have embraced drones of all kinds for money, for themselves and their constituents, willfully ignoring what drones are doing in war or the real dangers they will bring with them into the skies over the US.

In March 2010, Congressman Tierney held drone hearings and heard testimony that addressed ways in which the US use of killer drones has violated international law.

Ideally, Congress would by now have banned the use of drones for assassination and limited their battlefield use to situations in which troops on the ground can make visual identification of enemy forces. This is presuming that the US is involved in wars that do not violate international law, unlike the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As for use of drones over the United States, at this writing, the FAA restricts drone flights to specific zones where they can be carefully segregated from general air traffic. As suggested above, the military, some law enforcement officials and drone manufacturers have been pushing the FAA to move fast to allow drones to fly much more freely. The FAA has resisted quick introduction for safety reasons, as indicated in the following testimony by Henry Krakowski, chief operating officer of the FAA air traffic organization before Senate Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Aviation Operations in September 2010:

“As the most complex airspace in the world, the NAS (National Airspace System) encompasses an average of over 100,000 aviation operations per day, including commercial air traffic, cargo operations, business jets, etc. Additionally, there are over 238,000 general aviation aircraft that represent a wide range of sophistication and capabilities that may enter the system at any time. There are over 500 air traffic control facilities, more than 12,000 air navigation facilities and over 19,000 airports, not to mention the thousands of other communications, surveillance, weather reporting and other aviation support facilities. With this volume of traffic and high degree of complexity, the FAA maintains an extremely safe airspace through diligent oversight and the strong commitment to our safety mission …

“While UASs (unmanned aerial systems) offer a promising new technology, the limited safety and operational data available to date does not support the expedited or full integration in the NAS. Because current available data is insufficient to allow unfettered integration of UASs into the NAS – where the public travels every day – the FAA must continue to move forward deliberately and cautiously, in accordance with our safety mandate.”

At the same time that Congress is pushing the FAA to allow drones to fly everywhere, the House version of the FAA bill would roll back the agency’s budget to 2008 levels, allocating $57.8 billion for a four-year period.The larger issue is whether drone technology can ever be perfected to the point where pilots on the ground are going to be able to look out for danger in the same way pilots in the air can. As Air Force General Poss said in the quote at the beginning of this article, technology can lead to unwarranted confidence. It seems certain that if Congress, the military, law enforcement agencies and the aerospace industry get their way, we will be having drone hits on passenger aircraft just as we are having bird hits now.

In addition, there is no restriction in the FAA reauthorization against drones flying in US airspace carrying weapons, raising the specter of accidental firings at other aircraft and at people and objects on the ground and of mid-air explosions from accidental hits on other aircraft. The Pentagon is also planning drone aircraft that can carry nuclear weapons.

2. Who Will Watch the Watchers?

Drones also present a real threat to personal privacy and safety. Drones are envisioned as eyes in the sky for police departments as well as for border patrols. Although members of Congress touted drones for surveillance, nothing in the FAA legislation discusses when surveillance can be undertaken or any restrictions on use of material gathered in drone surveillance.

This becomes of even greater concern in view of the problems of drone misidentification, demonstrated in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

There is also the possibility, not addressed in the FAA reauthorization, of police arming their drones to fight crime, which raises the fundamental issues of misidentification, due process and collateral damage, among others.

This article is obviously being written at a very late date. How could we have known sooner about the pro-drone amendments and their implications?

3. Citizen Surveillance

At this point, there is no anti-war legislative action office in Washington, DC, that is devoted solely to: (1) providing continuing information to grassroots organizers on weapons and war funding; and (2) building grassroots response organizations in Congressional districts.

Matt Southworth of the Friends Committee on National Legislation was helpful in identifying some Congressional aides who might wish to help address the drone amendments, but he was stretched thin and had only limited time to make calls, much less visits. Ideally grassroots anti-war groups would have the benefit of one or two people in Washington who would follow weapons and war funding legislation, such as the drone amendments, and provide early warning to local anti-war organizers.

A model for this would be Bread for the World, which develops grassroots organizations to lobby Congress on hunger and food policy issues.

This points also to the need for local educational groups that work to inform the public not only on current wars but on business/job alternatives to the military contracting work being done by plants in their areas.

What we need immediately is legislation banning the use of US drones for assassination and banning drones from US general aviation skyways.

*    *    *    *

Senator Charles Schumer February 15, 2011
One Park Place, Suite 100
Peekskill, New York 10566

Dear Senator Schumer:

On February 10, 2011 you issued a press release saying that you want to amend the Federal Aviation Administration law so that air space will be expanded around Syracuse for testing of “cutting edge military drones.” You said this will “unleash millions of investment into the region and create jobs.”

For the reasons outlined in the attached flyer, we the undersigned urge you to reverse course and work to end all drone testing, training and operation in New York State, including drone operations at Fort Drum in Watertown NY.

We want to emphasize here that the atrocities and assassinations being committed by the United States using drones in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Yemen are unconscionable. The idea that you would use job creation as a reason for encouraging the development and use of these weapons is morally unacceptable.

Every single minute, $300,000 goes into our wars. Because of this spending, the United States cannot meet the educational and employment needs of its citizens. For you to tout job creation from weapons building under these circumstances is astounding.

We would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss these concerns. Please respond to the WESPAC Foundation at (914) 449-6514 orwespacfoundation@gmail.com

Sincerely,

Harriet Ackerman, Hastings on Hudson
Wayne Alt, Buffalo
John Amidon, Albany
Sondra Armer, Croton on Hudson
Kevin Ascher, Mount Kisco
Frank Brodhead, Hastings on Hudson
Brooklyn for Peace
Elaine Brower, World Can’t Wait, Military Families Speak Out, New York City
Russell Brown, Veterans for Peace, Buffalo
Frank Carbone, Newburgh
Joe Catron, Brooklyn
Ben Chitty, Co-cordinator Tappan Zee Brigade, Veterans for Peace Chapt. 61, Yonkers
Martha Conte, White Plains
Andrew Courtney, Croton on Hudson
Pamela Daly, Hartsdale
Don DeBar, Ossining
Sandra Dolman, Peekskill
Gayle Dunkelberger, Katonah
Roger Drew, Greenburgh
Marilyn Ellie, Cortlandt
Gail L. Evans
Sarah Flounders, International Action Center, New York City
Kathryn Joy Fuller, Syracuse
Carol Gable, Gaithersburg, MD (formerly of Mamaroneck)
Felice Gelman, Tarrytown
Mirene Ghossen, New Rochelle
Jack Gilroy, Endwell
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb, Stoney Point
Dr. Arthur Grant, Chappaqua
Teresa Gutierrez, May 1st Coalition for Worker and Immigrant Rights, New York City
Dennis Hanratty, New Rochelle
Mary Herbst, Grand Island
Judith A. and George E. Homanich, Buffalo
Joan Indusi, Ossining
Dottie Ji, Central Jersey Coalition Against Endless War
Agnes Johnson, Bronx
Mary Johnson, Mt. Kisco
Lorraine and Sam Katen, Mamaroneck
Kathy Kelly, Co-coordinator, Voices for Creative Nonviolence, Chicago, IL
Nada Khader, White Plains
Ed Kinane, Syracuse
Charlotte Koons, Women Opposed to the Nuclear Threat, Northport
Cecelia Lavan, New Rochelle
Maxine Lawrence, Ossining
Leila Luvka, Somers
Jeff Mackler, Administrative Committee, United National AntiWar Committee
Kwame Madden, Peekskill
Ann Marwick, Yorktown Heights
Kathryn Mang-Haag, Kenmore
Larry McGovern, Dobbs Ferry
Nick Mottern, Hastings on Hudson
Dan M. Nalven, Ossining
Valerie Niederhoffer, Buffalo
Ardeshir and Ellie Ommani, Co-Founders, American-Iranian Friendship Committee, Armonk
Pepi Powell, Peekskill
Peg Rapp, Washington Heights Counter-recruitment, New York City
Ken Roberts, Yonkers
Joanne Robinson, Yonkers
Enrico Rodrigues, White Plains
Victoria Ross, Buffalo
Meredith Ryan, Mount Vernon
Lisa Savage, Brunswick, ME
Pat Sorbini, Buffalo
David Swanson, author of War is a Lie, Co-founder WarIsACrime.org, Washington, DC
Syracuse Peace Council
United National AntiWar Committee
Roland Van Deusen, Clayton
Rose Viviano, Syracuse
Bennett Weiss, Newburgh