Sandra Finley

Jan 062009
 

This morning, Judge Whelan decided the trial will not proceed tomorrow.

I told her I didn’t understand:

–  the prosecutor said he is prepared to go ahead.

–  I am representing myself

–  I am prepared

–  I want to proceed

–  (Apart from my own testimony) I need to be able to ask questions of the witness from Statistics Canada

No one has asked for an adjournment or postponement.

I don’t understand where the request to adjourn or to postpone is coming from.

It seems that she has the right, if she believes that there might be an actual or perceived miscarriage of justice, to stop the trial from proceeding at this time.  There was a side mention of “if this case goes to appeal”.  I understand that:  the judge will want to ensure that everything has been done according to hoyle, because her decision might end up being appealed.  Oh Lord, I hope not.

I am now to appear in court room #7 on Thursday, January 29th at 2:00 pm for “case management”.  The case management “slipped through the cracks”.

I requested that the Case management be done tomorrow or Thursday because all the facilities and judge would already be assigned and therefore available for this task.  I was told that the Judge was not available. 

Today, different occurrences make it unclear to me that it was ever intended that the trial would go ahead tomorrow.  Yesterday the court phoned to make arrangements for this “pre-trial” today (one day before the trial starts – I told them it was very short notice and that my time was fully booked, I really don’t have time to spare. I am trying to keep calm and don’t want to create unnecessary time pressures. I gave them the information they would need and asked if I had to attend.)  In the end I was told that the Judge wanted the pre-trial.  It was done by telephone connection this morning. 

During this pre-trial conversation Judge Whelan hammered on the question “What inconvenience will it be to you if the trial doesn’t proceed tomorrow?”.  I told her there was financial inconvenience and elaborated a bit.  She would not hear that.  And insisted on “Aside from that .”.   I said there was significant time inconvenience.  She didn’t accept that.  Repeatedly, “What inconvenience will it be to you if the trial doesn’t proceed?”.  Four times she asked the question and I responded.  (I’m thinking I don’t know what you want – but I do know:  they want me to be represented by a lawyer).  “Ms Finley you are not answering my question.”

And then she used the nice little phrase meant to disempower:  “you don’t even know … “. 

Brow-beating by the Judge.  Probably good training for me, for what might lie ahead. 

All it does is to make me more determined.  The justice system is paid for by citizens.  It’s actually our justice system.  If an average citizen can’t go in and defend themself after the government has laid charges against them, then something is very wrong with the design of the system.  First Nations people know that in spades.  It is no wonder that they are insisting upon their own, community-based justice. 

On the topic of the crown witnesses, I thought that Ivan Felligi, Chief Statistician until earlier in 2008, was to appear. I have prepared the questions to ask him.  The prosecutor, Barrie Miller, corrected to say that it is Anil Arora (he is the one who telephoned me from StatsCan back in May 2006.  We had a lengthy conversation that I tape-recorded, thank goodness!   And it’s not illegal to do that, if you’re not the government.)  I told Judge Whelan and Barrie that all I needed was to be able to ask questions, for example, “This (news report) dated (whenever) says (this).”  Is it an approximately accurate statement?”. 

But enough of all that for now!

You are so wonderful.  I am carried forward by your generosity of support and spirit.

Many thanks,

Sandra

Dec 222008
 

My letter to the Premier (#7) is my Christmas gift to the Great Sand Hills in western Saskatchewan.

Corporate influence.  Put it on the table, out in the open.  There is little sense in arguing on behalf of the environment or security of a natural gas supply, when the motivator is the money, not the environment and not minus 32 degree weather.

/Sandra

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

IMPORTANT ISSUES RAISED BY THE GREAT SAND HILLS

CONTENTS

(1)  GOVERNANCE

(2)  DRAINING THE BANK ACCOUNT

(3)  ENDANGERED SPECIES

(4)  RAISES THE ISSUE:  WHAT IS SACRED?

(5)  FALSE, FALSE ECONOMICS

(6)  THY WILL BE DONE  (your letter to the Premier of Saskatchewan)

(7)  MY LETTER TO THE PREMIER

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

(1)  GOVERNANCE

The work on the skullduggery in the Great Sand Hills is the work of citizens.  Even after the problems are brought to light, both parties keep their mouths closed on the very serious problems.

The Government does something only after they have been forced by public pressure.  My letter to the Premier lays out the reason:  revolving doors, conflicts-of-interest, and corporate funding. (Corporate funding of political parties is prohibited federally thanks to Jean Chretien; provincially it is acceptable for corporations to fund political parties.)

We need as many letters to the Premier and Minister of Environment as we can possibly generate (#6 below).  If only to address the problems created by Government that serves the corporations.

———————

(2)  DRAINING THE BANK ACCOUNT

It is minus thirty-two degrees in Saskatchewan today.  “Peak Oil” is past.  We are on the downhill side of the supply curve.

The infrastructure to heat our homes is largely based on natural gas.  We are DEPENDENT on natural gas for heat.  Under NAFTA we have to continue to export the same PROPORTION of our oil and gas to the U.S. as currently.   (Mexico refused to have this clause in their agreement with the U.S. and Canada.)  The pipelines being built today are not to serve Canadians.  There are no trans-Canada lines.  Only pipelines to Chicago and other places in the U.S.  The natural gas supplies are projected to deplete with greater and greater rapidity, before oil.

Unfortunately not everyone can afford to move to Hawaii.  It’ll get a little crowded there, too.

This sell-off of our main heat source is incomprehensible.  Gross ignorance.

Or “have to have it all today”.  Or “next generation” – – what the hell?

They’ll figure it out.”  “Technology” will provide the answers.  “Somebody else … ”  “Me, I like things the way they are.”  Two plus two, plus two, equals minus two hundred and twenty-two.

—————————–

(3)  ENDANGERED SPECIES

The inhospitable nature of the Great Sand Hills has made them a place of last refuge for species threatened by extinction.  To destroy that place so we can “develop” and export a natural gas supply that will last a short time, so we can put some coins in our pockets-full-of-holes is … (you fill in the blanks).

—————————–

(4)  RAISES THE ISSUE:  WHAT IS SACRED?

When a soul leaves its bones behind, if Blackfoot, it journeys to the Great Sand Hills to join Infinite Life.  Souls walking about in skin may not go there.

Think what happens to a society when nothing is sacred.  Water, for example.

Dependent … for life.  That’s what sacred is.  Some people still don’t “get it”.

Back in 2003 we learned about “fracking” (the man-induced fracturing of underground formations to release gas from natural pockets).  Which also happens to allow poisons to then seep into underground water supplies through holy pockets.  Voluminous amounts of potable water that the Government allows the oil and gas companies to poison AND to divert underground; the water is permanently lost to the rain-evaporation cycle.

In a desert.  More desert.

———————————

(5)  FALSE, FALSE ECONOMICS

Without thick hair I would be bald from pulling out my hair.  I may scream if I hear the growth mantra gush out of the mouth of one more incapable-of-thought idiot.  It doesn’t matter how much “technology” or “higher education” you have.  You cannot have continuous growth premised on consumption when the supply side is a finite resource.  It is apparent that you must shift to a different paradigm.

“Economic growth and development” is so obviously an idea that has to be replaced.  For the sake of our grandchildren, we cannot afford to be robots with programmed thinking that doesn’t adapt and change with reality.

History, for the sake of heaven, has ample example of civilizations that turned Eden into desert, then vanished on the wind.

The best way to ensure that you don’t have descendants is to cut down the last tree.  That’s been done by human societies a number of times over.  Trees aren’t even a finite resource – they are renewable.

———————————

(6)  THY WILL BE DONE  (your letter to the Premier of Saskatchewan)

Thy will be done.

Whose will?

I vote for our informed will, in service to common sense and the future we bequeath to our grand-children.

It CAN be our informed will.  IF there are enough of us.  Email addresses for the Premier and Environment Minister follow.

If you haven’t already, would you send a quick note to members of the Saskatchewan Government, at least to the Premier?  And ask anyone else you know who would be interested, to do the same? You don’t have to live in Saskatchewan.  These are national issues.

There is a window of opportunity now, before the Government announces its decision on the GSH.  It will be too late, after the decision is announced.

The United Church got 400 signatures in, during the last go-around.  Need something like that again!  The letters don’t have to say much.  The Govt just has to know that large numbers of people are watching.

The Honourable Brad Wall, Premier of Saskatchewan

E-mail: premier AT  gov.sk.ca

(Please provide your full name and mailing address as any response from the Premier of Saskatchewan will be delivered by Canada Post.)

Minister Environment, Nancy Heppner

Minister.ENV AT gov.sk.ca

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

(7)  MY LETTER TO THE PREMIER (Brad Wall)

(His response (already received): the letter “outlining (my) concerns and opposition to proposals for resource exploitation and development of the GSH”,  is referred to the Minister of Environment (Nancy Heppner) for detailed response.)

Dear Brad,

You would not have been privy to the volume of public pressure on the Government of Saskatchewan that led to the scientific study of the Great Sand Hills.  You were not in office at the time.

I can tell you how fiercely the battle was fought and over how many years.   The study did not come about easily.  There are large numbers of people with a substantial investment of time, expertise and interest.  The citizens of Saskatchewan have invested several millions of dollars now, in addition to time, to see that we do justice in the Great Sand Hills.

The Saskatchewan Party is in a vulnerable position vis-à-vis the Great Sand Hills, if I may speak frankly and to the point, as I did with the NDP when they were in power.

In the case of the NDP, Dwayne Lingenfelter went from Deputy Premier to Vice-President of Nexen.  TransGas, crown corporation, wholly-owned subsidiary of SaskEnergy, built a $9 million pipeline to the Great Sand Hills.  The number one and only listed customer of Transgas was Nexen.

SaskEnergy held a fraudulent press conference about “new discoveries” of natural gas in the GSH while Ron Clark was president.  I know because I phoned and spoke with the Executives of each of the 3 companies who were supposed to have found the new reserves.  And I spoke with an employee of Transgas who confirmed what the o&g Executives said.  “The Government is putting words in the mouth of the companies that they wouldn’t say  themselves.”  There were no “new finds”, except in newspaper reports based on the fraudulent information presented at the press conference.  (INSERT: I didn’t mention about the other revolving door between employees of the Dept of Environment (e.g. Larry Kratt, co-chair of SPIGEC, the Sask Petroleum Industry Government Environment Committee – and the industry’s high-paying jobs in Calgary.)

Elwin Hermansson courted the Petroleum Club.  In your case, you have been at least twice to Alberta to raise money for the SaskParty.  That creates debts to be repaid.

In conclusion, decisions made for political as opposed to scientific reasons, about the Great Sand Hills will be highly suspect.  And highly inappropriate, especially given the substantial investment of time and money by the people of Saskatchewan in the scientific study of the Great Sand Hills.

I say this, not to assert that the decisions WILL be politically and financially motivated.  I say it because I have always found prevention to be less painful for all concerned.

My note may sound coercive.  I think you will find it factual and in good faith.  I am motivated by the words of a senior doctor, recipient of an Order of Canada, at one of the GSH public meetings.  In the more than a decade since the last time the people of Saskatchewan had forced public meetings on the GSH, the Government had not made one step of progress in assembling the scientific data required for sound decision-making, and as had been agreed would be carried out.

As I understand political evolution in Canada, people are at the end of  their tether.  There is growing awareness of the failure of our system of governance to protect the things we value and need for the present and for future generations. Thanks to books and documentaries like “The Corporation” by UBC law professor Joel Bakan, people have a better understanding of the role of the large corporations in the undermining of good governance.  They will not put up with “partnerships” that serve corporate interests at the expense of the public good and for the enrichment of those who are motivated solely by money.

With due respect, I understand that there were different premiers in office at the time.

This matter is too important to pussyfoot around the issues.

I hope that the Government of Saskatchewan will follow the advice of the Scientific Study on the Great Sand Hills.

Yours truly,

Sandra Finley

Saskatoon SK  S7N 0L1

Dec 202008
 

CONTENTS

(1)  LOCKHEED MARTIN DOESN’T MANUFACTURE CLUSTER BOMBS?

(2)  NO, OF COURSE LOCKHEED DOESN’T MANUFACTURE CLUSTER BOMBS

(3)  LOCKHEED MARTIN HAS REFORMED ITS WAYS, NEW YORK TIMES

(4)  HOW GOVERNMENT BECOMES PROSECUTOR ON BEHALF OF LOCKHEED MARTIN

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

(1)  LOCKHEED MARTIN DOESN’T MANUFACTURE CLUSTER BOMBS?

Gail writes:

The Lockheed Martin site says that LM doesn’t manufacture cluster bombs. Is this new? Please advise.

(Link no longer valid  http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/ATACMSBlockI/)

Sure enough, if you scroll to bottom of the above web page, you’ll find:

“Lockheed Martin does not manufacture submunitions, “cluster bombs” or any other explosive warheads used in its missile, rocket or guidance systems.  Lockheed Martin does provide systems – such as ATACMS Block IA – that accurately deliver a variety of payloads which greatly reduce collateral damage due to their precision.  Ordnance is furnished by the military services that use Lockheed Martin’s delivery and guidance systems.”

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

(2)  NO, OF COURSE LOCKHEED DOESN’T MANUFACTURE CLUSTER BOMBS

RESPONSE to Gail:

Is this new?”    Yes, it is.   They manufacture(d) the dispensers (WCMD’s) and the cluster munitions (CBU’s) to go with the dispensers.   More explanation below.

They have removed the information on cluster munitions that used to be on their website.   The Source was:   http://www.lockheedmartin.com/mfc/index.html  but I can’t find “WCMD’s”, or CBU’s” there now.

The pages that did have WCMD/CBU information now all come up as  error pages, one after the other.   The message is one that indicates the pages did exist at one time.   Also, if you look around through their press releases, etc.  you will find reference to personnel who had positions in the WCMD or CBU units.   Lockheed Martin would have made the statement that they don’t manufacture cluster munitions and taken the info off their website because of the very recent International Treaty (December 2008)  to Ban Cluster Bombs.  It’s not a problem (for my trial) because the information exists in other places.  e.g.  http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app5/wcmd.html     (Note:  I copied this page at  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=2358  just in case the link stops working.   But not all of the information will display properly.)

There are millions of cluster bombs stock-piled, so maybe Lockheed Martin shut down the manufacturing recently, after the UN Treaty?  (The U.S. didn’t sign onto the treaty.  Lockheed Martin pretty well runs their foreign policy – – item #3 below.)

You have to be a lawyer to get the right answer.  The statement is  “Lockheed Martin does not manufacture submunitions…” .   One might ask, “Does Lockheed Martin SELL cluster bombs?”  And never mind all that.  Isn’t it wonderful that Lockheed Martin no longer manufactures cluster munitions!  Would I could believe them.  See #3.

For WCMD’s, CBU’s, and BLU’s :

(1)  The Dispenser is called a WCMD (Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser).  It has a navigation system built into it.  “After release, the WCMD guidance corrects for launch errors and winds aloft, and computes the optimum flight path and submunition release point.  . has a stand-off range of about 10 miles.”

(2)  The cluster munitions (Lockheed Martin products) that go in the Munitions Dispenser are:

–  CBU’s  (Combined Effects Munition) , “a multi-purpose cluster bomb, consisting of 202 1.5 kg BLU-97/B CEBs (Combined Effects Bomblets)”.

They sell a number of CBU’s with various “payloads”.   The information from the Lockheed Martin site is still on this website:  http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app5/wcmd.html    (Jan 2, 2011 the information is still there.)

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

(3)  LOCKHEED MARTIN HAS REFORMED ITS WAYS, NEW YORK TIMES

(Canadians should note that Lockheed Martin is one of the partners represented in the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) negotiations among Stephen Harper, George Bush, the president of Mexico and big corporate “leaders”.  Think SPP; remember the police tactics at the Montebello summit.)

Also this from http://www.nupge.ca/news_2007/n22au07b.htm :

“Lockheed Martin executive Ron Covais, also present at the (SPP) forum, told Maclean’s magazine, in reference to the SPP talks,  “We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes, because we won’t get anywhere.” The main avenue for changes would be through executive agencies, bureaucrats and regulations, he said, adding:    “The guidance from the ministers was   “‘Tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen.'”

(Like, put the census into Lockheed’s hands?  Remember the article circulated to you “News report Nov 01,  U.S. wants more information on Canadians”.  The report said that the Americans will introduce a visa system for Canadians to enter the U.S. if they aren’t given access to information on routine (all) Canadian citizens.  And, happy, happy, “”Canadian officials have said (Canada) will meet the new standard, “plus or minus a little,” by 2011.  But there’ll be tremendous pressure (from the U.S.) to get there faster.”)

Back to the quoted article  http://www.nupge.ca/news_2007/n22au07b.htm:

“The SPP is a disturbing mixture of government officials, big business, and the defence departments and defence industries. The initiative may be a secret to most Canadians, but not to the select few, and what an interesting crew they are!

Consider who attended the secret Banff meeting.   From Canada:

Stockwell Day, Federal Minister of Public Safety

General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff

Gordon O’Connor, then Minister of Defence

Perrin Beatty, President, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters

Thomas d’Aquino, Canadian Council of Chief Executives

Roger Gibbins, Canada West Foundation

Richard L. George, Suncor Energy Inc.

Peter Harder, Deputy Minister, Foreign Affairs

Fred Green, Canadian Pacific Railway

James Kinnear, Pengrowth Corporation

Sharon Murphy, Chevron Canada

From the United States:

Donald Rumsfeld, Former U.S. Defense Secretary

Rick Covais, President, Lockheed Martin

Admiral Tim Keating, U.S. Navy, Northern Command

James Schlesinger, former Secretary of Energy and Defense

Dan Fisk, Senior Director, National Security

Maj. Gen. Mark Volcheff, Director, Plans, Policy and Strategy, NORAD

Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary of Energy

From Mexico:

Geronimo Gutierrez, Deputy Foreign Minister

Vinicio Suro, Pemex, Mexican National Oil Co.

Eduardo Medina-Mora, Secretary of Public Security”)

——————

—   And now, to the New York Times article,

LOCKHEED MARTIN HAS REFORMED ITS WAYS:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/business/yourmoney/28lock.html

The New York Times November 28, 2004

Lockheed and the Future of Warfare

In-Depth Coverage

By Tim Weiner

EXCERPT:

”  Lockheed says it has transformed its corporate culture. In the 1970’s, it was discovered that the company had paid millions of dollars to foreign officials around the world in order to sell its planes. In one case, Kakuei Tanaka, who had been the prime minister of Japan, was convicted of accepting bribes.

”Without Lockheed, there never would have been a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,” said Jerome Levinson, who was the staff director of the Senate subcommittee that uncovered the bribery.  The antibribery provisions of that law, passed in 1977, owed their existence to the Lockheed investigation, he said. The last bribery case involving Lockheed came a decade ago, when a Lockheed executive and the corporation admitted paying $1.2 million in bribes to an Egyptian official to seal the sales of three Lockheed C-130 cargo planes.

Mr. Trice, Lockheed’s senior vice president for business development, says the company cleaned up its act at home and overseas since the last of the series of major mergers and acquisitions that gave the corporation its present shape in March 1995. ”You simply have to look people in the eye and say ‘we don’t do business that way,”’ he said.

There really is no need to do business that way any more — not in a world where so much of Lockheed’s wealth flows directly from the Treasury, where competition for foreign markets is both controlled and subsidized by the White House and Congress, and where Lockheed’s influence runs so deep. Men who have worked, lobbied and lawyered for Lockheed hold the posts of secretary of the Navy, secretary of transportation, director of the national nuclear weapons complex and director of the national spy satellite agency.  The list also includes Stephen J. Hadley, who has been named the next national security adviser to the president, succeeding Condoleezza Rice.

Former Lockheed executives serve on the Defense Policy Board, the Defense Science Board and the Homeland Security Advisory Council, which help make military and intelligence policy and pick weapons for future battles.

Lockheed’s board includes E.C. Aldridge Jr., who, as the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer, gave the go-ahead to build the F-22.

None of those posts and positions violate the Pentagon’s rules about the ”revolving door” between industry and government. Lockheed has stayed clear of the kind of conflict-of-interest cases that have afflicted its competitor, Boeing, and the Air Force in recent months.

”We need to be politically aware and astute,” Mr. Stevens said. ”We work with the Congress. We work with the executive branch.” In these dialogues, he said, Lockheed’s end of the conversation is ”saying we think this is feasible, we think this is possible, we think we might have invented a new approach.”

Lockheed makes about $1 million a year in campaign contributions through political action committees, singling out members of the Congressional committees controlling the Pentagon’s budget, and spends many millions more on lobbying. Political stalwarts who have lobbied for Lockheed at one point or another include Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi and a former Republican national chairman; Otto Reich, who persuaded Congress to sell F-16’s to Chile before becoming President Bush’s main Latin America policy aide in 2002; and Norman Y. Mineta, the transportation secretary and former member of Congress.

Its connections give Lockheed a ”tremendous opportunity to influence contracts flowing to the company,” said Ms. Brian of the Project on Government Oversight. ”More subtly valuable is the ability of the company to benefit from their eyes and ears inside the government, to know what’s on the horizon, what are the best bets for the government’s future technology needs.”

SO who serves as the overseer for the biggest military contractors and their costly weapons? Usually, the customer itself: the Pentagon.

”These programs are huge,” said Dov S. Zakheim, the Pentagon’s comptroller and chief financial officer for the last three years, who recently joined Booz Allen Hamilton, the consulting firm. ”There is a historical tendency to underestimate their test schedules, their technological hurdles, the likely weight of an airplane and, as a result, to underestimate costs.  ”Because you have so few contractors, you don’t get the level of attention that the average citizen would think would be devoted to a program costing billions of dollars,” he said. ”With this massive agglomeration into a very small number of companies, you get far less visibility as to whether the subcontractors are effectively managed. Problems accumulate.”

”Twenty years ago, the complaint was, it takes so long to build things,”he said. Weapons designed in the depths of the cold war were built long after the Berlin Wall crumbled. That led some people, including George W. Bush while running for president in 1999, to suggest that the Pentagon skip a generation of weapons set to roll off the assembly line in this decade and concentrate instead on lighter, faster, smarter systems for the future.

That didn’t happen. It still takes two decades to build a major weapons system, and the costs are still staggering.

”The complaints haven’t changed 20 years later,” Mr. Zakheim said. The difference between then and now is the concentration of expertise, experience and power in a few hands, he said, ”and I don’t think the effect has necessarily been a good one.”

Mr. Stevens rejected that criticism. ”I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve heard ‘not progressive, not sophisticated, ponderous, slow”’ as terms used to describe Lockheed, he said. ”I see none of that.”

What he sees is a far grander vision. Lockheed, he said, is promising to transform the very nature of war. During the cold war, when Lockheed and its component parts built an empire of nuclear weapons, Mr. Stevens said, the watchword was: ”Be more fearful. ‘Deterrence,’ isn’t that Latin?  ‘Deterrere.’ Induce fear. Terrorize.”

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

(4)  HOW GOVERNMENT BECOMES PROSECUTOR ON BEHALF OF LOCKHEED MARTIN  (Death Merchant)

It’s not too hard to see the problem the Government has created by contracting-out to Lockheed Martin Corporation.

–  The Government has a large NON-COMPLIANCE problem because of out-sourcing to Lockheed Martin.  This posting has centred on Lockheed’s manufacture of weapons that contravene International Humanitarian Law (even before the UN Treaty to Ban Cluster Munitions).

I haven’t mentioned a word about the other very contentious aspect: privacy, sovereignty over and security of Canadian information, especially in the light of the American Patriot Act.

Now look what happens when the Government decides to enforce compliance.

There is no doubt in my mind but that I did the right thing in saying, “No” to the contracting-out.  Most people in the world would understand that what Lockheed Martin does is immoral;  that participation with Lockheed is participation in criminal activity.  And, Government assurances to the contrary, we are opening ourselves up to providing the American military direct access to the most comprehensive data base the Government of Canada has on its citizens.  Fascist states maintain comprehensive files on citizens and use fear tactics.

To enforce compliance with Canadian law, after the Government has contracted-out to Lockheed Martin:

–  it must use the threat, and then maybe the actuality of the prison system, to coerce a citizen who has done the right thing, into compliance.

–  the prosecutors (the whole judicial and penal system) end up defending the corporate interest, not the public interest.

–  I am not suggesting that the prosecutors WILL use the argument supplied by Lockheed Martin on its website, “Lockheed Martin does not manufacture submunitions, “cluster bombs” or any other explosive warheads … “.  But IF they did, they would also be using the lies of the corporate interest against the citizen.  You can see how slippery is the slope.  Statistics Canada doesn’t want to lose this court case.

Dec 112008
 

CONTENTS

  1. COMMENTARY
  2. WONDERFUL VICTORY!  CWB (CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD)
  3. SWAT TEAM RAIDS OHIO FOOD CO-OP.  I TALKED WITH JACKIE STOWERS.
  4. FOR NEWCOMERS:  ANOTHER MEANS FOR HANDING DATA OFF TO CORPORATIONS, “Govt fronts”.

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

(1)  COMMENTARY

Join in conspiracy with me.  We conspire:  when something is wrong we fight it.

Our conspiracy is all that matters.

There is no need to worry about other conspiracies.  Keep our energy focussed on our conspiracy.

By fighting what is wrong, our conspiracy will prevail.

————————–

We have

a.  Items  2 and 3,  Canadian Wheat Board and Ohio food co-op.  They are about FOOD.

b.  FOOD at a time when work is on Lockheed Martin and the Government, in preparation for a trial over the CENSUS.

 

How, in my weird mind, does  a. have anything to do with  b.?

The topic in 2008-12-06 is the threat posed by “massively organized information”. MOI.

MOI was a central factor in the success of Hitler’s campaign to exterminate a group of people.

IBM’s system of data storage on “punch cards” that could be mechanically sorted by Hollerith machines not only made a fortune for IBM, it enabled rapid identification of individuals based on selected characteristics.

“Herman Hollerith invented IBM”. ..  In 1879 he “accepted the invitation of his Columbia professor  to become an assistant in the U.S. Census Bureau.”  Census data was manually generated.  Imagine the time it took.  A new census would be underway before the last census results were reported.

Hollerith came up with the “idea of a card with standardized holes, each representing a different trait:  gender, nationality, occupation and so forth.  The card would then be fed into a “reader”.   …  Any desired trait could be isolated by simply sorting and resorting for data-specific holes.  … It was nothing less than a nineteenth-century bar code for human beings.”

“By 1884 a prototype machine was constructed …Hollerith patented it  … found it could be used in many more ways than just the census …”The clanging contraption could calculate in a few weeks the results that a man previously spent years correlating.”   Hollerith’s machine was used in the 1890 U.S. census.  Eventually Hollerith’s company became IBM.  The first overseas subsidiary was in Germany, for census work.

And so ..  on into IBM’s lucrative market for population data in Nazi Europe in the 1930’s and 1940’s.

From there to Lockheed Martin Corporation’s involvement in the Canadian (and American and UK) censuses.  I objected to being complicit with this corporation that makes its money from killing people.  I concentrated on cluster bombs because it should be easy in a court of law to prove that LM manufactures cluster bombs.  And that cluster bombs contravene International Humanitarian Law (IHL)(the laws of war) (may be more difficult to prove).  My email of Dec 8th was the news that Canada has signed onto the international treaty to ban cluster bombs.  Great!  that’s easier than IHL to prove.  Our signature on an International Convention to ban cluster bombs is meaningless if we simultaneously financially support one of the largest producers of cluster bombs.   You use economic sanctions to stop inhumane practices.

There is another, unexplored, side of LM.

I am indebted to Lisa for sending in stacks of information that put a name and the details to Lockheed Martin’s international surveillance systems.  That’s later in another email.

“massively organized information”, surveillance systems, the amoral nature of corporations, the lessons from Nazi Europe — it is not too hard to figure out that we need to conspire to stop Lockheed Martin’s contracts for census work.

(I am reminded of the lesson in “Women Who Run With the Wolves”:  it isn’t smart to be naïve.  The wolves that are naïve and not vigilant end up infected, maimed or dead.)

But how does this about Lockheed Martin and population data connect to the food stories?

–        “here’s the good news”, victory for the Canadian Wheat Board and

–        “Now for the bad news”, SWAT team raids on the Ohio Food Co-op?

The relationship is that they are parts of the conspiracy:

–        What’s happening with the census (Lockheed Martin) is wrong.  Action: don’t comply.  Action:  plead “not guilty”.  Creates opportunity:  trial (public attention, spot-light on the issue.)

–        The illegal, undemocratic, and unethical steps taken by the Harper Government to get rid of the CWB are wrong.  I haven’t kept this network informed of the details of that on-going hard-fought battle.  Now there has been a very significant victory in the recent elections to the Board: four out of five of the elected positions went to pro CWB candidates!  Most of us have little idea of how great a victory this is, in the face of abuses of government power.  People banded together, fought hard and won back some ground.  (item #2)

–        Item #3, bad news  (SWAT team raids Ohio Food Co-op)  is so incredible that it’s hard to believe.   I tracked down a person, Jackie Stowers, to make sure.  It would be so nice if I could write Jackie off in some way — discredit her –  it would be more comfortable than believing the article.  Alas!  there’s nothing wrong with Jackie Stowers.  She works to connect people with local growers of naturally-raised and organic food products.

Why is Jackie’s story (SWAT team raid on her home) important? Other people have had the same happen to them. ..But it is happening in the USA.  We are in Canada.

Draw the parallel with Hitler’s expansion from Germany into other European countries.  His forces didn’t just arrive one day and take over.  The Hollerith machines were working at frantic speeds in many different countries well before the official arrival of the Nazis.  IBM had subsidiaries in those countries.  The President of IBM was delighted with the money IBM was making.

Our first communications to Statistics Canada over the out-sourcing of census work to Lockheed Martin were met with “The contracting-out is to a Canadian company (LM Canada), not an American company.”.  We called them on that piece of nonsense.  StatsCan (now headed by Mr. Munir Sheikh) also contradicted itself by saying, in other communications, that they were obliged to accept Lockheed’s tender because of NAFTA rules.  If the contract was truly with a Canadian company, NAFTA of course, would not apply.

IBM with its subsidiaries in various European countries. Population data collection for the Nazis, with no qualms.   Lockheed Martin with its subsidiaries in Canada.  Population data collection through the census gets into the hands of the American military.  Legitimately, from the American point-of-view.  They passed the Patriot Act.  On 26/11/2008 I sent the email to you “News report Nov 01,  U.S. wants more information on Canadians”.   … No.  You don’t let Lockheed Martin work on the Canadian census.    You stop it right now….  No.  WE put an end to it, because there ain’t nobody else who is going to do it for us.

The point is, and we know it:  the loss of democratic functioning in the U.S. doesn’t stop at the 49th parallel.

In Jackie Stowers’ Ohio world, people laughed at those who were concerned about the erosion of fundamental principles.  After the SWAT team’s arrival and walking off with the family’s food supply, computer, food co-op membership lists, cell phones, etc.  people are no longer laughing.

The good news is that an organization (sorry, I don’t know the name) contacted the Stowers.  The organization will most likely supply resources to help out.  Jackie met with them yesterday.

What happened to the Stowers is wrong. Our conspiracy is to fight wrong.  We are part of a huge conspiracy that is fighting wrong.  I am certain that the Stowers will win.  The key is that the battle has to be fought.

I wanted Jackie to know that there are many Canadians who stand shoulder-to-shoulder in support of her and her family.  I know that the more abuses that are allowed in the U.S., the more vulnerable we become in Canada.  With more people connected and working together on this continent, the fight against wrong will prevail.  We are in a giant tug-of-war.  We add more people to our side of the rope.

We build our strength through every wrong that is righted.

Just in case you missed it,  I repeat information that is important for Canadians to understand – the American “Bush” regime has to have access to oil.

  • Lockheed Martin and the census fits into the safeguards to ensure access.
  • Massively organized data to identify resistance to their claims on oil and gas.
  • The RCMP anti-terrorist squad sent to Dawson Creek and the Encana pipeline would have its “terrorists” locked away.
  • The  supply of oil exists in the more northerly areas of Canada, largely populated by indigenous people.  You can predict that there will be a large effort to gain compliance with the census from First Nations communities.  The carrot is “we have to have the population data in order to give you money”.

The safeguard for us is dispersed power.  Centralized power, centralized control of information is not healthy.

From 2008-12-06 and the video link below:  Author Edwin Black uses American daily oil consumption figures to establish the extent and consequences of American dependency on oil imports.  He makes the point that the Americans do not have a plan for a disruption in supply (European countries do).  The role of the Straits of Hormuz in the supply line become abundantly clear.

He does not mention the Tar Sands, nor the fact that Canada is now the number one oil supplier to the U.S.  I am left with the feeling that the American “Bush Administration”, contrary to Black’s statements, DOES have a strategy for oil security.  It lies in Canada.  Uneasiness about that comes with the Troop Exchange Agreement (signed Feb 14, 2008)  and the new “Canada First Defence Strategy”  (June 2008) in which Canada has “interoperability” and “compatible doctrine” with the U.S..

I can choose to know or choose not to know:  we are part of the strategy for oil and water security for the U.S.

Watch this video if you have any doubts about how serious the situation is.

Edwin Black at Western Automotive Journalists’ Symposium video (Be patient or bypass the introductory comments.)

(Link no longer valid)   http://video.google.ca/videosearch?hl=en&q=edwin+black&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

———————————–

Most of you received the email about the RCMP anti-terrorist squad deployed to Dawson Creek because of the “incidents” on the pipeline.   It is important to put people associated with the police and military onto our distribution lists.  It was very easy, in the Encana case, to demonstrate that the police are being used to protect the interests of large corporations.  The “incidents” happen because ANY people, in ANY place – any sane person – will protect their families and loved ones from being poisoned to disease, infertility and death.  The Government is not regulating, in service to the corporations and “money”.  The RCMP is truly searching for THE VICTIMS, not the terrorists.  The RCMP anti-terrorist squad is looking in the wrong place for the terrorists.

Talking with people in the police and military, at every level, is the best insurance against a repeat of what happened to Jackie Stowers and her family.  We can spare ourselves from SWAT teams descending upon us.

In my mind, all of this is connected.

Edwin Black’s book “IBM and the Holocaust” is a great motivator for me to get as much press as possible for the trial.  Jackie Stowers’ story reinforces my motivation.

“Their” conspiracy will not win the day.  It won’t get off the ground.  “Our” conspiracy will win out.

Cheers,

Sandra

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

(2)  WONDERFUL VICTORY!  CWB (CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD)

Column #698   Farmers Show Strong CWB Support in Director Elections,  Paul Beingessner   08/12/08

One of the most contentious CWB director elections to date ended on Sunday, with a result sure to have the federal government gnashing its teeth. Supporters of the CWB’s single desk won four out of five of the districts holding elections. The exception was District Two, in Alberta. Three of the five elected directors are new to the board, as incumbents in these three districts were not eligible to run again.

In the four districts that elected CWB supporters, the margins of victory were large, with 60 percent of voters, on average, voting for single desk supporters. The largest margin fell to Bill Woods, in District Four. This was formerly held by Ken Ritter, who could not run again. Significantly, the two Conservative MPs whose ridings cover most of District Four are Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and David Anderson, the MP with responsibilities for the CWB. Both Anderson and Ritz have been vocal and aggressive opponents of the CWB, claiming that their own electoral victories showed that farmers want to see the single desk eliminated.

Woods took the district on the first ballot, with 63.4 percent of the vote. Wood’s main opponent, Sam Magnus, held several positions with the federal Reform and Conservative parties, including a stint on the national council of the Conservative Party. Magnus’ status within the party didn’t help him much as he garnered only 28.5 percent of total votes. If Ritz and Anderson have a vestige of honesty, these MPs will drop the pretense that their schemes to neuter the board are supported by a majority of farmers.

Several other points stand out from the election. The Conservative government continued its overt interference in the election, including pruning the voters list further and sending letters to a select group of farmers, telling them how they might obtain ballots.

The culmination of government interference came when five prairie MPs used their parliamentary expense accounts to send personal letters to farmers on the voters list, telling them to vote for anti-single desk candidates. One of these MPs was David Anderson. As Wood’s substantial victory demonstrated, this strategy failed miserably. Hopefully, when Parliament resumes in January, in whatever form it might take, Anderson will be required to account for this misuse of Parliamentary money, and to explain how he acquired the voters list. That list is supposed to be confidential to the candidates.

Another of the four MPs, Andrew Scheer of Regina-Qu’Appelle, used his expense account to send a personal attack on re-elected CWB director Rod Flaman. Flaman was Scheer’s Liberal opponent in the federal election. Scheer claimed that Flaman “shamelessly shirked his responsibilities to the farmers who elected him and spent the last year campaigning for federal office while collecting his CWB pay cheque”.

Apparently farmers trusted Flaman more than they trusted Scheer, whose closest connection to agriculture is being an insurance salesman in Regina. Flaman won the district with 60.3 percent of the vote on the third ballot.

Currently, the CWB board consists of fifteen directors, with ten elected by farmers and five appointed by the federal government. Eight of the ten farmer-elected directors support the single desk, but the directors appointed by the Conservative government in Ottawa line up directly with the government in its opinion of the CWB. The very strong showing by pro-CWB candidates calls into question the legitimacy of the directors appointed by the government. Clearly they do not represent the wishes of farmers who want the CWB to continue its current mandate. As such, their role at the board table should be minimized to any specific areas of expertise they might have. Obstruction is not considered an area of expertise.

On a positive note for those candidates who were defeated, the Saskatchewan government seems to have a home for anti-single desk defeated candidates in Enterprise Saskatchewan. The Agriculture Sector Team has a couple on its board, including the chair, Gerrid Gust. While the province has aligned itself with the federal government’s anti-board stand, maybe it’s time for the Saskatchewan Party to reconsider its support of a position farmers’ clearly do not support.

On a final note, the rate of return of ballots reached 54 percent, a very good return for a mail-in ballot. The Conservatives have yet to find a way to manipulate the voters list that will give them the result they want.

© Paul Beingessner

————————————–

(3)  SWAT TEAM RAIDS OHIO FOOD CO-OP.  I TALKED WITH JACKIE STOWERS.

Alarming: SWAT Team Raids Ohio Co-op

Fri Dec 5, 2008 6:51 am (PST)
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/08/swat-team.htm

On Monday, December 1, a SWAT team with semi-automatic rifles entered the private home of the Stowers family in LaGrange, Ohio, herded the family onto the couches in the living room, and kept guns trained on parents, children, infants and toddlers, from approximately 11 AM to 8 PM. The team was aggressive and belligerent. The children were quite traumatized. At some point, the “bad cop” SWAT team was relieved by another team, a “good cop” team that tried to befriend the family. The Stowers family has run a very large, well-known food cooperative called Manna Storehouse on the western side of the greater Cleveland area for many years.

There were agents from the Department of Agriculture present, one of them identified as Bill Lesho. The search warrant is reportedly supicious-looking. Agents began rifling through all of the family’s possessions, a task that lasted hours and resulted in a complete upheaval of every private area in the home. Many items were taken that were not listed on the search warrant. The family was not permitted a phone call, and they were not told what crime they were being charged with. They were not read their rights. Over ten thousand dollars worth of food was taken, including the family’s personal stock of food for the coming year. All of their computers, and all of their cell phones were taken, as well as phone and contact records. The food cooperative was virtually shut down. There was no rational explanation, nor  justification, for this extreme violation of Constitutional rights.

Presumably Manna Storehouse might eventually be charged with running a retail establishment without a license. Why then the Gestapo-type interrogation for a 3rd degree misdemeanor charge? This incident has raised the ominous specter of a restrictive new era in State regulation and enforcement over the nation’s private food supply.

This same type of abusive search and seizure was reported by those innocents who fell victim to oppressive federal drug laws passed in the 1990s. The present circumstance raises the obvious question: is there some rabid new interpretation of an existing drug law that considers food a controlled substance worthy of a nasty SWAT operation? Or worse, is there a previously unrecognized provision(s) pertaining to food in the Homeland Security measures? Some have suggested that it was merely an out-of-control, hot-to-trot ODA agent, and, if so, this would be a best-case scenario. Anything else might spell the beginning of the end for the freedom to eat unregulated and unmonitored food.

One blogger familiar with the Ohio situation has reported that:

“Interestingly, I believe they [Manna Storehouse] said a month or so ago, an undercover ODA official came to their little store and claimed to have a sick father wanting to join the co-op.  Both the owner and her daughter-in-law had a horrible feeling about the man, and decided not to allow him into the co-op and notified him by certified mail. He came back to the co-op demanding to be part of it. They refused and gave him names of other businesses and health food stores closer to his home. Not coincidentally, this man was there yesterday as part of the raid.”

The same blog also noted that the Ohio Department of Agriculture has been chastised by the courts in several previous instances for its aggression, including trying to entrap an Amish man in a raw milk “sale,” which backfired when it became known that the Amish believe in a literal interpretation of “give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away” (Matthew 5:42)

The issue appears to be the discovery of a bit of non-institutional beef in an Oberlin College food service freezer a year ago that was tracked down by a county sanitation official to Manna Storehouse. Oberlin College’s student food coop is widely known for its strident ideological stance about eating organic foods. It seems that the Oberlin student food cooperative had joined the Manna Storehouse food cooperative in order to buy organic foods in bulk from the national organic food distributor United, which services buying clubs across the nation. The sanitation official, James Boddy, evidently contacted the Ohio Department of Agriculture. After the first  contact by state ODA officials, Manna Storehouse reportedly wrote them a letter requesting assistance and guidelines for complying with the law. This letter was never answered. Rather, the ODA agent tried several times to infiltrate the coop, as described above. When his attempts failed, the SWAT team showed up!

Food cooperatives and buying clubs have been an active part of the American landscape for over a generation. In the 1970s, with the rise of the organic food industry (a direct outgrowth of the hippie back-to-nature movement) food coops started up all over the country. These were groups of people who freely associated for the purpose of combining their buying power so that they could order organic food items in bulk and case lots. Anyone who was part of these coops in the early era will remember the messy breakdown of 35 pounds of peanut butter and 5 gallon drums of honey!

These buying clubs have persisted and flourished over the years due to their ability to purchase high quality organic foods at reduced prices in bulk quantities. Most cooperatives have participated greatly in the local agrarian economies, supporting neighborhood organic farmers with purchases of produce, eggs, chickens, etc. The groups also purchase food from a number of different local, regional and national distributors, many of them family-based businesses who truck the food themselves. Some of these food cooperatives have become large enough to set up mini-storefront operations where members can drop in and purchase items leftover from case lot sales. Manna Storehouse had established itself in such a manner, using a small enclosed breezeway attached to their home. It was a folksy place with old wooden floors where coop members stopped by to chat and snack on bags of organic corn chips.

The state of Ohio boasts the second largest Amish population in the country. Many of the Amish live on acreages where they raise their own food, not unlike Manna Storehouse, and sell off the extras to neighbors and church members. There is a sense of foreboding that this state crackdown on a longstanding, reputable food cooperative operation could adversely impact the peaceful agrarian way of life not only for the Amish, but homeschoolers and those families living off the land on rural acreages. It raises the disturbing possibility that it could become a crime to raise your own food, buy eggs from the farmer down the road, or butcher your own chickens for family and friends – bustling activities that routinely take place in backwater America.

The freedom to purchase food directly from the source is increasingly under attack. For those who have food allergies and chemical intolerances, or who are on special medical diets, this is becoming a serious health issue. Will Americans retain the right to purchase food that is uncontaminated by pesticides, herbicides, allergens, additives, dyes, preservatives, MSG, GMOs, radiation, etc.? The melamine scare from China underscores the increasingly inferior and suspect quality of modern processed institutional foods. One blog, commenting on the bizarre and troubling Manna Storehouse situation, observed that:

“No one is saying exactly why. At the same time the FDA says it it safe to eat the 40% of tainted beef found in Costco’s and Sam’s all over the nation. These farm raids are very common now. Every farmer needs to fully eqiped [sic] for the possibility of it happening to them. The Farmer To Consumer Legal Defense Fund was created just for this purpose. The USDA just released their plans to put a law into action that will put all small farmers out of business. Animals for the sale of meat or milk will only be allowed in commercial farms, even the organic ones.” December 3, 2008 7:09 PM

—————————————————————————–

Seems U.S. forgot to tell Navy Seabee Chad Stowers the Real War Is being fought here…and he’s the enemy: “When officers from the Lorain County Sheriff’s Office in Ohio arrived last Monday at the Manna Storehouse food cooperative in LaGrange with weapons drawn and trained on Jackie Stowers and her children, along with her in-laws, there was one member of the family missing. Jackie’s husband, Chad, is a U.S. Navy Seabee, helping in construction projects in the midst of combat in Iraq. He’s been there, separated from his family, for the last five months, supposedly protecting our rights from abuse—the sort of abuse that appears to be taking place on an ever-more-frequent basis at farms and food outlets around the country.”

 

UPDATE:  June 2011,   Court rules against food co-op

http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2011/06/08/court-rules-against-food-co-op/

 

UPDATE, November 2, 2011.  WHAT EVENTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE STOWERS’ CASE?

http://www.ohioconstitution.org/2009/10/09/manna-storehouse/

The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the appeal of the lower court’s decision.

 

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

(4)  FOR NEWCOMERS:  ANOTHER MEANS FOR HANDING DATA OFF TO CORPORATIONS, “Govt fronts”.

Email sent:  October 23, 2008

Subject:  Corporations in Governance – Nader video. Government use of word “Corporation”.

It’s more than Government serving corporate interests.  Governments are converting themselves to corporations.  . . .

(Oct 11, 2012.  The Government is doing what I feared, as spelt out.  I separated this out to make it easier to find – please click on http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=6838 )

Dec 082008
 

See also  2008-12-08 and 2009-05-29 .

CONTENTS

(1)  I WILL USE CANADA’S SIGNATURE ON THE TREATY, IN MY TRIAL!

(2)  PROGRESS! CANADA NO LONGER LISTED AS PRODUCER OF CLUSTER BOMBS.

(3)  WHO DO I THANK FOR CANADA’S SIGNATURE ON THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CLUSTER MUNITIONS (CCM)?

(4)  COUNTRIES THAT BAN INVESTMENT IN MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER MUNITIONS FOR ETHICAL REASONS.  IF THEY CAN DO IT, WHY CAN’T WE?

(5)  BANK GROUPS INVEST HEAVILY IN THE ARMS INDUSTRY.  LEVERAGE POWER AND LACK OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY A THREAT TO THE WORLD.

(6)  CANADA PENSION PLAN INVESTMENT in MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER BOMBS

(7)  CANADIAN BANKS IN CLUSTER BOMB MANUFACTURERS

(8)  STUMBLING BLOCK FOR BRITAIN’S SIGNATURE ON CCM: US MILITARY KEEPS STOCKPILE OF CLUSTER BOMBS IN BRITAIN.

(9)  MINES ACTION CANADA (MAC) REPORT ON THE TREATY

(10)  CANWEST NEWS REPORT ON THE TREATY BANNING CLUSTER BOMBS, DEC 3, 2008

(11)  TEXT OF THE UN CONVENTION (TREATY)

(12)  JULY 24 POSTING RE CLUSTER BOMBS

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

(1)  I WILL USE CANADA’S SIGNATURE ON THE TREATY, IN MY TRIAL!

Thanks to those who picked up on the connection between:

– Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of cluster bombs

– Canada contracts-out Canadian census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation

– Canada signs onto the treaty to ban cluster bombs

– my on-going trial for failure to comply with the census because of Lockheed Martin’s role in it.

I will put Canada’s signature on the treaty to ban cluster bombs to good use in the trial!  You are angels on my shoulder – many thanks.

“Canada joins cluster bomb treaty, U.S. absent”  Wed. Dec. 3 2008

CTV.ca News Staff

Canada has signed onto an international treaty to ban cluster bombs, though the U.S. and Russia have declined to join the effort.

Canada became a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions on Wednesday when Jillian Stirk, Canada’s ambassador to Norway, signed the document on behalf of Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon. …”

Kathleen writes:

” ..  it will be highly controversial for the government to be supporting the production of cluster bombs on the one hand via utilization of a company that produces them, while on the other hand going against cluster bombs within international circles.”

(Then-) Lawyer for the trial, Howard Rubin, says yes – get a copy of the treaty – which I found on the web (#11 below).

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

(2)  PROGRESS! CANADA NO LONGER LISTED AS PRODUCER OF CLUSTER BOMBS.

On July 24th I sent out an email, “Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of cluster bombs.  Canada, producer of cluster bombs.”

Canada is now signed onto this UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CLUSTER MUNITIONS (CCM).

The web information has been changed:

–  Canada is a now listed as “Party to CCM”

NOTE THE UPDATES:

1. Canada is no longer listed as a producer of cluster bombs

Source:  Cluster Munition Information Chart

(Link no longer valid:  http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/Cluster%20Munition%20Information%20Chart.%2011.2008.pdf)

AND

2.  We are now listed as a country that is in the process of destroying its stockpile of cluster bombs.

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/munitionChart061507.pdf

Hallelujah!

But we still have catch-up to do with the more advanced countries in the world – – we still INVEST in the manufacturers of cluster bombs.  We still give Lockheed Martin census and other contracts.

Challenge the banking and financial institutions, and the government, including CPP.  That’s how we will become a “leading world” country with some morality and integrity.  (See #5 and #6 below)

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

(3)  WHO DO I THANK FOR CANADA’S SIGNATURE ON THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CLUSTER MUNITIONS (CCM)?

A.  MAC

I sent a congratulatory and thank-you note to:  Mines Action Canada (MAC)

“… a coalition of Canadian non-governmental organizations, is an international leader working to eliminate the serious humanitarian, environmental and development consequences of landmines and other explosive remnants of war (ERW).”

Executive Director:  Paul Hannon, e-mail: info AT minesactioncanada.org

———

B.  FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTER, LAWRENCE CANNON

Later I will write to him:

– express support.

– point out the contradiction of government contracts that support Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of cluster bombs.

– tell him that “the government cannot afford double standards by opposing the use of cluster munitions, while our own government funds (CPP) invest in cluster munition production”.

–  “the government cannot morally allow investments to be made by its resident financial institutions that are in total opposition to its principles or policies”, as expressed by the signing of the UN Convention on Cluster Munitions.

–  “government efforts to fight the misery connected to the use of cluster munitions should include efforts to dry up the capital flows towards cluster munition production and trade.”

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

(4)  COUNTRIES THAT BAN INVESTMENT IN MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER MUNITIONS FOR ETHICAL REASONS.  IF THEY CAN DO IT, WHY CAN’T WE?

– Norway, through the Government’s “Ethical Investing” which has been discussed many times in this network.  There are excellent statements about why they will not invest in manufacturers of cluster munitions.  Read them by clicking on the link below.

–  Belgium, through the prolonged actions of Netverk Vlaanderen.  The Belgian Senate passed a law proposal in 2007:

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/explosive-investments_financial-insts-and-clusters-netverk-vlaanderen.pdf (This is an excellent paper, well worth reading.)

We really need to address the question of WHY Canada isn’t a leader on these issues.  We used to be, think back to Lloyd Axworthy and land mines.

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

(5)  BANK GROUPS INVEST HEAVILY IN THE ARMS INDUSTRY.  LEVERAGE POWER AND LACK OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY A THREAT TO THE WORLD.

From the web link:

“Although 98% of cluster munition victims are civilians, producers don’t have any problems attracting capital from financial markets… concepts like corporate social responsibility and socially responsible investment seem to have little impact on investment decisions. …

“1.2  … a big majority of banking groups and other financial institutions  (FIs) are blindly investing in any profit-gaining activity and are totally neglecting – and even ignoring – the impact of their decisions on human lives.  … This combination of a huge leverage power and a lack of social responsibility is a dangerous cocktail posing a serious threat to the sustainable development of our planet.

More and more … are recognizing the power of FIs working behind the screens of companies and projects.  Civil society is increasingly questioning the financial sector’s accountability and responsibility.  The Collevecchio Declaration on Financial Institutions and Sustainability, is a strong call by civil society organizations on financial institutions to embrace a commitment to sustainability, “do no harm”, responsibility, accountability and transparency.” …

“1.2  Fostering cluster munition production: an ethical minefield

Several reports and studies have confirmed and documented the general knowledge that bank groups are investing heavily in the arms industry.  With growing military budgets around the world, and especially the so called “war on terror” since the end of 2001, the arms industry has remained or become an interesting profit making industry for investors.  … Moreover the defence industry is known for its low sustainability standards, tendency towards corruption and lack of transparency.”

(Lockheed Martin is listed as a manufacturer of cluster munitions, which its website confirms.)

(UPDATE: Lockheed later made changes to its website to say that it doesn’t manufacture them.  I have copies of information from their website that contradict the statement, should anyone want it.)

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

(6)  CANADA PENSION PLAN INVESTMENT in MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER BOMBS

http://www.cppib.ca/Results/Financial_Highlights/public_equity.html

At March 31, 2008 CPP owned:

Lockheed Martin  345,000 shares valued then at $35,000,000.00

Raytheon    551,000 shares valued at $37,000,000.00

Textron   211,000 shares $12,000,000.00

EADS   101,000 shares then worth $2,000,000.00

Through CPP alone, Canadians (some of that money is mine) held $86,000,000.00 of investments in the manufacturers of cluster munitions.  If other countries can lead the way, why can’t we at least follow “best practices”?

The CPP Investment Board’s email address is:  csr AT  cppib.ca

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

(7)  CANADIAN BANKS IN CLUSTER BOMB MANUFACTURERS

Continuing with information from the website:

“… What follows are some examples of commercial banking services to six cluster munition producers …

(I picked out all the “Canada” entries from the various list of banks that provided capital in 2005:)

Bank of Nova Scotia (Canada) $US 70 million …

Bank of Nova Scotia, (Canada) $US 45 million, …

Bank of Montreal (Canada) $US 45 million, …

Bank of Nova Scotia, (Canada) $US 45 million,…

Royal Bank of Canada(Canada) $US 45 million

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

(8)  STUMBLING BLOCK FOR BRITAIN’S SIGNATURE ON CCM:  US MILITARY KEEPS STOCKPILE OF CLUSTER BOMBS IN BRITAIN.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7423714.stm

” … One stumbling block for the treaty could be the stockpile of cluster munitions the US military keeps at bases on British soil.   It will be very difficult for the US to engage in operations with countries who have banned this weapon and continue to use them

The British representative in Dublin, John Duncan, said the UK would work with Washington to find a solution to the issue.

But in a statement, the Pentagon stood firm, saying: “While the United States shares the humanitarian concerns of those in Dublin, cluster munitions have demonstrated military utility, and their elimination from US stockpiles would put the lives of our soldiers and those of our coalition partners at risk.”

Some campaigners do believe countries like the US will change, however. They cite the landmine treaty of 1997 that was never signed by the US, Israel, Russia or China, yet those nations have not used landmines since it came into effect.

Simon Conway, from the Cluster Munitions Coalition, said there would now be “massive” pressure on the US.    “We think now that all of America’s key allies have just renounced the weapon it will be very difficult for the US to engage in operations with countries who have banned this weapon and continue to use them,” he said.

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Ed Davey said the prime minister must make clear whether he would continue to allow the US to store its own cluster munitions on British territory.

“If he is serious about ending the scourge of these weapons, he must bring this abuse of the ‘special relationship’ to an end,” Mr Davey said.

(INSERT:  Lockheed Martin is now into the scourge of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, “unmanned drones”)

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

(9)  MINES ACTION CANADA REPORT ON THE TREATY

(NOTE BY SANDRA):  the UN Convention (treaty) must now be ratified by the parliaments of at least 30 countries in order to come into effect. That is the usual process.)

Mines Action Canada (MAC), a coalition of Canadian non-governmental organizations, is an international leader working to eliminate the serious humanitarian, environmental and development consequences of landmines and other explosive remnants of war (ERW).

03-Dec-2008     Summary

Today governments from around the world are signing the most significant disarmament and humanitarian treaty of the decade, banning the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions.

Details

Canada signs historic international treaty banning deadly cluster munitions

New treaty also obligates governments to provide victim assistance and to clear contaminated land

Oslo, Dec 3rd, 2008

Eleven years ago today the world came to Ottawa to ban landmines. Today, Canada took another step towards protecting civilians by signing another historic treaty in Norway – the Convention on Cluster Munitions. “The Convention on Cluster Munitions protects innocent civilians from another indiscriminate weapon,” said Paul Hannon, Executive Director of Mines Action Canada, Canada’s civil society campaign that has been working to ban cluster bombs since 2001. “Canadians are justifiably proud of the leadership we have shown on landmines and we should be equally happy that Canada is one of the first countries in the world to sign the new cluster bomb treaty.

Today governments from around the world are signing the most significant disarmament and humanitarian treaty of the decade, banning the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions, and obligating them to provide victim assistance and to clear contaminated land.

Signatories of the Convention on Cluster Munitions include many of the world’s producers, stockpilers and past users, as well as some of the most seriously affected states. Close to fifty foreign, defense and government ministers from around the world are signing the treaty, demonstrating the high level of political commitment to urgently rid the world of cluster munitions.

“This treaty shows what can be achieved when states and civil society act together,” said Co-Chair of the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC) Grethe Østern of Norwegian People’s Aid. “This is a victory because the treaty outlines clear obligations for states to help survivors, clear the land and destroy stockpiles so that the weapon can never be used again.”

Like chemical, biological, and antipersonnel landmine conventions before, this treaty bans an entire category of weapons. For over 40 years cluster bombs have killed and injured civilians during and after conflict.

Unexploded cluster munitions continue to kill and injure for days, months, even decades after conflict. Tens of thousands of civilians worldwide have been killed or injured by the weapon. On average, a quarter of all cluster bomb victims are children. The treaty will help ensure that survivors, including their families and communities, receive concrete and measurable victim assistance, including physical and psycho –social needs, equality, rights and national action plans.

CMC Spokesperson Branislav Kapetanovic said, “The development of this treaty has meant a lot to me and has given me a reason to live. Being able to fight against something that brought a lot of suffering into my life and left me without arms and legs, left me without hope”. Kapetanovic was injured in November 2000 while clearing NATO cluster submunitions in Serbia. ”For us here, this is not the end of our road: we still have to make sure the Treaty is implemented and monitored, and that funding is available to those in need,” he added.

The Convention on Cluster Munitions sets the highest standard to date in international law for assistance to victims and their communities. It obliges nations to destroy all stockpiles within eight years and to clear contaminated land within ten. States must also provide detailed annual transparency reports on progress towards meeting their legal obligations.

“Countries have finally realized that today’s wars cannot be fought or won with cold war weapons – the sooner they are destroyed, the better,” said Thomas Nash, CMC Coordinator. “As of today, millions of these indiscriminate weapons will be destroyed and the world will be a safer place,” he added. A number of countries have already started destroying their stockpiles.

Eighteen out of 26 NATO countries are signing the treaty, including the Canada, UK, France and Germany, as well as most African and Latin American countries, and some of the most contaminated nations, including Laos and Lebanon. After Oslo, the treaty will remain open for signature at the UN in New York. For the treaty to enter into force it must be ratified by 30 countries.

“Like the Ottawa Treaty banning landmines, this treaty will stigmatize the use of the weapon by all countries, even if they have not yet signed the treaty, Nations such as the United States, Russia, and Israel will risk severe international condemnation if they ever use cluster munitions again,” said CMC Co-Chair Steve Goose, Director of the Arms division at Human Rights Watch. “This is a time to celebrate, but the work doesn’t stop here. It is time for countries to turn these binding words on paper into a reality on the ground,” he concluded.

Even after the signing ceremony is over, regular citizens can still sign the People’s Treaty to pledge their support and get involved in movement to turn the treaty’s goals into a reality. Sign today!

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

(10)  CANWEST NEWS REPORT ON THE TREATY BANNING CLUSTER BOMBS, DEC 3, 2008

(the convention must now be ratified by the parliaments of at least 30 countries in order to come into effect.)

(Link no longer valid:  http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=1026584)

Canada signs treaty banning cluster bombs Steven Edwards, Canwest News Service

Published: Wednesday, December 03, 2008

UNITED NATIONS – Canada on Wednesday became part of the first global treaty banning cluster bombs, joining more than 100 countries at a signing ceremony in Oslo.

Announcing at the last minute it would join the group was Afghanistan, which had earlier been seen as bowing to U.S. pressure to refrain.

“This convention is a significant achievement. Over time, it will save the lives of many thousands of people around the world and will help to end the use of a weapon that has devastating effects on civilians,” Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said in Ottawa.

The Convention on Cluster Munitions, which prohibits the use, development, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster weapons, is the first international treaty to ban an entire category of conventional arms.

But absent from the ceremony were the top cluster-bomb users, among them the United States, Russia, China and Israel.

Cannon pledged that Canada would work to have the convention accepted universally.

“Canada looks forward to working closely with like-minded states, UN agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross and civil society organizations to fully implement the convention, rid the world of cluster munitions, and as far as possible repair the shattered lives of people who have suffered because of them,” he said.

Cluster munitions typically contain dozens to hundreds of small, explosive sub-munitions. They have been used in more than 30 countries and territories, and have a devastating impact on civilians, who account for 98 per cent of all recorded casualties. Children are particularly vulnerable, and many are killed or injured as they pick up the bomblets out of curiosity.

“The signing of this convention by so many states is evidence that the suffering of victims and affected countries has not gone unnoticed,” Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, said in a statement.

With Afghanistan’s decision to sign, the number of countries inking the treaty Wednesday was 108.

“I have received the authorization to sign the treaty,” Afghanistan’s ambassador to Oslo, Jawad Ludin, said to applause from country representatives.

Afghanistan was the target of tens of thousands of cluster bombs dropped by the United States in 2001 and 2002 as the U.S.-led invasion to topple the Taliban unfolded.

Insiders have said Afghanistan had been an early supporter of the treaty before backtracking under pressure from Washington.

The turnaround in the Afghan position came after lobbyists persisted with pleas to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, whose decision, Ludin said, was a “tribute to victims.”

Some former users are already convinced that there are alternatives to having cluster bombs in their arsenals.

Britain, the world’s third-largest user of cluster munitions in the past decade, is working “night and day” to destroy its stock of 30 million bombs, said Thomas Nash of the Cluster Munitions Coalition, an umbrella group that comprises some 300 non-governmental organizations.

He added that France, Germany and Norway had also already begun destroying their cluster munition stocks.

Signing the document for Canada was Ambassador Jillian Stirk. With the Norwegian government having played a central role in hammering out the convention, the ceremony took place at Oslo’s City Hall.

Before it can go into effect, the convention must be ratified by the parliaments of at least 30 countries, something Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere asked countries to quickly do.

© Canwest News Service 2008

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

(11)  TEXT OF THE CONVENTION (TREATY)

Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) is at both of these web addresses:

(Link no longer valid:  http://www.clusterconvention.org/pages/pages_v/vb_resourcedocs.html)

(Link no longer valid:  http://untreaty.un.org/English/Opening_Signature/english.pdf)

For “Cluster munitions: What the UN is saying”  go to:

(Link no longer valid:  http://www.mineaction.org/overview.asp?o=1324)

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

(12)  JULY 24 POSTING: CANADA, PRODUCER OF CLUSTER BOMBS

Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of cluster bombs.  Canada, producer of cluster bombs.

Dec 062008
 

CONTENTS

(1)  COMMENTARY
(2)  THE SECRET HISTORIES,  AN ANTHOLOGY, EDITED BY JOHN S. FRIEDMAN
(3)  IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST,  BY EDWIN BLACK
(4)  AN IMMIGRANT, DAREK CZERNEWCAN, ORIGINALLY FROM A COMMUNIST COUNTRY WRITES
(5)  EDWIN BLACK, IDEAL EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE TRIAL, OR NOT
(6)  THE PLAN, NEW BOOK (2008) BY BLACK, IN THE CANADIAN CONTEXT.  THE KICKER:  OIL (water?) SECURITY FOR THE USA.

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

(1)  COMMENTARY

“Mankind barely noticed when the concept of massively organized information quietly emerged to become a means of social control, a weapon of war, and a roadmap for group destruction.  …    (from IBM and the Holocaust)

 

Ha!  I love this lawyer, Howard.  Instructing me on defence for the trial, Howard writes:

–        Do not use this book I am quoting from

–        Do not use history

–        Do not use the Iraq War

–        (all the things I WANT to do!)

And do you know, he’s mostly right.  He says:

–        You will lose the court

–        You will lose the media

–        We do not learn from history

–        What IBM did (working with the Nazis to supply population data) is not what Lockheed Martin did

Okay, okay.  What I can say is, “I did not fill out the census form because I believed that the information would not be secure based on …,  (or)   I read about cluster bombs and believe …”.   That kind of thing.  Forget about telling the Court the REAL reasons I would not cooperate with what Statistics Canada (the Canadian name for the Census Bureau) is doing.

But I still think it’s important to understand history, even if we are doomed to repeat it (as in Kosovo, as in Rwanda, and the list goes on.)

Maybe I can’t use the following directly in the court case.  But it is one hell of a big motivator to me.  Maybe to you, too?

THE ROLE OF MECHANIZED CENSUS DATA IN NAZI EUROPE

(THE HOLOCAUST), COMPLIMENTS OF IBM.

Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the driving force behind getting a Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

He understood history.

The Charter came well before Edwin Black’s book,  IBM and the Holocaust, the strategic alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s most powerful corporation  (2001) .  The book is a meticulous documentation of the role of census data in Nazi Europe.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the application (interpretation) of it by the Supreme Court of Canada, are  tools we can use to prevent a re-occurrence of Nazi Europe or anything like it.

Even prior to the publication of IBM and the Holocaust enlightened Canadian leadership understood the dangers of state collection of data on its citizens, the need for a tool to prevent the state from encroaching upon the privacy of the individual.  We were given a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  It is useless if we don’t stand up and use it in times such as this.

IBM and the Holocaust dictates we do so.

Cheers!

Sandra

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

(2)  THE SECRET HISTORIES, AN ANTHOLOGY , EDITED BY JOHN S. FRIEDMAN

Synchronicity:

–        Thursday, in relation to the trial, (I was representing myself at this point) it was highly recommended to me that I read Edwin Black’s book  IBM and the Holocaust,  The Strategic Alliance Between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation  (2001).

–        Friday (last nite), I started reading a book I’d picked up, The Secret Histories, An Anthology (2005)  (things that have happened in history, but which have been kept secret).   What do I find?  – –    “IBM and the Holocaust” again.

From The Secret Histories (p. xv):

A reader might take this book as yet another reason to think skeptically about agencies of government and corporate economy, understanding them as prone to the abuse of power through secrecy.  Even my once beloved FBI proved capable of egregious assaults on the rights of a population it was sworn to protect.  If the FBI is capable of such corruption, why not the Army, or IBM?  But a reader might also take this book as the occasion to ask a more difficult question about the nature of democratic polity.  Suppression of information, in a free society, can be exclusively a matter of government connivance, but often – and some of the stories collected here make the point – the culture of secrecy requires a complicitous media and a passive citizenry.     We do not know what we do not want to know.

The Soviets lie, while we tell the truth?  Why were Americans like me so blasé, say, when Washington was caught in its blatant lie about that U-2 “weather plane”? …

The point is not to judge such denial from a moral high horse.  Anymore than it is for me to look contemptuously back on my younger self, enthralled as I was with illusions about the FBI.  The human condition is difficult.  No one is innocent.  There are secrets, therefore, that no one wants to face.  The Bible says that the truth will set you free.  Maybe.  But experience says that first, the truth will knock you for a loop.  Then it will set you free.  … But the truth laid bare here is less about our flawed institutions than about our human selves.

The second article in  Secret Histories  is  IBM and the Holocaust.

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

Related:   1940’s “U.S. Census was used to round up hundreds of thousands of patriotic American citizens at gunpoint” 

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

(3)  IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST, BY EDWIN BLACK

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

IBM and the Holocaust is the stunning story of IBM’s strategic alliance with Nazi Germany — beginning in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to power and continuing well into World War II.  As the Third Reich embarked upon its plan of conquest and genocide, IBM and its subsidiaries helped create enabling technologies, step-by-step, from the identification and cataloging programs of the 1930s to the selections of the 1940s.

Only after Jews were identified — a massive and complex task that Hitler wanted done immediately — could they be targeted for efficient asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, enslaved labor, and, ultimately, annihilation. It was a cross-tabulation and organizational challenge so monumental, it called for a computer. Of course, in the 1930s no computer existed.

But IBM’s Hollerith punch card technology did exist. Aided by the company’s custom-designed and constantly updated Hollerith systems, Hitler was able to automate his persecution of the Jews. Historians have always been amazed at the speed and accuracy with which the Nazis were able to identify and locate European Jewry. Until now, the pieces of this puzzle have never been fully assembled. The fact is, IBM technology was used to organize nearly everything in Germany and then Nazi Europe, from the identification of the Jews in censuses, registrations, and ancestral tracing programs to the running of railroads and organizing of concentration camp slave labor.

IBM and its German subsidiary custom-designed complex solutions, one by one, anticipating the Reich’s needs. They did not merely sell the machines and walk away. Instead, IBM leased these machines for high fees and became the sole source of the billions of punch cards Hitler needed.

IBM and the Holocaust takes you through the carefully crafted corporate collusion with the Third Reich, as well as the structured deniability of oral agreements, undated letters, and the Geneva intermediaries — all undertaken as the newspapers blazed with accounts of persecution and destruction.

Just as compelling is the human drama of one of our century’s greatest minds, IBM founder Thomas Watson, who cooperated with the Nazis for the sake of profit.

Only with IBM’s technologic assistance was Hitler able to achieve the staggering numbers of the Holocaust. Edwin Black has now uncovered one of the last great mysteries of Germany’s war against the Jews — how did Hitler get the names?

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

Edwin Black’s  opening words, IBM and the Holocaust  (p.7):

This book will be profoundly uncomfortable to read.  It was profoundly uncomfortable to write.  It tells the story of IBM’s conscious involvement – directly and through its subsidiaries – in the Holocaust, as well as its involvement in the Nazi war machine that murdered millions of others throughout Europe.

Mankind barely noticed when the concept of massively organized information quietly emerged to become a means of social control, a weapon of war, and a roadmap for group destruction.  …

Hitler and his hatred of the Jews was the ironic driving force behind this intellectual turning point.  But his quest was greatly enhanced and energized by the ingenuity and craving for profit of a single American company and its legendary, autocratic chairman.  That company was International Business Machines, and its chairman was Thomas J. Watson.

In the upside-down world of the Holocaust, dignified professionals were Hitler’s advance troops.  Police officials disregarded their duty in favor of protecting villains and persecuting victims.  (INSERT:  please ask if you want email “Follow-up, Police provoke Violence at SPP protest”, sent 28/11/2008.)    Lawyers perverted concepts of justice to create anti-Jewish laws.  Doctors defiled the art of medicine to perpetrate ghastly experiments and even choose who was healthy enough to be worked to death – and who could be cost-effectively sent to the gas chamber. Scientists and engineers debased their higher calling to devise the instruments and rationales of destruction. … 

Solipsistic and dazzled by its own swirling universe of technical possibilities, IBM was self-gripped by a special amoral corporate mantra:  if it can de done, it should be done.  To the blind technocrat, the means were more important than the ends.  The destruction of the Jewish people became even less important because the invigorating nature of IBM’s technical achievement was only heightened by the fantastical profits to be made at a time when bread lines stretched across the world. …

So how did it work?  …

(P. 10)

I was haunted by a question whose answer has long eluded historians.  The Germans always had the lists of Jewish names.  Suddenly, a squadron of grim-faced SS would burst into a city square and post a notice demanding those listed assemble the next day at the train station for deportation to the East.  But how did the Nazis get the lists?  For decades, no one has known.  Few have asked.

The answer:  IBM Germany’s census operations and similar advanced people counting and registration technologies.  IBM was founded in 1896 by German inventor Herman Hollerith as a census tabulating company.  Census was its business.  But when IBM Germany formed its philosophical and technology alliance with Nazi Germany, census and registration took on a new mission.  IBM Germany invented the racial census – listing not just religious affiliation, but bloodline going back generations.  This was the Nazi data lust.  Not just to count the Jews – but to identify them. 

(INSERT:  My Mother commented,  We always thought the Jews were identified by people who snitched on them.)

People and asset registration was only one of the many uses Nazi Germany found for high-speed data sorters.  …

(P. 16)

Many of us have become enraptured in the Age of Computerization and the Age of Information.  I know I have.  But now I am consumed with a new awareness that, for me, as the son of Holocaust survivors, brings me to a whole new consciousness.  I call it the Age of Realization, as we look back and examine technology’s wake.  Unless we understand how the Nazis acquired the names, more lists will be compiled against more people.

Only through exposing and examining what really occurred can the world of technology finally adopt the well-worn motto:  Never Again.

– – – – – –  – – – – – – – — –

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

http://www.amazon.com/IBM-Holocaust-Edwin-Black/dp/0751531995 

Was IBM, “The Solutions Company,” partly responsible for the Final Solution? That’s the question raised by Edwin Black’s IBM and the Holocaust, the most controversial book on the subject since Daniel Jonah Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners. Black, a son of Holocaust survivors, is less tendentiously simplistic than Goldhagen, but his thesis is no less provocative: he argues that IBM founder Thomas Watson deserved the Merit Cross (Germany’s second-highest honor) awarded him by Hitler, his second-biggest customer on earth. “IBM, primarily through its German subsidiary, made Hitler’s program of Jewish destruction a technologic mission the company pursued with chilling success,” writes Black. “IBM had almost single-handedly brought modern warfare into the information age [and] virtually put the ‘blitz’ in the krieg.”

The crucial technology was a precursor to the computer, the IBM Hollerith punch card machine, which Black glimpsed on exhibit at the U.S. Holocaust Museum, inspiring his five-year, top-secret book project. The Hollerith was used to tabulate and alphabetize census data. Black says the Hollerith and its punch card data (“hole 3 signified homosexual … hole 8 designated a Jew”) was indispensable in rounding up prisoners, keeping the trains fully packed and on time, tallying the deaths, and organizing the entire war effort. Hitler’s regime was fantastically, suicidally chaotic; could IBM have been the cause of its sole competence: mass-murdering civilians? Better scholars than I must sift through and appraise Black’s mountainous evidence, but clearly the assessment is overdue.

The moral argument turns on one question: How much did IBM New York know about IBM Germany’s work, and when? Black documents a scary game of brinksmanship orchestrated by IBM chief Watson, who walked a fine line between enraging U.S. officials and infuriating Hitler. He shamefully delayed returning the Nazi medal until forced to–and when he did return it, the Nazis almost kicked IBM and its crucial machines out of Germany. (Hitler was prone to self-defeating decisions, as demonstrated in How Hitler Could Have Won World War II.)

Black has created a must-read work of history. But it’s also a fascinating business book examining the colliding influences of personality, morality, and cold strategic calculation. –Tim Appelo –This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

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

This review is from: IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation (Hardcover)

This book is the most important new work on the Nazi era in the last two decades. The book is even more significant for the questions it raises about what the purpose of a corporation is and should be, what role companies and governments should play in directing cutting edge technology, and the danger that misuses of advanced information technology bring to individuals.

The core of the story is how a key IBM technology, the Hollerith-based card tabulating machines, became available for the Nazi war and Holocaust efforts. Although the details are murky (and may remain so), it is fairly clear that the use of this technology was sustained during the war years in part by shipments of customized (for each end user) tabulating cards from IBM in neutral countries for everything from blitzkriegs to slave camp scheduling to transportation to the death camps. There was not enough paper capacity to make the cards in Europe (that the Nazi and IBM records show were used), and there is no evidence that Nazis created substitutes for these essential supplies.

As Mr. Black warns, “This book will be profoundly uncomfortable to read.” I agree. My sleep will not be the same for some time after experiencing this powerful story.

Mr. Black makes an even stronger statement. “So if you intend to skim, or rely on selected sections, do not read the book at all.” I took him at his word, and did not even read the book quickly. I also arranged to read it in several sittings, so I could think about what I had read in between. I recommend that you do the same.

The reason for my recommendation is that your thinking will change very fundamentally through reading the book. Having read dozens of books by fine historians about the Nazi period, and knowing a great deal about the history of data processing, I assumed that there would be little new to the story here. But the title intrigued me. By the fourth time I saw the book, I could no longer resist it.

What I found inside the book surprised, shocked, and amazed me.

First, many authors claim that it was not clear in the United States that Jews were losing their lives in Europe during the Nazi years until just before the end of the war. This book documents many articles that appeared in the New York Times that certainly seemed to be saying that this systematic killing was going on from very near the time when it began. Anyone who ignored these reports just didn’t want to know.

Second, the book makes many connections between Thomas Watson, Sr. and Nazi Germany. Many things surprised me about this. One, he was there once or twice a year until just before World War II began. The horrible human abuses were probably observed first hand by him then. Two, he had friends who were victimized by the Nazis. Three, he accepted a very prestigious medal from Hitler in 1937 (which he returned in June 1940). Four, he spoke in favor of making U.S. policy pro-German until just before the United States entered World War II. Five, it appeared that he had a lot more concern about IBM’s profits and machines in Europe than about any people there.

Third, although I was very familiar with the improvements in industrial and transportation effectiveness in Germany during the Nazi years, I did not realize that IBM’s design of Hollerith machines for card tabulation was a breakthrough technology that enabled this progress.

Fourth, I had always been amazed that the Nazis had such detailed records of the geneologies of European Jews. What I did not realize was that much of this information was provided by Jewish citizens in government censuses, and was quickly processed into records used by oppressors on Hollerith machines leased from IBM or its subsidiaries.

In France, where the use of these machines was subverted by the Resistance, the percentage rate of Jewish deaths was one-third of what occurred in Holland where this technology was well applied. It is hard to avoid the feeling that millions of people died because these machines were available and kept supplied with parts and punch cards for the Nazis.

One cannot help but draw the comparison between this historical example and the companies and countries (including, apparently, the United States) that have more recently allowed critical nuclear, rocket, and satellite technology to become available to repressive regimes. It seems that by not asking questions about IBM and the Holocaust, we may be continuing to make many of the same mistakes today.

I salute the incredible imagination and back-breaking effort that went into assembling this astonishing set of documents and perspectives. I hope that many people will read the book, that scholars will look for more information to expand our understanding, and that the fundamental questions raised by this book will be debated wherever free people live.

Remember: Your freedom is only as good as that of the least free person, who is most vulnerable.

“Ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.”

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

(4)   AN IMMIGRANT, DAREK CZERNEWCAN, FROM A COMMUNIST COUNTRY WRITES

Darek Czernewcan was charged for failure to fill out his census form.

He writes:
“I purposely declined the census because I felt that the long form, which I received, asked questions which violated my right to privacy. Being an immigrant (originally, I’ve been a citizen now for 16 years), and having come to Canada from a (formerly) communist country, where even Big Brother did not resort to the kind of tactics I am facing in FREE Canada… Well, I was just offended. I did not spend a significant part of my life in the squalor of refugee camps, running away from political oppression, only to be met with the same kind of oppression in the FREE WORLD. I don’t want to rant too much, but I’ll just sum it up this way – I am being threatened with fines and jail time because in a FREE COUNTRY, I refused to tell the government how many hours in a week I spend doing dishes!”

In this Information Age most of us take “information” for granted.

Canadian census forms required information related to ethnicity, etc.

Lockheed Martin is in the business of “surveillance”.

I won’t go into the war work that it does for the American military in Iraq and elsewhere.

We are all familiar with the abuses.

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

(5)  EDWIN BLACK, IDEAL EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE TRIAL, OR NOT.

The IBM story has some resemblance with what is happening today with the Canadian census and Lockheed Martin.   It made me a little nervous.  But also determined.

(See the posting  “Nov 01,  U.S. wants more information on Canadians”)

RE Edwin Black, we haven’t time nor the resources, and as Howard (lawyer) points out, Lockheed Martin is not IBM, LM did not do what IBM did,  I can’t tell the judge to read the book.  (I took the book into Court and brought it to the attention of the Judge and Prosecutor.)

The game is public education.  Sometimes, as Howard says, you go to court for a principle.  I am in full agreement.

After the court case I would like to re-ignite the call for a public inquiry into the police tactics at Montebello.  Those in positions of authority MUST be held accountable.  “The culture of secrecy requires a complicitous media and a passive citizenry”.

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

(6)  THE PLAN, NEW BOOK (2008) BY BLACK, IN THE CANADIAN CONTEXT.  THE KICKER:  OIL (water?) SECURITY FOR THE USA.

I recommend this video to you.

Black uses American daily oil consumption figures to establish the extent and consequences of American dependency on oil imports.  He makes the point that the Americans do not have a plan for a disruption in supply (European countries do).  The role of the Straits of Hormuz in the supply line become abundantly clear.

He does not mention the Tar Sands, nor the fact that Canada is now the number one oil supplier to the U.S.  I am left with the feeling that the Americans, contrary to Black’s statements, DO have a strategy for oil security.  It lies in Canada.  Uneasiness about that comes with the Troop Exchange Agreement (Feb 14, 2008)  and the new “Canada First Defence Strategy”  (June 2008) in which Canada has “interoperability” and “compatible doctrine” with the U.S..

I guess I can CHOOSE TO KNOW or choose not to know:  we are part of the strategy for oil and water security for the U.S.  And, regardless of the court case, Lockheed Martin’s involvement in the Canadian census is problematic, similar to IBM’s involvement in the data capture and storage functions in Nazi Germany.

Edwin Black at Western Automotive Journalists’ Symposium video, click on this web link  (Be patient or bypass the introductory comments.):

(SOrry – the link is no longer valid.  http://video.google.ca/videosearch?hl=en&q=edwin+black&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#)

Dec 052008
 

Dec 5, 2008

Graham Warwick and John M. Doyle
Heavy turbulence has thwarted the second attempt to deliver the first General Atomics Predator B unmanned air vehicle (UAV) to Grand Forks Air Force Base, N.D., today for duty patrolling the U.S.-Canadian border.The 64-foot wingspan UAV turned back before mid-day because of the rough air about 300 miles north of U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Air & Marine’s UAV base in Sierra Vista, Ariz. Better weather conditions were forecast for a third attempt on Dec. 6, according to Juan Munoz Torres, a CBP A&M spokesman.

The Predator B will be based at a special UAV operations center at the N.D. airbase, about 13 miles from Grand Forks International Airport, where CBP A&M maintains an air branch with manned rotary and fixed-wing aircraft. The latest UAV, CBP’s fourth Predator, originally was scheduled to arrive Dec. 4 but was delayed by a communications problem at Sierra Vista, where three Predators are based to patrol the southern border with Mexico.

While the UAVs patrol the U.S. southern border border at night, CBP A&M says some of the flights along the northern border could be conducted in daylight. The agency plans to begin operations in late January 2009, but has still to reach agreement with the FAA on the flight restrictions to be imposed when the UAV is flying.

The northern Predator will be controlled locally from Grand Forks but data from its synthetic-aperture radar and electro-optical/infrared sensors will be piped to CBP operations centers in Washington, D.C., and Riverside, Calif. Eventually, the UAV will be controlled via satellite communications from the CBP A&M Operations Center in Riverside.

CBP will receive its fifth Predator before year-end. Only one vehicle will be based in Grand Forks initially, but the agency expects at least four will be needed to maintain patrol of the northern border.

Meantime, eight U.S. Air Force Predator As are scheduled to arrive at Grand Forks beginning in early 2009 and will be flown by the North Dakota Air National Guard. The Guard’s 178th Reconnaissance Squadron – recently converted from flying F-16s – is helping the ANG’s three UAV squadrons double its combat air patrols in Iraq and Afghanistan (Aerospace DAILY, Aug. 22). Since 2005, ANG Predator units have been formed in California, Arizona and North Dakota and maintain several overseas combat air patrols on an around-the-clock basis.

Dec 012008
 

CONTENTS

(1)  DAREK CZERNEWCAN FOUND US

(2)  DAREK GIVEN SUSPENDED SENTENCE

Note:  “According to an August news release, Lockheed Martin employs 140,000 people worldwide and reported 2007 sales of US $41.9 billion.”

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

(1)  DAREK CZERNEWCAN FOUND US!

The court proceedings against Darek for non-compliance with the 2006 census began in August in London ON.   If you had Darek’s family and life experience you would know in your bones about threats to justice and freedom:

Darek writes:

“I purposely declined the census because I felt that the long form, which I received, asked questions which violated my right to privacy. Being an immigrant (originally, I’ve been a citizen now for 16 years), and having come to Canada from a (formerly) communist country, where even Big Brother did not resort to the kind of tactics I am facing in FREE Canada… Well, I was just offended. I did not spend a significant part of my life in the squalor of refugee camps, running away from political oppression, only to be met with the same kind of oppression in the FREE WORLD. I don’t want to rant too much, but I’ll just sum it up this way – I am being threatened with fines and jail time because in a FREE COUNTRY, I refused to tell the government how many hours in a week I spend doing dishes!”

From Darek’s wife, Kelly:

“Hi!   

I’m Darek’s wife, Kelly.  Thank you for all your help and support.

I’m so glad there are at least two more families standing up for our rights.  

It gives me hope for my son’s future.  Darek’s maternal grandfather lost his entire family during the Second World War, and only due to a fluke, survived the “ethnic cleansing” himself, as he was posted on the other side of the country at the time.  Darek’s dad’s struggle against the Communist repression during Poland’s civil war seems smaller by comparison, and Darek’s fight just a sand-box shoving match, but we are talking about one family over the span of three short generations.  I do not want my son’s life tattooed and barcoded by Lockheed Martin in this or the upcoming Census.  As Stalin once said, “the people who vote count nothing, the people who count the votes count everything.”

Darek and Kelly have a fourteen-month-old son.

Darek found Todd Stelmach (another person in the same boat) and me through Don Roger’s web-site, “Count Me Out” (of the Census).

Darek, as quoted in the Gerogia Strait on-line news:

” Czernewcan explained that during the Cold War, his father was a political prisoner of Poland’s Soviet government. Later, his parents immigrated to Canada to spare Czernewcan from compulsory military service. 

“I have this intrinsic aversion to anything military,” he said.

 

Serendipitously, Darek’s work brought him to Saskatoon. We had time for coffee. It was just great to get to know a little of this person whose mind obviously works like mine in some ways!

The Statistics Act sets a limitation period.  Proceedings against individuals must be instituted “not later than two years after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose”.  The proceedings against Darek started in August.  It needs to be determined that this falls within the 2-year period.

(Sandra speaking:)  The bona fide Census work is valued. I am in the camp that believes “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, debate, and dissent.”  Sometimes the government has to be called on its actions. The American military (through Lockheed Martin Corporation) should have nothing to do with the Canadian census, for various reasons.  I doubt that the Statistics Act, when it was written, EVER contemplated that future governments would be doing this.

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

(2)  DAREK GIVEN SUSPENDED SENTENCE

“I suppose I owe you guys a bit of an update. My case is now over.  And I guess I both won and lost.  I’m sorry to let you down, but I had to throw in the towel.  (INSERT:  he DIDN’T let us down!  He did the right thing.) The Crown Attorney assigned to my case had a real hard-on for this. He said that if we go to trial, he would ask for the maximum penalty, maximum fine as well as maximum jail time, as well as an order to make me fill out the form. 

I did not succeed in finding pro-bono legal representation. I have to be honest with you – personally, I can do 3 months in a provincial bucket standing on my head. But I am the sole provider for my family and we would end up homeless and broke if I was in jail for 3 months. So I asked the Crown what he would want if I pleaded guilty. He was ready to agree to a $300 fine and no jail time. So we took it to plea court. And this is where I got lucky. The judge was exceptionally reasonable. He said that he was not the least bit inclined to agree with the crown that this was a serious matter. 

The judge said that he doesn’t see the purpose in prosecuting people like me. He asked me if I had anyone relying on me for support, and I said that yes, I had a wife who stayed at home and raised our 14-month old son. The judge was pleased to hear that. He said that since I have no criminal record he would like to give me an absolute discharge, but since there was some provision in the law that prevented him from doing so in this particular case, he gave me a suspended sentence. I should mention that this judge admonished the Crown Attorney for wasting the Court’s time with trivial matters and stopped just shy of asking them to bring him some real criminals! “

(“A suspended sentence is a legal construct. Unless a minimum punishment is prescribed by law, the court has the power to suspend the passing of sentence (generally for a period of three years) and place the offender on probation. It is the passing of the sentence, not the sentence itself, that is being suspended. This means that if the person is convicted of another offense during the period when the passing of sentence had been suspended, then the person may be sentenced for the original offence.”)

Nov 282008
 

For Montebello (high-end resort outside Ottawa) Canadian police were trained, disguised and deployed

for the assigned purpose of turning a peaceful protest violent.

RELATED:   Battle in Seattle, the movie“

The SPP is the so-called  Security and Prosperity Partnership.  

The focus of public attention on the SPP caused it to later change its name.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

(1)  WATCH THE SHORT MONTEBELLO VIDEO

 http://youtube.com/watch?v=DCRsj06wT64

Astute, peaceful protestors had been able to reach in and pull down the face masks of the provocateurs after someone noticed that they were wearing police boots and shouted it out.  The video includes footage from a subsequent press conference held by Police.   They had been caught on camera and were forced to defend their actions.    The Police got away, unchallenged, with “the three officers were performing their duties”.

Calls for a Public Enquiry into Montebello are certainly warranted, even years later.  When you see the video footage it’s a little hard to swallow the explanations given by the Police.   The officials responsible “will not comment”.

RELATED: 

1.   2012    TO:  Conservative MP Blake Richards re his private member’s bill to make it a crime to wear a mask at protests.  Remember Montebello, it was the police who wore the masks.     

In Blake’s world it is the protestors who wear masks and are the villains, hence the need for legislation to criminalize the wearing of masks.

He is naïve.  In fact the “provocateurs” are plants, in this case the Police, in other cases they are professionals hired by the corporatists.

The 2012 email to Blake includes a verbal description of what happened at Montebello,  along with other points.

2.  . . . Democracy overtaken by Corporatocracy = coup d’état. Citizens fight to regain democracy = Revolution (insurgency) . . .

(2)   THINK

In August 2007 numerous people and organizations called upon Stockwell Day, Minister Responsible, to launch a Public Enquiry into police actions at Montebello.  I have appended just one of the thoughtful submissions to Day as example (scroll down, it’s after the picture of the police provocateurs or “instigators”).

There has been no public enquiry to date.  The Government repeatedly demonstrates that it operates outside the law and democratic principles.

–  The SPP (Montebello) is essentially transnational corporate interests working with the Government, the same as at the WTO meetings in Seattle  (Battle in Seattle, the movie).

–  For Montebello, police were trained, disguised and deployed for the assigned purpose of turning a peaceful protest violent.

–  Media traditionally report on the violence, and not on the message of the protestors.  The deployment of Provocateurs is therefore an effective strategy to silence the dissent over “who is running the Government?“.   In whose interests are we “governed”?

 

I googled for some updated explanation that would say the police WERE NOT trained, disguised and deployed to turn the protest violent, because it is so hard to believe  – – I would like to find some reason not to believe it.  Sorry – it’s not there.

I phoned the office of NDP Member-of-Parliament Libby Davies, one of the ones who led the call for an Enquiry.  Her office confirmed that there has never been a response from the Harper Government to the 15-month-old call for an Enquiry.

I spoke with Paul Manly who pieced together the Montebello video which includes the completely inadequate explanation from the Quebec police, “the three police men were doing their job“.

You can google and find the CBC, CTV and other media reports if you are in doubt about the police incidents.   This link mentions the police shoes that gave the disguised policemen away.

Quebec police admit they went undercover at Montebello protest  (CBC)

 

(In case the link becomes invalid, there is a copy of the article at  http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=749)

 

I am left with the conclusion that the evidence is very solid to say that police officers were trained, disguised and deployed to turn peaceful protest violent. Which is against the law.

The need for a Public Enquiry is so damned obvious.  It’s more than a year later and nothing.

Montebello is a critical event.  We are into a police state if this is allowed to go un-addressed.

THINK:

–  if you were the people who got away with the police acts at Montebello, and you know there will be more protests, what would be your strategy for next time?

There are two possibilities:

a.  Make sure that the disguised police officers are not wearing police shoes! (it was their shoes that gave them away).

b.  (the more likely, and consistent with what is happening in the U.S.)  “Out-source” the police/military and prison functions of the society.  It is much more difficult for anyone to be held accountable, or to be discovered.

Remember from Battle in Seattle (documented not only in the movie):  once the violence started, the police were placed in a strait-jacket with instructions not to interfere with the trashing of property – for a period of time.  THEN they were called in with tear gas and rubber bullets, etc.

And I am sorry that I have this good recall for some things that I keep repeating.  One of them is the “Canada First Defence Strategy” from June 2008.  Canada will have “compatible doctrine” and “interoperability” with the U.S. security forces.  The SPP is a joint undertaking with the U.S. and Mexico that includes the “security” forces.

Option b must not happen.  It’s why I’m an activist.

I don’t know just when, but we need to mount a renewed campaign to force the Public Enquiry into Montebello.

youtube-montebello-070823

A YouTube video shows Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, ordering three masked men back from a line of riot police. ((CBC))

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

APPENDED:  one person’s (Scott Alexander Ross’s) letter to Stockwell Day.

Monday, August 27, 2007

To Stockwell Day the Honourable Member of Parliament for Okanagan – Coquihalla

On Monday August 20 there was an incident during the protest at the North American Leaders Summit in Montebello Quebec; this event was documented partially by video and by eye witnesses. Without either of those sources no one can attempt to say what happened at the protest.

The video on YouTube shows one masked protester pushing other protesters with one hand while having a large rock in the other; this masked man is followed by two others who eventually make their way to the police line where they force their way through and are pushed to the ground.

The video also showcases that at this event it was audible many peaceful protesters thought these masked protesters were provocateurs, police agents who sought to incite the crowds. Indeed as the video circulated on the internet the next day, this type of speculation grew. Comparisons were made based on similarities between the protesters in question and the police who were arresting them, such as the fact they were wearing the same boots.

Through every comparison made the Quebec Police responded that those three masked protesters were not police agents.

On Thursday August 23 the Quebec Police announced those three masked protesters were in fact police; they added however that those members were not trying to provoke the crowds. The Quebec Police as well as yourself suggest that the undercover officers’ cover was blown when they refused to throw stones they were carrying rather than by trying to incite conflict.

This recent acknowledgement that those masked men were police stands to show the Quebec Police did not tell the truth. As of today no one has explained why the Quebec Police literally lied.

Now with numerous protesters present at Montebello saying the police agents were actually acting as provocateurs there is a disagreement over what happened at the event. With two conflicting sides it is hard to determine what in fact happened at the protest. Mr. Day by your refusing an inquiry you have necessarily taken one of the following positions, either: there is no conflict over what happened, the Quebec Police are right, or that it is not that important of a conflict.

I hope the first possible position is ruled out right away, as it is evident in the video as well as by the protesters, newspapers, and fellow Canadians that there is a conflict.

To reply to your second possible position, that you believe the Quebec Police are correct, I must ask for evidence. Unless there is other evidence besides the Quebec Police testimony, which itself is in doubt as their credibility has been tainted by their being on the record as lying; I would argue besides the numerous independent eye witness accounts, that the video evidence contradicts the Quebec Police perspective. The department states the police were only holding the rocks to look like protesters, yet the video displays that when asked to put down the rocks to look like protesters the masked police decline; therefore a contradiction arises between the Quebec Police’s version and the video evidence. The Quebec Police may be right, but when faced with strong evidence to suggest otherwise, unless you know of any other evidence other then eye witness testimony, one cannot rationally deny the possible alternatives.

Lastly if you take the position this is not important enough for an inquiry I would respond that no one other then God can know what happened, as humans we have certain limits but through investigation we can apprach a close level of certainty. We can only come close through investigation  and through the weighing of evidence.

In your refusing an inquiry you have decided it should not be investigated.  I have made clear there is a disagreement over what happened and that there is strong evidence to support either side; if that is not enough to consider holding an inquiry, I would finally argue the subject matter is:

Canadian citizens, supported by eye witness accounts and video evidence, accuse Canadian Police officers of trying to provoke them to break the law.

This accusation claims that Canadian government employees were attempting to motivate Canadian citizens expressing their freedom of association and freedom of speech to become arrested; which in effect is claiming the Canadian government not only does not respect certain freedoms but oppresses them.

Democratic governments are built upon a trust between it’s citizens and it’s officials. When citizens doubt their democratic government and even go so far as suspect their government officers of wrong doing, and that government does nothing to quench such doubt, there cannot be trust. Without trust, people don’t vote and the government ceases to be representative. Without representation the government ceases being democratic.

For mine and the other numerous Canadian citizens who are currently in doubt over how the Quebec Police handled the Protesters in Montebello, and in effect doubting officers acting with powers given to them by the Canadian government, I ask you to change your decision and hold an inquiry into this matter in order to restore trust in certain officers of our Government.

Thank you,

Scott Alexander Ross

Nov 232008
 

(The Battle in Seattle is closely related to the Montebello protest, as discussed in other postings.)

Find a solution to transnational corporate takeover.  It is destroying what we value, not to mention our means of survival. Millions around the world have come to the same understanding.

Today is a momentous time in history.  We need to take advantage of it.   Here’s a fun way to do it: get your friends together and go see this great movie!

The next few postings are related.  They are invaluable tools for taking back and protecting the Earth.

#1  BATTLE IN SEATTLE, THE MOVIE

I highly recommend it to you.  Round up every police and military friend you have;  take them along with you for a great show.  You are guaranteed to have an interesting discussion after the movie!

An exceptional script (by a young fellow, Stuart Townsend), with great actors – – names you’ll recognize. The true events of the WTO battle in Seattle (1999) are told, in a balanced way, full of drama, with fictional characters.

There are terrific, insightful interviews with the actors at  (Link no longer valid:  http://battleinseattle.movieset.com/home/)

“I had no idea that this actually happened.”

“Even me, I didn’t know anything about this whole thing at all.”

“A lot of people don’t know it.”

“It’s a meaty good rich tapestry, this story”  (Woody Harelson)

” … it is about the first time since the 60’s where you see real coordinated response from the people ..  authority that they don’t agree with .. description of these forces INDEPENDENT of each other .. realy successful protest by the people ..  really hard in our democracy  … ”

“At the end of the day it’s not something to fight but a solution to find.”

“A lot of people know what really happened there.”

“Now I know more and still want to know more.”

“Action is the only thing that ultimately is going to make any difference.

“I hope this movie shows what IS possible when people get together.”

“It’s about people coming together.”

“I hope they (people) look at the real reasons why this movie is being made and why this story is being told.”

” Stuart Townsend … the first-time director has made a feature film of the riots and even snagged a high profile cast for the independant film.

Stuart Townsend:

“…I really loved the story, and I wanted to tell it. This was a war against corporate power. Corporations were ruining our world. You have to have corporations, but the whole point is to try and make them sustainable and responsible…”

“… wanted to use actors that young people really liked. If I made a documentary, no one would have seen it. By this approach, we thought that if we could make it more about the characters and the emotional connections, not just political connections, we could hit somewhat of a mainstream audience…”

PREVIEW  at   http://video.google.ca/videosearch?hl=en&q=movie+battle+in+seattle&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

From the official website, www.battleinseattlemovie.com you can get the movie shown in your community.

There’s a good INTERVIEW  at:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5n79ovj31s

http://www.globalissues.org/article/46/wto-protests-in-seattle-1999 :

“Once more, the mainstream media coverage in the US about such a major event was very much lacking. It was pretty much corporate led and therefore concentrating on the sensationalism of the violent aspects of the protests, without really looking at the real issues (such as the corporate domination with lack of accountability). However, a large group of independent media organizations worked together to provide alternative coverage.

Enormous Public Turnout Despite Police Crackdown

Estimates ranged from 50,000 to 100,000 protestors. Protesters came from all over the world, not just the developed countries. They ranged from human rights groups, students, environmental groups, religious leaders, labor rights activists etc wanting fairer trade with less exploitation. Even right-wing protectionist groups were there also arguing against the current corporate-led free trade, (although the protectionists were there for very different reasons).

The fact that 50,000 to 100,000 people turned up in the pouring rain, through all the police crackdowns etc indicates the sheer number of people who are concerned at the current issues, as obviously not everyone could be in Seattle. How many more would have turned up had it not been raining so bad!

While the majority were non-violent protestors, a small group started some violence and looting that led to the Seattle police and National Guard declaring a state of emergency (it was even termed as Martial Law by the Mayor of Seattle at one point). This led to the issuing of curfews, arresting, tear-gassing, pepper spraying and even shooting rubber bullets at innocent, non-violent protestors. This became the mainstream media’s major coverage focus often portraying all the protestors as “loony leftists” or violent groups with no clue as to what they are talking about. (the mainstream media is corporate-owned as well and certain media conglomerates make up some of the largest multinational corporations that directly benefit from the current form of free trade)

The media’s portrayal of protestors interfering in global trading missed the point that as history has shown, progress has also been made thanks to a variety of public protests: women’s rights, civil rights, civil wars and revolutions in Europe, in Latin America and other former colonial countries such as, India, East Timor, and so on.”