Archive

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Tens of thousands of dead fish are stinking up a 25-mile stretch of Lake Erie shoreline.

September 5, 2012 Leave a comment

Tens of thousands of dead fish stink up Lake Erie shore

 
September 5th, 2012
10:20 AM ET
 

Tens of thousands of dead fish stink up Lake Erie shore

Tens of thousands of dead fish have washed up on a 25-mile stretch of Lake Erie’s northern shore, and Ontario environmental officials say they could be victims of a natural phenomenon called a lake inversion.

The inversion brings cold water, which has lower oxygen levels, to the lake’s surface and fish suffocate.

“Essentially it’s a rolling over of the lake,” Ontario Ministry of the Environment spokeswoman Kate Jordan told The Chatham Daily News. “Something whether it be a storm, or cooler temperatures at night, or strong winds triggers a temperature change in the lake.”

Jordan said it was windy and choppy on the lake Friday night, according to a report in The Windsor Star. The fish kill was reported Saturday.

 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said the central basin of Lake Erie, between Cleveland on the south and Chatham, Ontario, on the north is particularly susceptible to oxygen deprivation, with the danger peaking in late August and mid-September.

Others suspect a sewage spill may have something to do with the fish kill.

David Colby, chief medical officer of the Chatham-Kent district where dead fish litter the beaches, told The Windsor Star that residents reported a strong sewage smell the night before the fish washed ashore.

“All kinds of people were woken out of a sound sleep by a stench and it was like a septic tank was backing up,” The Windsor Star quoted Colby as saying.

But Jordan said tests of lake water taken Saturday showed no signs of what might have killed the fish. The water was tested for oxygen, PH levels, conductivity and temperature, she said.

“The ministry did not observe any evidence of a spill or pollution and water quality measurements done did not show anything unusual,” Jordan told CNN.

The investigation was continuing, she said.

The dead fish included carp, sheepshead, perch, catfish and suckers, the Daily News reported, and Colby said most were of good size.

“I haven’t seen anything like this in quite some time,” the Daily News quoted him as saying. “The interesting thing is that most of the fish are sizable. There are very few little ones.”

Jordan told the Toronto Star the cleanup of the fish has yet to begin.

“We are having discussions with Environment Canada, the health unit and natural resources about that now,” the Toronto Star quoted her as saying.

Meanwhile, residents said the smell of rotting fish is overpowering.

“I had family here (on Monday) and I didn’t allow them to take the dog or the children down to the beach,” Chatham-Kent resident Patricia Pook told CNN affiliate CBC News. “I knew it was bad, but the smell is just overwhelming. It would make you sick to your stomach.”

  Post by:
Categories: Uncategorized

The Freeh Report and Joe Paterno, Part One


July 18th, 2012 |

Part One: The Philadelphia Inquirer Mangles the Flawed Freeh Report

What do you do when reporters from a major metropolitan daily newspaper—in this case, The Philadelphia Inquirer—demonstrate that they are completely incapable of reading a published report—in this case The Freeh Report—and providing their readers with a coherent summary of its contents? What do you do when the egregious misreading of that report by these reporters presents its readers a very false picture of how officials at Penn State handled Mike McQueary’s allegations of child molestation by Jerry Sandusky in February 2001? Perhaps you would recommend that the Philadelphia Inquirer receive the “death penalty” and not be permitted to publish its sludge for a full year!

Readers of my website might recall that, on 9 February 2012, I wrote a scathing critique titled “Incompetent Journalists at the Philadelphia Inquirer Slandered Joe Paterno”. Especially outrageous was the Inquirer’s 4 December 2011 editorial, which asserted: “Instead of alerting authorities, university officials and staff participated in what has all the markings of a cover-up. Their dismissal of the reported rape of a boy in a locker-room shower as mere ‘horsing around’ was an outrageous example of a mind-set that the university must now eradicate…”

As we now know, thanks to my investigation into that “reported rape,” the Editorial Board’s outrage was misplaced, directed at a pseudo-event created by the person who falsely summarized McQueary’s testimony in the grand jury presentment. As I made very clear in my article, “Three False Assertions by the Grand Jury turned the Press and Public against Joe Paterno and Penn State,” McQueary’s first-hand sworn testimony contradicted the summary of his testimony found in the widely reported grand jury report.

McQueary’s first-hand testimony contained his assertion that he “did not see insertion,” He also insisted that he never used the words “anal” or “rape”– since day one. Finally, McQueary testified that he never used the words “anal intercourse,” “anal sex,” or “rape” when reporting what he saw to Paterno, Curley and Schultz. In fact, the jurors who convicted Sandusky multiple times found him not guilty of the charge of anal rape of Victim 2.

The Philadelphia Inquirer never took any steps to correct the record, notwithstanding my repeated emails to its reporters, columnists and editors.

Nevertheless, one longs for the abysmally poor journalism practiced by the Inquirer then, especially after reading the garbage that is found under the Inquirer’s front page headline for Sunday, 15 July 2012: “The Penn State Paper Trail.”

Consider the first two paragraphs of that article: “Three days after Mike McQueary saw Jerry Sandusky molesting a boy in a shower in 2001, two top administrators at Pennsylvania State University had begun to craft a plan.”

“They would not notify authorities.”

The reporters who reached this conclusion—Jeremy Roebuck and Craig R. McCoy—cited a memo dated 2/12/2001, written by Penn State Vice President Gary Schulz as proof. The memo states: “Talked with TMC [Athletic Director Tim Curley] reviewed 1998 history.
– agreed TMC will discuss with JVP [Joe Paterno] + advise we think TMC should meet w JS [Jerry Sandusky] on Friday.
– unless he ‘confesses’ to having a problem, TMC will indicate we need to have DPW [Dept. of Public Welfare] review the matter as an independent agency concerned w child welfare
– TMC will keep me posted.”

If this memo supposedly proves that “They would not notify authorities,” my first questions for Messrs. Roebuck and McCoy are these:

1. What were the chances of Jerry Sandusky actually confessing?

2. Has Sandusky ever confessed?

3. If the probability of gaining his confession was extremely low, doesn’t that mean (according to the very memo you cite) that the next step would be to tell Sandusky that this matter will be turned over to the Department of Public Welfare?

4. Is there any evidence in the memo to indicate that Schulz and Curley had no intention of carrying out their threat?”

5. If the Schultz’s 12 February 2001 memo proves, as you allege, that “They would not notify authorities,” why did Schultz call the University’s outside legal counsel on 11 February 2001 to discuss “Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse? Why waste the time, if you have no intention of reporting the abuse?

Here’s another set of questions:

1. When you wrote, “The decision not to contact authorities was made final two weeks later in a flurry of e-mails among Curley, Schultz and then university president Graham B. Spanier,” did you actually read those e-mails before you went off the deep accusatory end?

After all, Schultz’s hand written notes for a meeting on 2/25/01 include the steps that are to be taken concerning Sandusky: “3) Tell chair of Board of Second Mile 2) Report to Dept. of Welfare. 1) Tell JS to avoid bringing children alone into Lasch Bldg who’s the chair??”

2. Is there anything in those notes that indicates Schultz, Curley and Spanier decided not to report to the Department of Welfare?

The next day’s e-mail from Schultz to Curley says: “Tim, I’m assuming that you’ve got the ball to 1) talk with the subject ASAP regarding the future appropriate use of the University facility; 2) contacting the chair of the Charitable Organization; and 3) contacting the Dept. of Welfare.”

3. Is there anything in that e-mail, which indicates that Schultz, Curley, and Spanier had made the decision not to report to authorities?

4. Again, I ask, did you actually read the material you reported on?

Readers who actually think about what they are reading will have noticed that Schultz’s notes for 2/25/01 and his e-mail of 2/26/01 contain no reference to any confession by Jerry Sandusky. They simply state a plan of action, which includes reporting to the Department of Welfare—as Pennsylvania State law requires. To that extent, these notes and e-mail actually sever the link that Messrs. Roebuck and McCoy attempt to create between Schultz’s notes of 2/12/01 and the “flurry of e-mails” two weeks later which “made final” their decision not to report Sandusky to the authorities.

In fact, it’s Curley’s e-mail to Schultz and Spanier on 2/27/01 which reintroduces the idea of a confession by Sandusky. As will be shown below, Curley is uncomfortable about going to everyone but Sandusky, “the person involved.” Here’s the relevant portion of Curley’s e-mail:

“After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday—I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps. I am having trouble with going to everyone, but the person involved. I think I would be more comfortable meeting with the person and tell him about the information we received. I would plan to tell him we are aware of the first situation. I would indicate we feel there is a problem and we want to assist the individual to get professional help. Also, we feel the responsibility at some point soon to inform his organization and [sic] maybe the other one about the situation. If he is cooperative we would work with him to handle informing the organization. If not, we do not have a choice and will inform the two groups. Additionally, I will let him know that his guests are not permitted to use our facilities. I need some help on this one. What do you think about this approach?”

Curley’s e-mail not only reintroduces the idea of a confession by Sandusky, but also implies that if Sandusky agrees to get professional help the Department of Welfare would not be notified. Spanier and Schultz not only agree with Curley’s proposal, but also praise it for being “humane.”

Thus, all three seemed prepared to violate Pennsylvania’s law to report allegations of sexual abuse if Sandusky admitted his problem and agreed to seek professional help. Presumably, that plan was designed to prevent more “incidents” like those of ’98 and ’01 while rescuing a friend. (I condemn this approach, but understand it.)

In fact, Spanier admits: “The only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road.”

But, again, I must ask: What is the probability that Sandusky will confess and agree to professional help. I believe that it was a lead pipe cinch that Sandusky would not confess.

Consequently, if Messrs. Spanier, Curley and Schultz stick to Curley’s revised plan, , these officials must report McQueary’s allegation to the Department of Welfare when Sandusky fails to confess.

Yet, that’s not the conclusion reached by the authors of the Freeh Report. In its grotesquely erroneous “gotcha” moment, the report asserts: “A reasonable conclusion from Spanier’s email statement that “[t]he only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it” is that Spanier, Schultz and Curley were agreeing not to report Sandusky’s activity.”

No, that’s not a reasonable conclusion! Absolutely not! It totally ignores that part of Curley’s plan to report to the Department of Welfare in the extremely probable event that Sandusky refuses to confess and seek treatment.

Clearly, the Freeh Report has overreached. And I can’t avoid the suspicion that this overreach led to another—the barely supported conclusion that the need “to avoid the consequences of bad publicity” explains the cover up.

Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that the Freeh Report’s erroneous “gotcha” moment—which specifically identifies the day when the cover-up by Spanier, Schultz and Curley commenced—excludes Joe Paterno.

Perhaps as a silver lining in its dark cloud of journalistic malpractice, Messrs. Roebuck and McCoy also have little to say about Joe Paterno. Appropriately so. Nevertheless, they appear to not only have swallowed the unreasonable gotcha conclusion reached by the Freeh Report, but also to have attempted to work backward from that false conclusion in order to demonstrate that the decision not to report actually can be traced back to Schultz’s notes dated 2/12/01. It’s shoddy journalism at its worst!

An unbiased reading of the sketchy evidence would indicate that the decision not to report McQueary’s allegations to the Department of Welfare occurred after 7 March 2001, the day Curley actually met with Sandusky.

The available evidence suggests that Curley never confronted Sandusky and Sandusky confessed to nothing. Worse, Sandusky (brazenly?) offered to give Curley the name of the boy who was in the Lasch building shower with him that night—and Curley refused to take it.

If this information is correct (a very big “if”), then, according to the plan all three agreed to, one of them was obligated to report Sandusky to the Department of Welfare. But that didn’t happen and we still do not know why—even after the publication of the Freeh Report.

In the Freeh Report [p. 77], Spanier claims that Curley subsequently told him that Sandusky had confessed and agreed to get professional help. But, we know that didn’t happen, so somebody’s lying.

Moreover, in that same Freeh Report [p. 78], the lawyer representing the Director of the Second Mile charity claims that Curley told his client that “nothing inappropriate occurred.” That’s the story being told by Spanier, Schultz and Curley today – and they’re sticking to it.

(Personally, I find it difficult to believe that both Curley and Schultz came to the conclusion that “nothing inappropriate occurred,” especially after Joe Paterno reported to them McQueary’s allegations of something sexual between Sandusky and a young boy, and especially given the fact that both of them knew about the investigation of Sandusky in 1998. Paterno’s report, alone, should have triggered an automatic message to the Department of Welfare.)

Let’s hope that the trial of Curley and Schultz brings resolution to that assertion.

Source article:
http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/?p=541

BACK to margotbworldnews.com

Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden’s death


By Elliott Freeman

May 1, 2012 in Politics
Pentagon officials recently disclosed to the Associated Press (AP) that they could not find any photo or video evidence to confirm that Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was killed in the Navy Seal raid in Pakistan a year ago.
AP has submitted more than 20 requests for information surrounding the raid on Bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound to the U.S. Government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In response to the request for visual evidence of Bin Laden’s death, the Pentagon stated that it could not find any pictures or video footage of the raid itself or of Bin Laden’s dead body. It also told AP it could not locate any images of Bin Laden’s body that were taken on the U.S.S. Carl Vinson, the Navy aircraft carrier that reportedly lowered him into the sea after his death.
In addition, the Pentagon admitted that it could not find an autopsy report, death certificate or results of a DNA identification test for Bin Laden, in spite of claims made by President Obama and reported by CBC News that a DNA test was performed. These admissions follow a related FOIA response by the Department of Defense in February, in which it stated that it had no emails concerning the Bin Laden raid that were sent prior to its execution.
The Atlantic Wire reported in February that the CIA claimed it had visual proof of Bin Laden’s death, but the Pentagon’s admission that it does not have any evidence of this kind still raises significant questions, since its jurisdiction includes the Navy Seals that conducted the raid and the Navy ship that buried Bin Laden at sea. The latest revelation drew the suspicion of Lt. Col. Robert Bowman (ret.), the former director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force. “It makes the official story sound very fishy,” Bowman said in an interview with Digital Journal. “Without proof, I’m not buying it carte blanche.”
Bowman also pointed to the reports that Bin Laden died in 2001 or 2002, which have been supported by former FBI counter-terrorism chief Dale Watson, former assistant Secretary of State Steve Pieczenik, former U.S. foreign intelligence officer Angelo Codevilla and other intelligence experts. “This smacks of a cover-up,” Bowman added. Some organizations contend that the cover-up extends beyond the Bin Laden raid, including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group of over 1,600 technical professionals that is calling for a new 9/11 investigation.
“The raid is not the only part of the Bin Laden narrative that doesn’t add up,” said founder Richard Gage, AIA. “It’s also highly unlikely that Bin Laden and Al Qaeda had access to plant the explosives that brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7.”
Meanwhile, President Obama called for a time of remembrance and contemplation on the anniversary of the raid. “I think for us to use that time for some reflection, to give thanks to those who participated is entirely appropriate, and that’s what’s been taking place,” he said on Monday, according to McClatchy News.
It remains to be seen how the public will reflect on the lack of credible evidence surrounding the demise of the world’s most wanted terrorist.
Categories: Uncategorized

World’s Top Radiation Expert, Dr. Chris Busby, Disagrees Fukushima Risks

Categories: Uncategorized

Canada: NEB Approves Mackenzie Valley Pipeline

January 7, 2011 Leave a comment

On December 16, 2010, the National Energy Board (NEB) approved the application for the construction and operation of the Mackenzie Gas Project. The Project includes the 1,196 kilometer Mackenzie Valley Pipeline, three onshore natural gas fields and a 457 kilometer pipeline to carry natural gas liquids from near the coast of the Beaufort Sea to northwestern Alberta and onwards to southern markets. The NEB attached 264 conditions to the Project’s approval in areas such as engineering, safety and environmental protection. The NEB will monitor the Project throughout its lifespan to ensure these conditions are being met.

The NEB began hearing evidence in January 2006 on five applications filed by a number of parties, including lead partner Imperial Oil. The Board held over 58 days of hearing sessions in 15 communities throughout the Northwest Territories and northern Alberta.

To move forward, the NEB’s decision must now be approved by the Federal Cabinet. If the Project is approved, construction is expected to begin in 2014 and the pipeline is scheduled to be in operation by the end of 2018. If the Project proceeds, it will be the largest pipeline system to be constructed and operated in Canada’s north.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.

LLP)

Related Functions

Categories: Uncategorized

German anger over America’s ’15 per cent cut of Afghan aid’

December 22, 2010 Leave a comment

By Lewis Smith

Friday, 3 December 2010
Germany has accused the US military of swallowing a ¤50m (£42m) contribution to building up the Afghan army by charging a 15 per cent “administration fee”.

A series of protests was made by the German government to the US after discovering that money it was raising for nation-building in Afghanistan was being taken by the US. One of the cables sent to WikiLeaks was from the US mission at Nato requesting instructions from Washington after being harangued by the Germans.

The US ambassador to Nato, Ivor Daalder, pointed out there were “serious political concerns” arising from the complaint and warned the perception that “the US is charging allies an excessive fee for the use of monies they have donated” could be “difficult to explain away”.

The fund the money was intended forwas set up in 2007 to buy kit and infrastructure for the Afghan army. More than ¤100m had been raised by the start of 2010 with a further ¤150m more pledged. Germany’s donation was the biggest.

Some of the protests were made by Ulrich Brandenburg, the German ambassador to the military alliance, who demanded an explanation for the 15 per cent handling fee charged by the US army corps of engineers and wanting to know why projects were being held up.

A cable reporting his anger said: “He said that money for earmarked projects had not been disbursed, resulting in delayed projects. He also said that the US army corps of engineers was charging a 15 per cent administrative fee. He said that German parliamentarians were beginning to ask questions about how this money has been handled, adding that this could make it difficult for Berlin to provide additional contributions in the future.”

Germany’s ¤50m was transferred to Nato’s headquarters in Brussels in October 2009 and ¤7m was intended specifically for three military schools. However, by February this year the Germans were complaining that the money had gone to the US Treasury and “as of today no project financing has occurred”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/german-anger-over-americas-15-per-cent-cut-of-afghan-aid-2149929.html

BACK to margotbworldnews.com

Categories: Uncategorized

Emergency Action! Protest To Show Solidarity With Striking Georgia State Inmates!

December 19, 2010 Leave a comment

 

Submitted by kennyyates on Wed, 12/15/2010 – 3:05pm.

Friday December 17, 2010
11:30am – 1:00pm
Richmond, Virginia Courthouse
701 E. Broad St.

To endorse this action please visit:
[ https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?hl=en&pli=1&formkey=dHVBcXNrOFBIUmExM19TMVN4Z2daOEE6MQ#gid=0 ]

“A threat to justice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere.” – Martin Luther King Jr

Not unlike the prisoners in the United States, the working class, without an organized Union, lose their rights granted to them by the U.S. Constitution. The moment you clock in, you are subject to the will of the employer, losing your individuality and status as a free human being. We immediately enter the realm of second class citizens, which should not be tolerated by any moral human being. Understanding that our second class status as a worker isn’t far removed from that of the prisoner, the Richmond Industrial Workers of the World feel it is within our responsibility as fellow workers, to show solidarity with our brothers and sisters in the Georgia state prison system, and echo their demands to retain their dignity and status as human beings:

“These conditions can be changed and the interest of the working class upheld only by an organization formed in such a way that all its members in any one industry (or in this case ‘industrial complex’), or in all industries if necessary, cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus making an injury to one, an injury to all.” – Industrial Workers of the World Preamble

The hereby undersigned stand in solidarity with the striking inmates in the Georgia State prison system. We urge the Georgia Department of Corrections (DOC) to recognize and respect the rights and demands set forth in the press release by the organized prisoners, and cease the brutal repression of their collective voice.

To endorse this action please follow this link!
[ https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?hl=en&pli=1&formkey=dHVBcXNrOFBIUmExM19TMVN4Z2daOEE6MQ#gid=0 ]

Support The Largest Prison Strike in U.S. History!

On Thursday morning, December 9, 2010, thousands of Georgia prisoners refused to work, stopped all other activities and locked themselves down in their cells in a peaceful protest for their human rights. The ‘December 9 Strike’ became the biggest prisoner protest in the history of the United States.

Thousands of men, from Augusta, Baldwin, Hancock, Hays, Macon, Smith and Telfair State Prisons, among others, initiated this strike to press the Georgia Department of Corrections (“DOC”) to stop treating them like animals and slaves and institute programs that address their basic human rights. They set forth the following demands:

·A LIVING WAGE FOR WORK: In violation of the 13thAmendment to the Constitution prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude, the DOC demands prisoners work for free.

·EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES: For the great majority of prisoners, the DOC denies all opportunities for education beyond the GED, despite the benefit to both prisoners and society.

·DECENT HEALTH CARE: In violation of the 8thAmendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments, the DOC denies adequate medical care to prisoners, charges excessive fees for the most minimal care and is responsible for extraordinary pain and suffering.

·AN END TO CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS: In further violation of the 8thAmendment, the DOC is responsible for cruel prisoner punishments for minor infractions of rules.

·DECENT LIVING CONDITIONS: Georgia prisoners are confined in over-crowded, substandard conditions, with little heat in winter and oppressive heat in summer.

·NUTRITIONAL MEALS: Vegetables and fruit are in short supply in DOC facilities while starches and fatty foods are plentiful.

·VOCATIONAL AND SELF-IMPROVEMENT OPPORTUNITIES:The DOC has stripped its facilities of all opportunities for skills training, self-improvement and proper exercise.

·ACCESS TO FAMILIES: The DOC has disconnected thousands of prisoners from their families by imposing excessive telephone charges and innumerable barriers to visitation.

·JUST PAROLE DECISIONS: The Parole Board capriciously and regularly denies parole to the majority of prisoners despite evidence of eligibility.

Despite that the prisoners’ protest remained non-violent, the Department of Corrections (DOC) violently attempted to force the men back to work—claiming it was “lawful” to order prisoners to work without pay, in defiance of the 13th Amendment’s abolition of slavery. In Augusta State Prison, six or seven inmates were brutally ripped from their cells by CERT Team guards and beaten, resulting in broken ribs for several men, one man beaten beyond recognition. This brutality continues there. At Telfair, the Tactical Squad trashed all the property in inmate cells. At Macon State, the Tactical Squad has menaced the men for two days, removing some to the “hole,” and the warden ordered the heat and hot water turned off. Still, today, men at Macon, Smith, Augusta, Hays and Telfair State Prisons say they are committed to continuing the strike. Inmate leaders, representing blacks, Hispanics, whites, Muslims, Rastafarians, Christians, have stated the men will stay down until their demands are addressed. One issuing this statement:

“…Brothers, we have accomplished a major step in our struggle…We must continue what we have started…The only way to achieve our goals is to continue with our peaceful sit-down…I ask each and every one of my Brothers in this struggle to continue the fight. ON MONDAY MORNING, WHEN THE DOORS OPEN, CLOSE THEM.DO NOT GO TO WORK. They cannot do anything to us that they haven’t already done at one time or another. Brothers, DON’T GIVE UP NOW. Make them come to the table. Be strong. DO NOT MAKE MONEY FOR THE STATE THAT THEY IN TURN USE TO KEEP US AS SLAVES….”

When the strike began, prisoner leaders issued the following call: “No more slavery. Injustice in one place is injustice to all. Inform your family to support our cause. Lock down for liberty!”

Please take a moment and call the following prison systems and declare your support for the striking inmates!

Georgia Department of Corrections (478) 992-5246

Macon State Prison (978) 472-3900
Hays State Prison (706) 857-0400
Telfair State Prison (229) 868-7721
Baldwin State Prison (478) 445-5218
Valdosta State Prison (229) 333-7900
Smith State Prison (912) 654-5000

For more information on the ‘December 9 Strike’ please contact the following designated representatives:

Elaine Brown, 404-542-1211, sistaelaine@gmail.com;
Valerie Porter, 229-931-5348, lashan123@att.net;
Faye Sanders, 478-550-7046, reshelias@yahoo.com

For more information please contact:
Richmond Industrial Workers of the World • 804.496.1568 • richmondiww@gmail.com

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • Magnoliacom
  • Newsvine
  • Furl
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
Industrial Workers of the World
General Headquarters
PO Box 180195, Chicago, IL 60618, USA
tel: (773) 857-1090
Email – ghq [at] iww.org
Website – www [at] iww.org

BACK to margotbworldnews.com

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,