Sudbury Election Scandal

3. City of Greater Sudbury No Comments »

The federal crown has stayed its criminal charges against Gerry Lougheed, and has asked the court to delay proceedings which is ANOTHER SCANDAL.  Conversation between Gerry Lougheed and Andrew Olivier Dec. 11th 2014

Sudbury Lawyer Fetish-Fails to cooperate with Provincial Ombudsman

3. City of Greater Sudbury No Comments »

Dec 12/12 Marin said “There were two reasons we didn’t get cooperation from city councilors,” “One is that they wanted to come in with the city solicitor. Which they can’t do. The solicitor works for the city and he can’t represent a bunch of councilors, while being true to all of them. At one point, the city solicitor insisted that not only he be present during all the interviews, but that we couldn’t talk to his clients directly (and) we would have to submit questions through him. “The city solicitor is in a conflict of interest. In this case, he ran interference with our investigation. On behalf of Sudburians we apologize to the Ombudsman for the mentality of some of city councilors. There was also a poor show of support from citizens. GSPS (council’s muscle) have been known to intimidate witnesses before testifying in Sudbury courts and possibly citizens from attending to show support. Their influence can afford some councilors the resources and protection they need to oppose the Ombudsman.

Marin politely called Kett and Canapini both liars when he replied, “That’s what I was told, I received a letter to that effect. You might want to take that up with your city solicitor,” After being caught in a lie and without addressing Marins “letter”, Kett said neither he or Canapini have any “issue with the Ombudsman’s office…but have an issue with Marin personally”… The outcome of any Ombudsman investigation including Elton fiasco is a matter of public record.

…Canapini asked the Ombudsman to show him where it says in the Ombudsman Act he cannot represent these councillors”. Its not in the Ombudsman Act because municipalities are EXPECTED to cooperate with the Provincially appointed and impartial Ombudsman . Refusal to cooperate and retaining legal counsel implies there is something to hide … Canapini is wrong when he says the party being investigated is the ENTIRE council and not for individual councillors. He self proclaims “I am the lawyer for council”. In fact, he would only be the lawyer for the councillors that are in support of continuing closed door meetings and opposing the Ombudsman. The council members who did not participate or support closed doors meetings don’t need a lawyer. Therefore Canapini.s complaint to the Law society was frivolous, vexatious and a further waste of taxpayers money.

So when the Ombudsman asks.. “What is different in Sudbury? Why the lawyer fetish? What law do you have that is different from the rest of Ontario?” Answer … Sudbury is a cesspool of lawyers each with several “puppets” to mask their conflict of interest in and out of council. Marin said “the greatest power his office has is moral suasion”: And if that doesn’t work, more inevitably come to the conclusion that Sudbury is a village without morals to be known as LawLawLand … run by unaccountable, legally protected incompetents who provide municipal, police and CAS services to Sudburians.

BIG Pharma

3. City of Greater Sudbury No Comments »

Ontario Liberal psychiatrist Sudbury’s Dr. Kumar stated that ADHD kids need access to drugs… as in a drug vending machine…rather than proven alternative methods of treatment!

The decision to prescribe Ritalin is often made by doctors with little or no mental health training and at the request of CA$ or Big Pharma.

I wonder if his pro drug views would be accepted in his home country of India, and where he received the bulk of his medical training. What does Dr. Kumar think they did with these “ADHH” children 20 years ago? We believe Dr Kumar to be completely wrong when he says “there is SOME research evidence that the frontal lobe of the brain is defective”. How many parents have had their kids tested for this “”abnormality” before doctors like Sheila Milne, Elaine Blacklock and Kumar prescribe this drug?

He goes further to say that the “abnormality of the brain” in these children affects their ability to perform complex tasks and functions such as organizational skills; yet these so-called ADHD kids are usually the brightest in the class and usually exhibit these behavior because they are bored and not academically challenged. Therefore we must conclude by his statement “children become bored and then disruptive” that he believes drugging children so they conform rather than offer them a challenging educational environment. Dr. Kumar also fails to disclose that children on Ritalin bring in more funding to school boards and are more likely to abuse drugs as adults.

If anyone is out of touch with reality, its Dr. Kumar, Sheila Milne and other doctors in the Sudbury area that prescribe Ritalin without doing proper tests. For Dr Kumar to state that experts such as the University of Victory and the University of Toronto are not in touch with reality is absurd. When teachers are allowed to score students to recommend them to take Ritalin it is obviously so that the school can receive more funding. They can receive up to $8500 for a child labeled “special needs” and the child receives NO special treatment at school. The only prerequisite for this extra funding is that the child be taking Ritalin.

Statements made by doctor Kumar such as “What are the other options to Ritalin” clearly indicates he is NOT a Ritalin or an ADHD expert. As anyone who has researched ADHD and Ritalin can tell you there are many alternatives to Ritalin. There is also NO evidence that children who are not treated are at high risk for alcohol and drug abuse as claimed by Kumar. In fact the opposite is true! Children suffering stress caused by divorce and access and custody battles exhibit the same symptoms as ADHD. These are the BULK of the children that are labeled ADHD and prescribed Ritalin WITHOUT PRPER TESTING.

Another ridiculous statement Dr. Kumar makes is that “not treating kids with Ritalin will criminalize our society even further”. Dr. Vijay Kumar’s statements are inaccurate and contradictory. Statistics clearly indicate children taking these drugs are more likely to commit suicide. Perhaps Dr. Kumar requires Ritalin to keep his thoughts on track! After all, when it comes to your children who would you trust, the likes of Sudbury’s Sheila Milne, Elaine Blacklock and Dr Kumar … OR Dr Roger McIntyre, head of the Mood Disorder Psychopharmacology Unit at Toronto’s University Health Unit, Health Canada and Allen Cassels, a drug policy researcher at the University of Victory? It seems that the policy in Sudbury is DRUG your children. Beware of doctors and teachers who want to label your child special needs…they have their own interests in mind…..

WP Theme & Icons by N.Design Studio
Entries RSS Comments RSS Log in