Stop the Hogs!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Finley" <sabest1@sasktel.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 7:04 PM
Subject: Gov: I am In Court, Tues April 15th, failure to fill out Census
(Contracting Out to weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin)

Please see that this gets extensive circulation in the Peace movement. In order to get maximum benefit and support, I need as many people as possible at:

Saskatoon Provincial Courthouse
Tuesday April 15th, 8:50 am (for a 9:00 am court appearance)
Room #1 220 - 19th Street

I (Sandra Finley) am commanded in her Majesty's name to appear.

-----------------------

Many of you will not know: in 2003 I began corresponding with the Government to advise against the contracting out of the Canadian census to weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

Part of the correspondence is appended. It sets out some of my objections.

Note that other people refused to cooperate because the USA passed The Patriots Act under which the American Government (military?) has access to any and all information held by companies in the U.S.. I did not address that issue.

Today I received a summons to appear in Court on April 15th.

I view this as an opportunity to get media coverage for Government complicity with the American war machine. As a tax-payor I will not be complicit.

Thanks!

Sandra
=====================
From website www.sandrafinley.ca - right-hand side - button "Governance" - heading "Unholy Alliances between Government and Business".

2006 Census Canada - Non-Compliance

There have been a few media reports about the high rate of non-compliance with the 2006 census. The cause has been attributed, for example, to a transient population (e.g. Alberta).

If you are in the email networks you know what the media is not telling: the Government contracted-out part of the 2006 census to Lockheed-Martin Corporation which is part of the American military machine. People have refused to co-operate with the census as a form of protest or resistance.

There are a number of reasons why the census should not have been out-sourced but the Lockheed-Martin situation is pivotal.

My first communication to the Government about their plans to "out-source" to Lockheed-Martin was in 2003. I have appended a copy of the excellent letter from Quaker people in Halifax dated February 2004. ...

Later, we worked with the Government on the GDR (Government Directive on Regulating) which is part of so-called "Smart Regulations". I used the GDR to reinforce the point about the census, telling the Government that Canadians are learning non-compliance with regulations. I told them there would be a high level of non-compliance with the census for very legitimate reasons, if they did not change their direction. It wasn't hard to figure out, from all the protest. The rule of law in Canada is being undermined which is a very serious situation.

Corruption, governments in bed with the people they are supposed to regulate, the complete failure to regulate to protect "the commons", the gun registry, contracting-out to corporations like Lockheed-Martin, etc. etc. - all PREDICTABLY lead to a loss of confidence and consequent disrespect for the laws of the land. Definitely not a good place to be. You can point this out to the Government, but they seem incapable of hearing.

I have continued to communicate with Ivan Felligi about the census. A Statistics Canada person phoned me and we talked the matter through, or so I thought. I have participated in the on-line support network at Vive le Canada. These are people who have resisted the census in various ways.

Statistics Canada personnel also watch the site. There is a recent posting from one of them:
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewto ... 16245&mode
=&onlytopic=0&show=20&page=10

"Count Me Out" is another web-site for the sharing of information.

There are thousands of people across Canada who have not complied, many of them for the same reason: Lockheed-Martin. On July 5th we circulated in our network the report that 400,000 adults in British Columbia alone had not sent in their census forms - 10% of the population. The Government stepped up efforts to gain compliance. They do not disseminate the information on how many people have sabotaged the census in various ways, from the provision of inaccurate information up to refusal to submit.

The letter I received this week from Ivan Felligi tells me, "If your completed questionnaire is not received by Statistics Canada by October 27, 2006, I will turn the matter over to the Department of Justice with a recommendation that appropriate charges be laid...."

Further, if I am tried and found guilty of an offence under the Statistics Act, I "may be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both."

The reason given by Ivan for why the census form from me is required, is simply not true. It is contained in my reply to him (copy below).

Now here's the pickle and the slow dawning of the light: I didn't connect this on-going battle over Government complicity with a company that makes its money through the killing of Iraqi people and their country - to my running for the leadership of the Green Party of Saskatchewan. Tomorrow no less!

I should be happy the light dawned in time! I have to tell "the Party" that if they elect me to the leadership, there may be an interruption while I am in jail! They may not want a leader who is "in trouble with the law".

Geez! How does the world come to this absurdity?! It's worth a laugh. But if I laugh about it, I might get the injection and be locked up in the Psychiatric Ward again. (Another story for newcomers!) Psychiatric ward, jail - not much difference. Except that you might be allowed to openly express your humour and laughter in the latter.

Oh dear.

The following is my letter to Ivan Felligi, head of Statistics Canada. I have cc'd it to the President of Lockheed-Martin Canada, Martin Munro. And to Maxime Bernier, who, as the Minister for Industry Canada is responsibl for Statistics Canada.

/Sandra

(Ironically, every one (and now the third) of the predicaments around the Census has come just before a meeting of the Green Party of Saskatchewan. This year's Annual Convention is in Humboldt on Saturday, April 5th - a week and a half away!)

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

SUBJECT: Census Data

October 13, 2006

TO: Ivan Felligi, Chief Statistician of Canada
Ivan.P.Fellegi@statcan.ca

CC: Industry Canada
Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada Maxime Bernier
minister.industry@ic.gc.ca 613-995-9001

Cc: Jacques.Morin@a.statcan.ca; Lyne.St.John@a.statcan.ca

CC: Lockheed-Martin President (Canadian operations)
Martin Munro martin.munro@lmco.ca
613-599-3270 ext 3498 (Martin's exec asst, Diane Grandy)

Dear Ivan,

I am in receipt of your registered letter dated October 3, 2006.

It does not address my reason for non-compliance with the census, communicated to you consistently and beginning back in 2003.

The reason you provide for the necessity of compliance with the census is not truth. I presume that if your reason is an untruth, it is because you do not have a truthful reason to offer.

I would be failing my responsibilities as a citizen were I to bow in cowardice to anyone, civil servant or otherwise, who attempts to intimidate me with the threat of the judicial system - jail time and fines - when there is no reasonable basis.

Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. I will not, through complicity, add to their financial profits. I communicated this to you more than two years before the census, as did many other Canadians.

If I am to be treated equally before the Law, then you must equally refer the thousands of other Canadians who have not complied with the census to the Judicial system. I presume you are doing this.

The reason you have provided for the necessity of my compliance, quoting from your letter of October 3, 2006 is: "A compulsory response is required of all respondents because the census is essential for providing the information needed by governments, businesses, researchers and individual Canadians to shed light on issues that are critical to virtually every sector of society. If respondents were to arbitrarily choose whether or not they would answer the census questions, the result would not accurately reflect the characteristics of the population and would therefore not be considered useful or reliable."

I am sorry to say, but that is a load of bull. Most people off the street know it's not the way statistics work. I find it offensive that citizens are treated as though they are ignorant. In my particular case, I am a graduate of the College of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan. I majored in Quantitative Analysis (Statistics) and graduated with Honours. Every day we are provided with reliable statistical information not based on 100% sampling.

I repeat my point: if you must resort to blatant untruths I presume it is because you don't have a valid argument to offer.

Another point I would like to make: you chose to define the Canadian census in a way that necessitated the out-sourcing.

On your website you record that the first census in Canada was conducted in 1666, the first national census in 1871. For centuries and decades the Government has defined the census in a way that civil servants had the capability of doing the work. To me, quite frankly, it is prudent to keep one's work within the limits you are capable of managing.

If the Government is not capable of doing that which has been successfully managed by civil servants for decades and centuries, then the answer is to fire those responsible for the mismanagement. The answer is not to knowingly create some over-sized census monster which weakens one's capabilities and then dictates an attitude of "I am so weakened I must rely on Big Daddy LM to help me out."

Statistics Canada and its employees are to serve the interests of the
citizens of Canada. Previous administrations have done that very well. If
not, there would have been problems in the past. I am not aware of any. So I suggest that you need to re-think what you are doing.

Third and final point: in the last paragraph of your letter you say, "I would like to assure you that the information you provide on your census
questionnaire will be kept strictly confidential, ...".

I reassure children so they may feel safe and secure. I think you mis-read
the situation: I am secure, I am an adult. I do not need to be reassured by you. I will arrive at my own conclusions by observing your actions and by reading what you write.

Furthermore, not once in my communications with the Government have I
mentioned concerns about the confidentiality of information. I have been
clear and explicit in the reason for my non-compliance. You repeat this
mantra about confidentiality. Not once have you addressed or attempted to address my explicitly-stated reason for non-compliance: the Statistics
Canada contract with Lockheed-Martin enriches a corporation that plays a
very large role in the American killing machine.

I am not being snooty. I am not "radical". I come from rural Saskatchewan which is small "c" conservative country. I am "mature", a Mother of 2 children. I do not believe in increasing the hatred in the world through killing other people and their children. Lockheed-Martin profits from the killing.

I don't know into which pigeon hole you have slotted me. I am able to think.

I can connect the dots between my actions and wider outcomes. I was a member of and benefited from the Girl Guides of Canada for many years. I learned service to community. That community and sisterhood extends to women in all countries of the world. I had the privilege of attending an international camp. I slept in the same tent, cooked, laughed and danced with these women when they and I were young. I really don't like seeing them killed, as in Iraq. That's killed, as in dead. Why would I participate in, or be a collaborator with Lockheed-Martin? Perhaps you have not read the Washington Post, October 11? 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred (research overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health). The killing, once started, does not stop.

You were told by thousands of Canadians that Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. You made a bad decision to "out-source".

Your letter of October 3 is an attempt to coerce me through the threat of
jail time and fines. Were my plate not full at the moment, did I not have
more important priorities, I would be researching the avenues through which to lay charges, to "turn the matter over to the Department of Justice", as you say. So that you might be tried for your tactics vis-a-vis me.

Yours truly,
Sandra Finley
Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
============================

HALIFAX MONTHLY MEETING of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
comprising Halifax Friends Meeting, Antigonish Worship Group, Dartmouth
Worship Group and South Shore Worship Group

Lucienne Robillard
Minister of Industry
House of Commons
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

February 15, 2004

Dear Lucienne Robillard,

The Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) is very
concerned about the Canadian government's decision to award a $20.5 million dollar contract to a unit of the U.S. weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT).

The $20.5 million dollars is the amount to be spent to contract out work of
Statistics Canada on the 2006 National Census. Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. is to lead a consortium that includes IBM Canada, Transcontinental Printing Inc. Canada and ADECCO Employment Services Ltd. Canada.

In February 2003, Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. was also awarded a multi-year contract by the Canadian Department of National Defence to provide a health care information system on Canadian Forces personnel. That contract is worth approximately $17 million and covers only the first 14 months of the project. The contract has the potential to exceed an estimated value of $56 million, however, if all four phases are delivered over the anticipated 10-year period.

These decisions were made while Alan Rock was serving on Jean Chrétien's Cabinet as Minister of Industry. We are writing to you, the new Minister of Industry, to make you aware of our continuing objections.

While Quakers realize that, under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and World Trade Organization Agreement regulations, non-Canadian firms are eligible to bid on contracts to provide essential public services, we are loathe to see the Canadian public's tax dollars flow to a military contractor that benefits richly from the development (and deployment) of weapons of mass destruction.

We are also loathe to assist a principal member of the U.S. military-industrial complex to further develop its capacity to collect, store, analyze, and retrieve sensitive information on citizens of any country.

We have read that a spokesperson for former Public Works Minister Ralph
Goodale has stated that under the obligations of the NAFTA, Canada cannot alter contracts with Lockheed Martin and if we were to do so we could be sued for millions of dollars. (Toronto Star, October 15, 2003)

We ask you, in your capacity as Industry Minister and in conjunction with
other members of Cabinet, to find a way forward that would best extricate
our country from these contracts.

While many would welcome an outcome in which Statistics Canada would be allotted the funding and capacity to fully carry out an activity as
important as the Canadian census, it is of particular importance to Quakers - because of our Peace Testimony* - that contracts not be let to a
subsidiary of a trans-national corporation that sold almost $27 billion
dollars worth of weapons in 2002.

We therefore ask:

1. that your government cancel all its contracts with Lockheed Martin and 2. that you pledge not to grant millions more to Lockheed Martin in the future.

We would appreciate hearing from you soon in regards to this important
matter.

Sylvia Mangalam
Clerk of the Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
1388 Bedford Highway Bedford NS B4A 1E2

* George Fox's declaration of 1661 to Charles II is referred to as the
Friends Historic Peace Testimony: "We utterly deny all outward wars and
strife and fightings with outward weapons, for any ends or under any
pretence whatsoever. And this is our testimony to the whole world."

cc: Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada; Stephen Owen, Minister of Public Works; Jim Peterson, Minister of International Trade; Bill Graham, Minister of Foreign Affairs; David Pratt, Minister of National Defence; Ivan P. Fellegi, Chief Statistician of Canada

Our Monthly Meeting will also be sharing this letter with other Friends'
Meetings, as well as the general public.

============================
(sent at end of May 2006 by Sandra Finley)

Dear Ivan,

In your response you defend the tendering process. The tendering PROCESS is of little concern to me.

The OUTCOME is.

I am vehemently opposed to actions that enrich corporations that are part of the American war machine.

I doubt it is possible for you to address my fundamental objection,
communicated to you beginning in 2003 or 2004.

Best wishes,
Sandra Finley

-----Original Message-----
From: Ivan.P.Fellegi@statcan.ca [mailto:Ivan.P.Fellegi@statcan.ca]
Sent: May 18
Cc: Jacques.Morin@a.statcan.ca; Lyne.St.John@a.statcan.ca
Subject: Count me out of the census!
Importance: High

The Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada, the Honourable Maxime
Bernier, has asked me to respond to your email of May 3, 2006.

I would like to assure you that Statistics Canada has taken a number of
important safeguards to protect the privacy and confidentiality of your
Census responses. These safeguards have been independently assessed by IT security specialists and the entire assessment process overseen by a Task Force headed by the former Auditor General of Canada, Mr. Denis Desautels.

The task force was clear in their conclusion: "Canadians can trust that the
information gathered during the 2006 Census will be secure." The entire
report is available at www.census2006.ca. I would also like to expand on
some of the security safeguards in place for the 2006 Census.

Statistics Canada is completely responsible for every phase of conducting
the 2006 Census. The contract with Lockheed Martin Canada, IBM Canada and Transcontinental Printing Canada is strictly for the provision of hardware, software and printing services. No contractor ever has access to or is in possession of Census responses.

Census information is, at all times, under the complete care and full
control of Statistics Canada employees. In fact, all census databases,
facilities and networks containing confidential data are physically isolated
from any networks outside Statistics Canada. Therefore, even if a request
were ever to be made by an external authority to any contractor for
confidential data, it would be physically impossible for a contractor to
comply, given that they are never in possession of census responses.

Public Works and Government Services Canada awarded the contract through an open, transparent, and stringent competitive bidding process following all the laws and regulations pertaining to procurement. Statistics Canada has relied on the private sector in the past to provide equipment and services to conduct a Census in a cost effective manner, without compromising confidentiality, and the 2006 Census is no exception.

Census data are a vital source of information for decisions by governments and private citizens and businesses that affect the daily lives of Canadians. The data must be complete and accurate for these purposes. We have put so much emphasis on security and confidentiality measures regarding contractor provided systems to ensure that Canadians can complete their Census questionnaires in full confidence of these measures. It is critical that we all be part of the Canadian family portrait that is the Census. I urge you to be part of that portrait.

Thank you for your interest in the census.

Ivan P. Fellegi
Chief Statistician of Canada
==============================

Sandra Finley
Leader, Green Party of Saskatchewan
306-373-8078
Saskatoon, SK
sabest1@sasktel.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Finley" <sabest1@sasktel.net>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 8:01 PM
Subject: Census/Lockheed update: plus Can you help? For court case, I need copies of letters sent to StatsCan AND StatsCan reply


CONTENTS
(1) CAN YOU HELP?
(2) BRIEF BACKGROUND FOR NEWCOMERS
(3) DAREK CZERNEWCAN FOUND US
(4) DAREK GIVEN SUSPENDED SENTENCE

*** (5) LOCKHEED MARTIN HAS BEEN AWARDED A CONTRACT FOR WORK ON THE 2011 CANADIAN CENSUS ***
=================

(1) CAN YOU HELP?

Re: Contracting-out of 2006 Census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation

In preparation for trial, I need copies of letters sent to Statistics Canada AND the reply received from StatsCan. (Does anyone keep four-year-old records?! Or some may have corresponded in 2006, only 2 years ago.)

Later, I will make arrangements: the author of the letter will need to talk to the Court (in person, or by telephone or video hook-up) to confirm that they sent the letter and received the reply.

If you know of anyone who might be able and willing to provide such, please get in touch with me. By the end of this week.

I am working on some possibilities. Trial coming fast!

Many thanks, Sandra

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

(2) BRIEF BACKGROUND FOR NEWCOMERS

- I have a trial in Saskatoon, January 7 & 8.
- Am charged under the Statistics Act with failure to comply with the 2006
census. (not a criminal charge)
- Maximum if found guilty is $500 fine and 3 months in jail.
- I did not comply because of out-sourcing (contracting-out) of census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation. LM is almost the same as the American military. They specialize in surveillance systems, they manufacture cluster bombs and so on. I let the government know in 2004 that the contracting-out of census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation was a big problem.

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

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

(3) DAREK CZERNEWCAN FOUND US
The court proceedings against Darek for non-compliance with the 2006 census, started in August in London ON. His family experience is of realized threats to justice and freedom:

" 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.

((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.)

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

(4) 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.")

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

(5) LOCKHEED MARTIN HAS BEEN AWARDED A CONTRACT FOR WORK ON THE 2011 CANADIAN CENSUS
The Govt has already signed a contract with Lockheed for the 2011 Census.
We had hoped to prevent this from happening. Geez! Now a campaign to let StatsCan and the Public Works Department know that I won't be complying with the 2011 Census?! Maybe it's prudent to wait until after my trial!
Many thanks to the investigative journalism of Travis Lupick at the Georgia Strait mewspaper: Morrison (from SatsCan) ... (He) said that the contracts were open to bidding, and that Lockheed Martin was the only company to place bids on either contract.

" ... Peter Morrison, director general for the census program branch of StatsCan. In a phone interview, Morrison said that on July 21, 2008, a second contract worth $19.7 million was awarded to the company for work related to the 2011 census."

No other company submitted a tender for the particular work. I don't accept the argument.

Here's how it works. From work I did a few years back on a food aid order for bulghur wheat. The transnational corporation in that case was Archer Daniels Midland (ADM - huge in international grain markets. Former Canadian Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney sits on its Board of Directors.)

The specifications for international food aid for bulghur wheat require an ingredient that only one corporation (ADM) manufactures. You have to mix it in with the bulghur wheat (to "fortify" it). It's a high-priced protein ingredient. The specifications make it so that only ADM can fill the food-aid order. Price-wise others can't compete. No substitutions are allowed, not even an excellent and lower-priced pea protein made in Saskatchewan. ADM has the people who administer the food aid programme for bulghur wheat.

So only Lockheed Martin tendered for this contract? Sorry but I'm skeptical. And regardless, it is always unwise to develop a system that is dependent upon ONE supplier. Eventually they will call the shots. And they will make it so that other parts of the system become dependent upon their services. It is in their interest to do so.

I maintain my position. Articles such as the "U.S. wants more information on Canadians" (sent to you on Nov. 26) reinforce my conviction.

Please contact me if you have a letter to, and reply from, StatsCan regarding the 2006 census. Thanks!

Sandra

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

Email from:
Sandra Finley
Saskatoon SK S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
sabest1@sasktel.net

Lockheed Canadian Census Objector on trial.

Ontario man, Saskatchewan woman face jail time in census protest
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/s ... otest.html
Sunday, July 6, 2008 | The Canadian Press

------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 7:45 PM
Subject: [coc-chaps-l] Lockheed Canadian Census Objector on trial.
Dear Friends
Please check out this new youtube video “Lockheed Canadian Census Objector on trial” and pass it along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEe5WuN0Hsc

Lockheed Canadian Census Objector on trial.
Background
The corporatist agenda of privatizing public services means that more and more of the data that was originally handled by various levels of government are now being handled by corporations. When the 2006 Canadian Census was contracted out to the worlds largest military contractor, Lockheed Martin (an American multinational that is subject to the US Patriot Act), Saskatchewan resident Sandra Finley objected and refused to fill out her Census form. She has been charged under the Statistics Act with failure to comply with the census. If she is found guilty she faces a maximum $500 fine and 3 months in jail. She is trying to get in touch with the 60 other people who have been charged. Sandra can be reached by phone at (306) 373-8078 or by email at sabest1@sasktel.net for more information visit www.vivelecanada.com
Please pass this video link along http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEe5WuN0Hsc
Sandra is featured in my soon to be released documentary “You me and the SPP – Trading Democracy for Corporate Rule”.
cheers
Paul Manly
paul@manlymedia.com

======================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Finley" <sabest1@sasktel.net>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:11 PM
Subject: Census Lockheed Martin Trial: Canada signs international treaty to ban cluster bombs

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) COPY OF JULY 24 EMAIL RE CLUSTER BOMBS (FOR NEWCOMERS)

===============
(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 trial on January 7-8th 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!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Canada joins cluster bomb treaty, U.S. absent
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/
20081203/cluster_bomb_081203/20081203?hub=TopStories
Updated Wed. Dec. 3 2008 11:04 AM ET 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."

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) which requires changes.

The web information has been changed: - Canada is a "Party to CCM"

NOTE THE UPDATES:

1. Canada is no longer listed as a producer of cluster bombs Source:
Cluster Munition Information Chart
http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/ ... 1.2008.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/ ... _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@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/ ... nderen.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.

=====================
(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.)

(6) CANADA PENSION PLAN INVESTMENT in MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER BOMBS
http://www.cppib.ca/Results/Financial_H ... quity.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@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.

=================
(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).
http://www.minesactioncanada.org/home/i ... ews&ID=363

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.) http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world ... 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:
http://www.clusterconvention.org/pages/pages_v/
vb_resourcedocs.html
http://untreaty.un.org/English/Opening_ ... nglish.pdf

For "Cluster munitions: What the UN is saying" go to:
http://www.mineaction.org/overview.asp?o=1324

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

(12) COPY OF JULY 24 EMAIL RE CLUSTER BOMBS

Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of cluster bombs. Canada, producer of cluster bombs July 24, 2008
CONTENTS
(1) COMMENTS
(2) WHAT, AND HOW BAD ARE CLUSTER BOMBS?
(3) CANADA, PRODUCER AND STOCK-PILER OF CLUSTER BOMBS (UPDATE DECEMBER 3,
2008: NO LONGER THE CASE)
(4) BELGIUM BANNED THE PRODUCTION OF CLUSTER BOMBS AND PROHIBITS INVESTMENT IN CORPORATIONS THAT MANUFACTURE THEM
(5) NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENT PENSION FUND DIVESTED FROM LOCKHEED MARTIN
(6) NEW ZEALAND "Taking Action Against Cluster Bomb Manufacturers"
(7) INTERNATIONAL TREATY TO BAN CLUSTER MUNITIONS, AND INVESTMENT IN THE
MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER BOMBS
a. NEW BOMB CLEAN-UP TREATY BEGINS, BBC NEWS, GENEVA 2006 (BACKGROUND)
b. DISCUSSIONS IN LIMA, PERU, 2007 (BACKGROUND)
c. MEETINGS CONTINUE, GENEVA, JULY 2008
d. PRESS RELEASE: U.S. OUT OF STEP WITH ALLIES WITH HOLLOW "NEW" CLUSTER BOMB POLICY: UNRESTRICTED USE FOR ANOTHER DECADE
e. WHERE IS CANADA IN THE INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS?
(8) BUSH ADMINISTRATION, LARGEST MILITARY BUILDUP, MAJOR BENEFICIARY IS
MILITARY CONTRACTORS.
(9) GOVERNMENT (CITIZEN) INVESTMENT IN LOCKHEED MARTIN UNDOES THE SOCIAL
JUSTICE AND PEACE WORK OF CANADIAN CHURCHES OVERSEAS
(10) LETTER RE LOCKHEED'S MANUFACTURE OF CLUSTER BOMBS SENT TO DALHOUSIE
UNIVERSITY
==============
(1) COMMENTS

Lockheed Martin is a manufacturer of cluster bombs. Internationally there are continuing efforts and successes in the banning of cluster bombs.
The 2008 United Nations Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) is currently in progress in Geneva. The treaty on cluster bombs is in negotiation. "A month after 111 nations including major US allies agreed to ban cluster bombs, the United States says it will continue to use its huge
stockpile for another decade."
"(2007) Belgium has not only banned the production of cluster bombs, but also adopted a law in March that bans banks and investment funds operating in that country from investing in companies that make these munitions. All countries should follow Belgium's lead ... Cutting off the flow of money to
manufacturers of cluster munitions would discourage production ..."
In Canada, cutting off the flow of money might mean cutting Lockheed Martin off from Government contracts? Forget about the banks - we, the people of Canada help finance a manufacturer of cluster bombs!
A group named "Net Werk" in Belgium is behind the action that led to the refusal of Belgiums to have anything to do with the financing of cluster bomb manufacturers.
In this network we periodically refer to the ethical investing of Norway's pension funds, more than $300 billion from North Sea oil royalties. The Fund has divested from Lockheed Martin.
When you understand the infiltration of Lockheed Martin into Canada, it is no surprise to see Canada on the list of countries that produce and stock-pile cluster bombs. (UPDATE: DEC 2008 Canada is no longer listed as a producer of cluster bombs and it is in the process of destroying its stockpile in accordance with the UN Convention on Cluster Munitions which it signed.) There are people in Canada working hard to reclaim our identity of peace-builders in the world. I am greatly pleased that our network of people can add our weight to help them.
Email (3 of X) was a letter to Dalhousie University to convince Dalhousie to rescind the $two million dollar contract with Lockheed Martin. The specific information that Lockheed is a manufacturer of cluster bombs may aid their decision. I will send this additional material to them.
It is always easier and face-saving to prevent the Lockheed funding of universities from happening in the first place. In a pre-emptive move, please contact people you know who have a connection to a University in Canada. Alert them to the possibility that Lockheed Martin may already be knocking on the doors of their University. Talk about it. Spread the word. Stop it before it's a done-deal, as in the Dalhousie case.
The contact information for the universities will be sent to everyone. Our combined letters will be sufficient to keep Lockheed Martin out of Canadian universities. The campaign will help create more awareness of the increasing role of Canada in the killing wars.
" The problem lies not in the nature of man but in the nature of power. ... The state imagines it is impotent without a military because it cannot conceive of power without force. ... " (from "Nonviolence: Twenty-five lessons from the History of a Dangerous Idea" by Mark Kurlansky, 2006.)
Some people may prefer to start communicating with church and other groups, rather than the universities. Government funding of a corporation that makes cluster bombs is an affront to the work of the Mennonite Central Committee, the Social Justice and Peace initiatives of various other churches, the great "development" work being done by various organizations, Amnesty International, Project Ploughshares, Doctors, Engineers Without Borders, ... the list is long.
We dig into one pocket to help fund constructive initiatives in other countries. Meanwhile the Government dips into our other pocket to take money to give to Lockheed Martin whose work completely destroys the good work of volunteers and under-paid contributors to international justice.
"Violence does not resolve. It always leads to more violence." (Kurlansky) The war in Iraq clearly demonstrates that "People who go to war start to resemble their enemy".
There are intelligent and creative, effective alternatives to the killing ways. We are part of the alternative way.
Cheers!
Sandra

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

(2) WHAT, AND HOW BAD ARE CLUSTER BOMBS?

"Cluster bombs are dropped in a canister that splits open in mid-air, scattering hundreds of soda-can-size bomblets over wide areas. The bombs can be either air-dropped or ground-launched.
Critics say cluster munitions are difficult to target accurately, and between five and 30 percent of the bomblets do not explode on impact, remaining in or on the ground and posing a risk to civilians, sometimes for years to come. According to Handicap International, 400 million people live in affected areas where they are at risk from unexploded cluster bomblets."
(From http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/
article.php3?id_article=1705 )

98% of cluster munitions victims are civilians. (from
http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/wp/ ... s/2008/07/
explosive-investments_financial-insts-and-clusters-netverk-vlaanderen.pdf )

"Using cluster munitions is a serious breach of International Humanitarian Law as it is impossible to distinguish between civilian and military targets, and causes disproportionate long-term civilian harm."
Unexploded, they are the same as the land mines that Princess Diana is famous for working to eliminate.
Regarding international stock-piles, from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6140530 :
"One billion of them are in the United States alone."

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

(3) CANADA, PRODUCER AND STOCK-PILER OF CLUSTER BOMBS (UPDATE DECEMBER
2008: THE FOLLOWING NO LONGER APPLIES)

I was surprised to see Canada on 2 different lists of producers of cluster bombs:
a. The June 2007 information on
http://hrw.org/campaigns/clusters/chart/index.htm "A DIRTY DOZEN CLUSTER
MUNITIONS" lists Canada under "Countries that Produce Cluster Munitions (34)".

Canada is also listed under "Countries that Stockpile Cluster Munitions (75)".

("Countries Observing a Domestic Prohibition, or a Moratorium, or Supporting a Moratorium are" (June 2007): Belgium, Holy See, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway.)

b. From http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/arti ... ticle=1705
regarding international treaties,
"At least 30 additional governments will sign the Oslo agreement in Lima ... Some of these new adherents, like Argentina, Britain, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, produce cluster bombs."

===============
(4) BELGIUM BANNED THE PRODUCTION OF CLUSTER BOMBS AND PROHIBITS INVESTMENT IN CORPORATIONS THAT MANUFACTURE THEM
There is very good information on the website of the group behind Belgium's principled stand:
http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/wp/ ... s/2008/07/
explosive-investments_financial-insts-and-clusters-netverk-vlaanderen.pdf

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

(5) NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENT PENSION FUND DIVESTED FROM LOCKHEED MARTIN

Dr. Gor Nystuen from Norway participated in a panel organized in New Zealand, for the purpose of bringing that country on-side with legislation to stop the funding of corporations that manufacture cluster bombs. Dr. Nystuen's biography explains the Norwegian situation:
http://www.stopclusterbombs.org.nz/2008 ... facturers/

"Dr. Gro Nystuen chairs the Council on Ethics for the Norwegian Government Pension Fund. This governmental pension fund has amassed a fortune of more than $300 billion over the last decade from oil revenue (Norway is the world's third largest oil exporter after Saudi Arabia and Russia). Dr. Nysteun chairs the fund's Council on Ethics, established in 2004 to advance an ambitious ethical code. She has helped establish ethical guidelines and disinvestment policies that are used to screen Fund investments. The criteria for exclusion of companies (corruption, environment, human rights, and manufacturing of certain weapons) has seen the Fund divest from manufacturers of antipersonnel mines, cluster bombs and nuclear weapons or related components (including General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and
Lockheed Martin). Dr. Gro Nystuen is an Associate Professor at the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights at the University of Oslo. She has been in the Norwegian foreign service since 1991 and played a key role in helping Norway to secure the 1997 treaty prohibiting antipersonnel mines."

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

(6) NEW ZEALAND "Taking Action Against Cluster Bomb Manufacturers"
Information at:
http://www.stopclusterbombs.org.nz/
2008/02/11/public-talks-cluster-bomb-manufacturers/
The website has a list of links to groups from other countries who are working on the same issue.

===================
(7) INTERNATIONAL TREATY TO BAN CLUSTER MUNITIONS, AND INVESTMENT IN THE
MANUFACTURERS OF CLUSTER BOMBS
(UN Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW))
May 2007: " The government officials meeting in Lima this week are following up on a February agreement reached by 47 countries in Oslo, Norway to finish drafting a global treaty next year aimed at eradicating cluster munitions."

a. NEW BOMB CLEAN-UP TREATY BEGINS, BBC NEWS, GENEVA 2006 (BACKGROUND)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6140530.stm

Sunday, 12 November 2006, 01:25 GMT
New bomb clean-up treaty begins By Imogen Foulkes BBC News, Geneva
The use of cluster bombs in Lebanon focused world attention A new international law is coming into force requiring countries to clear up unexploded bombs and mines or pay teams of de-miners to do it.
The treaty on explosive remnants of war covers ordnance such as land mines and cluster bombs.
At the same time, in Geneva, a UN arms review conference is under way amid growing pressure on member states to discuss a ban on cluster bombs.
Aid agencies say such bombs should be banned, not just cleaned up.
'Cold War remnant'
There are thought to be billions of cluster bombs stockpiled around the world.
One billion of them are in the United States alone.
However, the US is one of the key nations, along with China and Russia who are not keen to discuss the issue. Cluster bombs have been around for decades, used in wars from Vietnam to Kosovo.
"You can't achieve your military or strategic aims if you kill large numbers of civilians in the process "
(INSERT: to me, you don't have to be too smart to understand the last statement.)
(full text is on the website.)
--------

b. DISCUSSIONS IN LIMA, PERU, 2007 (BACKGROUND)
http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/arti ... ticle=1705
Lima: Taking Aim at Those Who Finance Cluster Bombs
24 May 07 - A future international treaty to ban cluster munitions should prohibit financial institutions from investing in companies that manufacture the weapons, Thomas Nash, coordinator of the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC), told IPS in the Peruvian capital.

Ángel Páez/IPS, Lima - Nash said the draft treaty being discussed Wednesday through Friday in Lima, Peru refers specifically to a ban on financing for cluster munitions manufacturers.

"Belgium has not only banned the production of cluster bombs, but also adopted a law in March that bans banks and investment funds operating in that country from investing in companies that make these munitions. All countries should follow Belgium's lead," said Nash in a civil society forum held Tuesday in Lima, ahead of the intergovernmental conference that opened Wednesday.
Cutting off the flow of money to manufacturers of cluster munitions would without a doubt discourage production, said Nash, who added that the international banking community should listen to the world's clamour.
The government officials meeting in Lima this week are following up on a February agreement reached by 47 countries in Oslo, Norway to finish drafting a global treaty next year aimed at eradicating cluster munitions.
At least 30 additional governments will sign the Oslo agreement in Lima, Nash told IPS. Some of these new adherents, like Argentina, Britain, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, produce cluster bombs. Another manufacturer, Brazil, excused itself from participating in the conference.
Cluster bombs are dropped in a canister that splits open in mid-air, scattering hundreds of soda-can-size bomblets over wide areas. The bombs can be either air-dropped or ground-launched.
Critics say cluster munitions are difficult to target accurately, and between five and 30 percent of the bomblets do not explode on impact, remaining in or on the ground and posing a risk to civilians, sometimes for years to come According to Handicap International, 400 million people live in affected areas where they are at risk from unexploded cluster bomblets.
The six biggest producers of cluster bombs - Lockheed Martin, EADS, Thales, GenCorp, Textron and Raytheon - received 12.6 billion dollars in financing from 68 financial institutions between 2004 and 2007, according to the report "Explosive Investments: Financial Institutions and Cluster Munitions" by Netwerk Vlaanderen, a Belgian organisation that monitors arms trade funding and promotes sustainable investment.

The U.S.-based Textron, whose CBU-105 bombs were used by the U.S. army in Iraq, received a 1.25 billion dollar credit facility in 2005, arranged by Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, which provided 120 million dollars each. A total of 19 banks - including Bank of America, Britain's Barclays, Germany's Deutsche Bank and Switzerland's UBS - are now taking part in the credit arrangement.

In March 2003, U.S. forces dropped cluster bombs in the Iraqi region of Hilla, south of Baghdad, killing at least 33 civilians and injuring 109, according to a report by the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
And although the Vietnam war ended more than 30 years ago, cluster bombs continue to cause severe damages to the civilian population in that southeast Asian country.
The CMC reports that 34 countries continue to produce cluster munitions, another 25 have used them in armed conflicts, and 75 have stockpiles that pose a threat to humanity.
Handicap International activist Anne Villeneuve said that 98 percent of victims of cluster munitions are civilians, the great majority of whom are poor, and many of whom are children.
Although Handicap International has compiled information on 13,308 confirmed casualties from cluster submunitions, it estimates that the total number of deaths from these weapons ranges between 55,000 and 100,000.
U.S. activist Jody Williams, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for leading the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which concluded that year with the signing of a global treaty, was in Lima to deliver a message of support from herself and another five Nobel laureates: Guatemalan indigenous activist Rigoberta Menchú, Iranian lawyer and human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, Northern Irish peace activists Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan, and Wangari Maathai, an environmental and political activist from Kenya.
The Nobel Women's Initiative statement says that "Arms control and disarmament are not esoteric issues that only a few 'experts' are capable of handling - generally in negotiations behind closed doors. Any discussion related to weapons must not be based solely on military considerations, but must include the humanitarian perspective as well."
Cluster bombs "have become synonymous with civilian casualties," the Nobel Peace Prize-winners stated.
Williams said cluster bombs are an even bigger problem than land mines, because their effect is more lethal, and argued that institutions that finance the producers are as responsible as the manufacturers themselves for the fatal consequences of the weapons.
"While so many of the world's arms cause so much human misery, cluster munitions deserve to be singled out as an especially pernicious weapon of ill repute," Williams said.
She added that the United States alone has millions of stockpiled cluster munitions.
Since 1999, the areas where the largest numbers of cluster bombs have been used are Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo and Lebanon, and in every case, the large majority of victims have been civilians, said Villeneuve.
The Ottawa Treaty or Mine Ban Treaty should have brought a de facto cut-off of investment in factories producing land mines, but that does not seem to be happening, because there are banks that invest in the manufacturers, even if they come from countries that have banned land mines, said Villeneuve.
That is why the cluster munitions treaty must explicitly prohibit investment in companies that manufacture these weapons, she asserted.
Nash said "we have achieved a world practically free of land mines; now we are trying to clean the world of cluster bombs. And that is not an impossible dream." (END/2007)
-------

c. MEETINGS CONTINUE, GENEVA, JULY 2008
EXCERPT from http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/news/?id=429
July 08, 2008
NOTE: CCW = United Nations "Convention on Conventional Weapons"
IHL = "International Humanitarian Law"
" ... Both the morning and afternoon sessions lasted less than two hours each and there was some confusion on the continually changing programme of work.
The news of the day was the "new" US policy on cluster munitions leaked via an AP story late on Monday night. The policy (do nothing except export existing cluster munitions until 2018 and then adopt a 1% dangerous duds failure rate for cluster munitions) is unlikely to assist in pushing work forward in the CCW given that India, Pakistan, Russia, Brazil and others have explicitly ruled out a technology based approach. A scheduled lunchtime side event by US cluster munition producer Textron will not help this
dynamic. The CMC press release on the US policy was circulated yesterday.
Overall it is becoming more and more difficult to see a meaningful way ahead for the CCW's work on cluster munitions. The instinct for Canada, France, Germany and others appears to be that something in the CCW is better than nothing. But a new Protocol that does nothing to address the humanitarian
concern and that risks undermining existing rules of IHL, competing with the high standard set by the CCM and providing a convenient alternative for states that are wavering about signing in Oslo would clearly be worse than nothing. While there are several weeks of discussions and much positioning to come in the CCW this year, looking ahead to the outcome in November there are three scenarios that might allow compatibility with the Oslo Process:
1) An end to discussions on a new protocol on cluster munitions with perhaps a commitment to renew focus on this in the implementation of Protocol V;
2) A roll over of the current mandate to continue discussions next year on a new instrument on cluster munitions, while the CCM is busy entering into force;
3) Agreement in November on a brief protocol that says very little, but what
it does say is consistent with the CCM and so does not conflict with it.

------

d. PRESS RELEASE: U.S. OUT OF STEP WITH ALLIES WITH HOLLOW "NEW" CLUSTER BOMB POLICY: UNRESTRICTED USE FOR ANOTHER DECADE
EXCERPT from http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/news/?id=429
(Geneva, July 8, 2008) - A month after 111 nations including major US allies agreed to ban cluster bombs, the United States says it will continue to use its huge stockpile for another decade. According to the new policy memorandum signed by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the US will also seek to ship cluster bombs to other countries, despite US law prohibiting transfers. After 2018, the US will still use cluster munitions with a claimed failure rate of less than 1 percent, despite wide recognition that a
failure rate approach will not prevent unacceptable harm to civilians. The policy puts the US squarely at odds with the 111 nations-including nearly all major US allies-that agreed to a new international treaty in May that comprehensively bans the use, production, trade and stockpiling of cluster munitions, no matter what the failure rate. The United States has been the leading known user, producer, stockpiler, and exporter of cluster bombs.
"Washington's cluster bomb policy is too little, too late," said Steve Goose, director of the arms division at Human Rights Watch, and co-chair of the Cluster Munition Coalition. "Most key US allies have already rejected cluster bombs because innocent civilians are killed and maimed, not only when the weapons are used but also months and years after that. Knowing this, how in good conscience can the US wait 10 years to accept a lesser standard?"
The US policy will allow unfettered use of the nearly 1 billion submunitions now in US stockpiles for the next decade, almost all of which are known to have very high failure rates and to be highly inaccurate, as shown in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, and in southeast Asia. Even the future policy is flawed with the percentage failure rate approach having been discredited after evidence from the 2006 conflict in Lebanon and rejected by states adopting the global ban last May.
"Even in ten years time, this policy will not be sufficient to protect civilians," said Grethe Ostern of Norwegian People's Aid, co-chair of the CMC. "There are no safe cluster bombs. The failure rate determined under testing conditions will have little relationship to the real failure rate in combat. And even then, the new US policy will not address the indiscriminate, wide area effect of cluster munitions during attacks."
In addition to allowing continued use, the US would seek to transfer cluster munitions around the world, even though current law prohibits it. "Shockingly, the new policy states the US will seek to ship cluster
munitions with high failure rates to other countries, despite the fact that Congress passed and President Bush signed a law last year banning such trade," said Goose.
------------------------

e. WHERE IS CANADA IN THE NEGOTIATIONS?
UPDATE, DECEMBER 3, 2008: CANADA SIGNED THE TREATY to ban cluster munitions.
Pushing hard for an international ban on cluster bombs? I don't know. But it is something we should find out. If our Government is not aggressively supporting the positions of Belgium and Norway, etc. it is our
responsibility to see that they are. If they are, we should be extending our support to the officials. If anyone knows the situation, please send it in. It looks as though the meetings resume in November.

===========================
(8) BUSH ADMINISTRATION, LARGEST MILITARY BUILDUP, MAJOR BENEFICIARY IS
MILITARY CONTRACTORS. NUMBERS.
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arm ... 32307.html
CONTRACTS SOAR ON STRENGTH OF RECORD MILITARY SPENDING
March 2007
The Bush administration has presided over one of the largest military buildups in the history of the United States, and the biggest beneficiaries of this spending boom have been major military contractors.
Counting the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Department of Energy's work on nuclear weapons and naval reactors, proposed military spending for FY 2008 is $647 billion. After adjusting for inflation, this represents the highest level of military spending since World War II - higher than the peak of the Reagan buildup, higher than spending during Vietnam, and higher than the top year of the Korean conflict. Military spending has more than doubled since President Bush took office in January 2001.
This growth in overall military spending has been accompanied by comparable growth in prime contracts awarded to military firms like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Boeing. Pentagon contracts are up from $144 billion in FY2001 to over $294 billion in FY 2006, an increase of 103%.
Measured in dollar terms, Lockheed Martin was by far the biggest beneficiary of the increase in Pentagon contracts. Between FY2005 and FY2006, Pentagon contracts to this Maryland-based company totaled over $26 billion, a $7.1 billion increase over a one-year period. Other contractors gaining $1 billion or more between FY2005 and FY2006 included Northrop Grumman ($3.1 billion), Boeing ($1.9 billion) and Raytheon ($1.0 billion). Lesser known firms like the American Body Armor and Equipment Company, the Kuwaiti Petroleum Corporation, and Tetra Tech have seen their contracts jump five- or ten-fold since 2001, in large part due to contracts linked to the Iraq war.
Stock prices are another way to measure the degree to which weapons contractors are benefitting from war increases. According to an analysis done by the War Resisters League, Lockheed Martin's stock price increased 116% since March 2003. Boeing, General Dynamics, Halliburton and L-3 Communications are among the contractors who saw their stock values jump more than 100%. During the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average increased by 54%, meaning that many weapons contractors enjoyed double the average increase.
=================
(9) GOVERNMENT (CITIZEN) INVESTMENT IN LOCKHEED MARTIN UNDOES THE SOCIAL
JUSTICE AND PEACE WORK OF CANADIAN CHURCHES AND ORGNAIZATIONS OVERSEAS
Discussed under COMMENTARY. Please help see that information gets to people who are involved in these organizations.
=========================
(10) LETTER RE LOCKHEED'S MANUFACTURE OF CLUSTER BOMBS SENT TO DALHOUSIE
UNIVERSITY
TO: DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION
SENT: Thursday July 24th, 2008
EMAIL ADDRESS: (andrea.power@dal.ca)
CC: Dalhousie University Faculty Assoc DFA@dal.ca
CC: Dalhousie Student Union dsu@dal.ca
TO: Dalhousie University
- The Senate
- Board of Governors
- President Dr. Tom Travis

FROM: Sandra Finley
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Canada S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
sabest1@sasktel.net

Dear Members of the Dalhousie Governing Body,
In follow-up to my request of July 14th that you re-consider the decision to accept funding from Lockheed Martin Corporation:
The attached information documents:
- that Lockheed Martin is a manufacturer of cluster bombs.
- that cluster bombs contravene International Humanitarian Law.
It is persuasive argument against investing in, or taking money from Lockheed Martin.
Thank-you for consideration of my request.
Best wishes,
Sandra Finley
====================
Email from:
Sandra Finley
Saskatoon SK S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
sabest1@sasktel.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Finley" <sabest1@sasktel.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 2:00 PM
Subject: Census Lockheed Martin Trial: I should have anticipated this

#4 is the important one

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.
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 the dispensers (WCMD's) and the cluster munitions (CBU's) to go with the dispensers.
I just searched - the pages that did have WCMD/CBU information now all come up as error pages, one after the other. Probably since the International Treaty to Ban Cluster Bombs. It's not a problem (for my trial) because the information exists in other places.

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; one might ask, "Does Lockheed 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 (LM 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

The Source was: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/mfc/index.html but I can't find "WCMD's", or CBU's" there now.

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

(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:

"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/busin ... 8lock.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. And the danger for us.

- The Government has a large NON-COMPLIANCE problem because of out-sourcing to Lockheed. This email 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 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.

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.

======================
Email from:
Sandra Finley
Saskatoon SK S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
sabest1@sasktel.net