I have begun to believe my mind is full of tiny little topics that act like pimples.

No one can predict the order they start to fester in, or when they’ll get ripe and burst.

Friday 27 February 2015

How Our Society Is Totally Backwards



How Our Society Is Totally Backwards – The Paradox Of Our Age

The following is an excerpt of  “The Paradox of Our Age,” from Words Aptly Spoken, by Bob Moorehead.  It perfectly sums up everything that is backwards about our culture. 



We have taller buildings but shorter tempers; wider freeways but narrower viewpoints; we spend more but have less; we buy more but enjoy it less; we have bigger houses and smaller families; more conveniences, yet less time; we have more degrees but less sense; more knowledge but less judgement; more experts, yet more problems; we have more gadgets but less satisfaction; more medicine, yet less wellness; we take more vitamins but see fewer results.
We drink too much; smoke too much; spend too recklessly; laugh too little; drive too fast; get too angry quickly; stay up too late; get up too tired; read too seldom; watch TV too much and pray too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values; we fly in faster planes to arrive there quicker, to do less and return sooner; we sign more contracts only to realize fewer profits; we talk too much; love too seldom and lie too often. We’ve learned how to make a living, but not a life; we’ve added years to life, not life to years.
We’ve been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbor. We’ve conquered outer space, but not inner space; we’ve done larger things, but not better things; we’ve cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul; we’ve split the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less; plan more, but accomplish less; we make faster planes, but longer lines; we learned to rush, but not to wait; we have more weapons, but less peace; higher incomes, but lower morals; more parties, but less fun; more food, but less appeasement; more acquaintances, but fewer friends; more effort, but less success.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but have less communication; drive smaller cars that have bigger problems; build larger factories that produce less. We’ve become long on quantity, but short on quality.

We have confused price with value



These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion; tall men, but short character; steep in profits, but shallow relationships. These are times of world peace, but domestic warfare; more leisure and less fun; higher postage, but slower mail; more kinds of food, but less nutrition. These are days of two incomes, but more divorces; these are times of fancier houses, but broken homes.
These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, cartridge living, throw-away morality, one-night stands, overweight bodies and pills that do everything from cheer, to prevent, quiet or kill. It is a time when there is much in the show window and nothing in the stock room. Indeed, these are the times!

Why do we choose to live this way?




Change starts with each person being individually responsible for their actions and behaviour.  What kind of world are we voting for with the way we choose to live our lives?


Share and Enjoy

I did

Blaine Barrett

TheSmeeGoanGuy


-        

Monday 9 February 2015

Liars, Liars, Pants on Fire

I HAVE A COMPLAINT!
You are Violating Your Oath!
Stop Lying to Your Patients.
Regain Your Integrity!


Attn; Dr. Simpson and all College Registrars

Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities
Fleur-Ange Lefebvre, Executive Director and CEO
College of Physicians and Surgeons
Registrar
Alberta
Dr. Trevor Theman
Saskatchewan
Dr. Karen Shaw
Manitoba
Dr. William Pope
Quebec
Dr. Yves Robert
New Brunswick
Dr. Ed Schollenberg
Nova Scotia
Dr. Douglas A. (Gus) Grant
Prince Edward Island
Dr. Cyril Moyse
Newfoundland and Labrador
Dr. Robert Young
Yukon
Ms. Fiona Charbonneau
Nunavut
Ms. Barbara Harvey
Ontario
Mr. Dan Faulkner


Ladies and Gentlemen: I have a Complaint:

The Medical Marijuana Policy of the CMA
 Violates its own Code of Ethics


After reviewing the history of the Medical Marijuana Program I have come to the conclusion that the Medical Profession in Canada, by their avoidance of the truth has, possibly unknowingly, committed an act of professional misconduct, in that they have engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.

My name is Blaine Barrett and I am a Medical Marijuana Advocate and Ethical Critic residing in Surrey BC. I am 72, a concerned Senior Citizen and one of 40000 patients who were previously legally licensed to use and purchase Medical Marijuana. Since September of this year all 40,000 of us are now compelled by law to obtain a signature but cannot get a physician to sign applications for a “renewal”! I suffer from Double Depression and Neurological Pain in my back and legs. I have used Marijuana since 1999 for mental control and pain management. I only require 1-2 gr./day but when I need it I NEED it!

I obtained my first Application Form B2 signature in 2007 and since my first purchase from them I have been witness to the Harper Government’s Health Canada calculated destruction of the Medical Marijuana Access Program. The implementation of the Marihuana for Medical for Research Purposes Regulations has destroyed all patients’ ability to obtain their medication from any legal source except of the new crop of extremely expensive Licensed Producer (LP). In order for a patient to become a customer he must provide a document signed by a doctor, and that at this moment has created an insurmountable blockade for access to a legal supply of Marijuana.
We need help. There are 40,000 qualifed applicants who need a renewal.

What is most disappointing is the Canadian Medical Association’s participation in the destruction of the MMAR. They adopted a hostile Medical Marijuana Policy to act as a deterrent to their members. Ever since 2003 the CMA has stubbornly refused to comply with the MMAR policies that it finds objectionable; and has advised its members not to participate in the program by refusing to sign applications. This was an obstacle to patients that has continually increased in severity for the past 11 years and it’s all based on lies.

With the creation of the MMRP program in Sept. 2013 Health Canada changed the source of our legal supply to an LP but there still was a way to access with a doctor’s signature. That access has now been eliminated as of May 13, 2014.



May 13, 2014, six months ago, Dr. Louis Hugo Francescutti, the last president of the Canadian Medical Association made a declaration and as the head of the advocacy organization had one message for all Canadian doctors when it comes to prescribing marijuana:

“Don’t do it!”


The Deterioration of Medical Ethics
Related to Medical Marijuana

In the course of our national history, there has never been another profession more respected, admired, and trusted than the Canadian Medical Profession was in 1867. Three months after the founding of Canada, 164 Canadian Medical Professionals coalesced to form the Canadian Medical Association to serve our national health needs.

One of their first concerns was with the moral and ethical character of Physicians to ensure a continuation of the respect they held in Society. To ensure the expectations were met, they devised and adopted a Code of Ethics to cover the practice of Medicine in Canada and expand the scope of the Hippocratic Oath they all swore to honour. This was last revised in 2004 and last reviewed in Mar, 2012. It is based on the fundamental principles and values of medical ethics, especially compassion, beneficence, non-malfeasance, respect for persons, justice and accountability.

It is worthy to note that at that time physicians relied on testimonial evidence alone. With reference to Cannabis the evidence is still on hand: 5000 years of medical use with not one death or any other established harmful consequence of its use; but the CMA now opposes its use in any form. What happened to detour the CMA into a complete reversal regarding Cannabis?

There effectively was no CMA policy regarding marijuana for 100 years until the Hippy Revolution of the 1960’s raised its profile and the War on Drugs commenced. The CMA was not overly concerned about pot and prior to 2000 they were in favour of decriminalization. Then the Canadian Government passed the Medical Marihuana Access Regulations and the CMA got its nose out of joint because the Government took the position of telling them what to do and not asking for their help. Over the course of the last 11 years and 11 presidents the CMA has rigidly opposed Medical Marijuana citing three primary objections and Physicians are now obstructing the application process.

They now condemn all testimonial evidence as a pack of lies and cannabis has no medical benefit worthy of consideration? Despite 5000 years of no harm this opposition is based on three complete lies that have intentionally distorted the publics understanding of cannabis’ medical benefit.

THE TRIO OF LIES!
Violations of Ethics rule 4, 9, and 14

1.    Prescribing marijuana to a patient is a risk that exposes him to too many unknown possible detrimental effects and could harm the patient.

Over 5000 years of Testimonial evidence laud its wide range of medical benefits and supports the lack of any possible harm: not one death or consequential health problem from its use in any fashion. The CMA asserts there is no scientific basis for that conclusion and any doctor prescribing it could be legally liable for causing harm to a patient. Pure fiction! Every recipient of this complaint is fully aware that there is no legal liability related to signing an application and if there were, it is a simple matter to get a Waiver of Responsibility form for the patient to sign from your College. It’s an intentional denial and proven Cover Your Ass technique that every doctor is well aware of.

<><><><><><><><><><>

2.    There is inadequate research of any benefits from its use that are up to the acceptable standards of the CMA.

At this point these standards exclude almost all of the Global research done by the international Medical community. Any research done by any other specialty or field of practice will not be considered. Even the studies by foreign scientists of the Nobel Laureate level are intentionally ignored. At this point over 100 cannabinoids have been identified and each, or a combination result in beneficial results, but the CMA demands that each of these need to be verified as acceptable to Pharmaceutical level testing. There is more than adequate research that has been conducted in the past ten years being ignored by the CMA that proves them to be intentional liars in denial of reality.

I suggest you all bring yourselves up to date on current research and watch this documentary:

4/20 Marijuana Documentary - Cannabis Research Studies - 2014


The CMA and Health Canada are equally distortionary when it comes to the hazards of Marijuana use. Despite all the claimed hazards they have no Research Studies that meet their own CMA standards so its all Lies again.

<><><><><><><><><><>

3.    The CMA holds that Physicians who approve an application for Medical Marijuana are acting as a Gateway to more serious drug addiction and criminal behaviour.

A physician’s signature on an Application for Marijuana is deemed a Prescription by the CMA: What a line of crap. Read both the MMAR and the MMPR and neither requires a “Prescription”.

The MMAR requires a signature on a Form B1 or B2. That signature is a declaration that the symptoms displayed by an applicant are enough to warrant inclusion as a Licensee under the MMAR. The License permits the patient to purchase and possess dried marijuana from Health Canada and no place else.

The MMRP is similar in that all the doctor is doing is simply certifying that the applicant once again meets the symptom criteria for medical marijuana and the signed application serves only as authority to purchase dried marijuana from one of the new expensive Licensed Producers. It has no other power!

<><><><><><><><><><>

The three foregoing statements, as justification for the CMA’s blockade of signatures, are in direct conflict with the CMA Code of Ethics to which all physicians are required to conform. There are 53 rules and I have only cited the three most egregious violations by the Association before I deal with those of the Colleges.

As Class examples:

4. Practise the art and science of medicine competently, with     Integrity

Integrity= the most important requirement in a man of Character! Its primary and first component is Honesty!
“Risk”, “No benefit” and “Addictive”
 = Intentional, Calculated LIES!

You may not agree with that conclusion but there are 40,000 of us who believe it. They know better!

9. Refuse to participate in or support practices that violate basic human rights.

We have a Charter Right to Access our Medication.
Why are our physicians blocking the way?

The CMA opposes Parental Control of Treatment

Compare these two conflicts:

Ref: Leukemia treatment disputes reopen debate whether parents should have final say over children’s welfare


Cannabis Extract Treatment for Terminal Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia with a Philadelphia Chromosome Mutation



Why is the Medical Profession exercising its power to deny Parental Rights and forcing children into chemotherapy with all its known hazardous effects? In this instance they refuse treatment with a medication with no known serious side effects in favour of chemotherapy with a high probability of Chemo side effects:
Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting, Mouth Sores, (Mucositis), Neuropathy, Neutropenia and Infections, Diarrhea, Constipation, and Hair loss.


14. Take all reasonable steps to prevent harm to patients;

Intentional denial of access to a medication being used for symptom relief, knowing full well that this act could result in serious recurrence of symptoms, is not a reasonable step to avoid harm. Neither are Prescribing Fentanyl and Opioids with devastating known side effects and an elevated risk of death.

<><><><><><><><><><>

These three statements effectively establish that the CMA based their Marijuana Policy, on lies that are obvious to any person who values integrity and has even a minimal knowledge of Medical Marijuana use.


The Role of the Colleges

I feel betrayed by the opposition to Cannabis use as declared in CMA Official Policy. I feel further dismayed by every Canadian College of Physicians and Surgeons copying, adopting and following the CMA’s lead blindly and proliferating the three lies. All Colleges recently revised their Official Policies to add additional restrictive procedures and practices that are totally ridiculous and completely impractical. You have no idea of the complexity of the medication you are trying to regulate: these additions to policy are based on ignorance with no basis in fact.

It seems the Doctors have now taken the initiative and in return for their signature want total control of the Doctor/ Patient relationship. We have a profession that, after admitting that they have very little knowledge about any of the aspects of Medicinal Cannabis use or treatment: are demanding complete control of a patient’s treatment under threat of terminating their prescription for disobedience. That is not going to fly. You are acting prematurely and without consideration of the fact that at the current time you are only dealing with the smallest component of the patient pool by blindly following the Harper restriction of medical use to smoking dried marijuana.

For the past eleven years the medical profession has effectively watched the use of marijuana as a medication grow and made no attempt to learn anything about marijuana therapy and treatment modes. You are dealing with a patient population that for all that time was improvising and developing different methods of treatment for a large number of medical problems and 90% have abandoned smoking and developed a whole range of treatment options that you are ignoring. Depending on the problem there are oils like Phoenix Tears, Extracts, tinctures, edibles, ointments, suppositories, etc. and the majority of physicians are ignorant of any of it. 

At this point the Doctor/Patient relationship between the 40000 Medical Marijuana Qualified Patients and almost all 60000 of your CMA members is one of mistrust. Doctors view patients as potential drug addicts and liability risk and Patients view Doctors as a contemptible bunch of liars in denial of reality. We feel betrayed because we trusted you as Good Samaritans and you have just ignored our need for help for years and you are still stuck telling the same three lame lies as justification for closing your eyes to the consequences of your indifference.

Stop and Reconsider

At this point, as a profession, you are backed into a corner with no place to go. Salvage your integrity and tell the truth. Simply admit you have reassessed your position and you were wrong. Not publicly but privately to yourself and consider what I am proposing as a change in tactics that can go a long way to restoring the Doctor/Patient relationship to one of mutual trust.

At this time the profession is fixated on only Dried Marijuana as the whole problem. I doubt even 10% of the patients using Medical Marijuana do so by smoking. The majority require raw plant product as a source material for whatever personal formula they are making to treat themselves. They make oils, extracts, medibles, and salves in 1000+ differing ways and schedules of use. A lousy prescription, as you call it, for the maximum 5 grams recommended by Ottawa does absolutely nothing if the patient needs 50 pounds of raw herbal product per month for his treatment. You all know nothing about the manufacture or use of any of these products in depth and in about two years with legalization a physician’s permission will be null and void and the distrust of the 90% of users will never be destroyed.

You all need to eat some crow and show some moral fortitude and join with your patients to demand money from the liars in the Harper Government to correct your lack of knowledge. Research is necessary and attached to this Complaint you will find one possible way to deal with the problem. My proposal is called the Risk Research Assessment Project and it is attached for your consideration. I previously made this in the form of a proposal for a joint research project to Dr. Louis Francescutti after his appointment to the CMA Presidency. I was ignored as is standard practice for the CMA.
Since then I have watched the profession fester with resentment and they are now in an impossible situation making unreasonable demands that cannot be met because they have destroyed all confidence in their role as a trustworthy source of help.

I may be a fool or simply overly optimistic but I believe that there is a way to break the current impasse if only the profession will listen and understand that they need to show some humanity and understanding and above all negotiate a middle ground to establish a workable Doctor/Patient relationship in Cannabis Treatment and establish its benefit on a factual basis.

So where does that leave us now?
In a position where we can ignore Government influence and resolve the differences in goals of Doctors and Patients by partnering to a new instructional model and eliminating the shortage of information that so plagues Doctors in the assumption of the risk of treatment. To this end I now repeat the proposal I made the CMA to establish a joint Program to collect the missing information. It is far from perfect but consideration of its development into a data base of great utility in a very short time.

I would very much appreciate an acknowledgement of receipt of this Complaint and thank you in advance for any consideration you may give my proposal.

I would very much like to know your reaction and would welcome any criticism or comment you may feel free to provide as to how you collectively will proceed to correct these ethical shortcomings.
Best regards


____________
Blaine Barrett
#255, 10202-149st
Surrey BC V3R 3Z8

Wednesday 4 February 2015

I HAVE A COMPLAINT! A Problem with Ethics and Medical Marijuana


I HAVE A COMPLAINT!
You are Violating Your Oath!
Stop Lying to Your Patients.
Regain Your Integrity!
A Problem with Ethics and Medical Marijuana











I HAVE A COMPLAINT! A Problem with Ethics and Medical Marijuana


Attn; Dr. Simpson and all College Registrars

Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities
Fleur-Ange Lefebvre, Executive Director and CEO
College of Physicians and Surgeons
Registrar
Alberta
Dr. Trevor Theman
Saskatchewan
Dr. Karen Shaw
Manitoba
Dr. William Pope
Quebec
Dr. Yves Robert
New Brunswick
Dr. Ed Schollenberg
Nova Scotia
Dr. Douglas A. (Gus) Grant
Prince Edward Island
Dr. Cyril Moyse
Newfoundland and Labrador
Dr. Robert Young
Yukon
Ms. Fiona Charbonneau
Nunavut
Ms. Barbara Harvey
Ontario
Mr. Dan Faulkner


The “Sleep, Slide, and Away” Treatment

You are just put to Sleep,
You slide into oblivion,
and
You’re away from it all

If you are a normal person you want a peaceful and painless death! It doesn’t matter how or when but that is the goal. To guarantee that you find a doctor who will agree to a binding legal agreement to render a service in the indefinite future if and when you decide it is appropriate and the conditions are right! It is your Rational decision to have him simply put you to sleep and keep you there to avoid the pain of death!

Note this well:

This is not a request for the doctor to euthanize you or shorten your natural life span in any way and should be ethically and morally acceptable to all doctors. Just put the patient to sleep! That is all!

The Physicians First Responsibility

Any Physician’s first responsibility to a Patient is to keep them alive as long as possible, but unfortunately all patients inevitably die. To the Canadian Medical Association, all members are bound by their Hippocratic Oath: Do No Harm! as well as their  acceptance of the 7th Commandment:
Thou Shalt Not Kill!

The Physicians Second Responsibility

The Physician’s second responsibility to his patient as soon as he is diagnosed as terminal is to now render the time left to the patient to be as peaceful and painless as possible. Physicians have great skill at this task, but many times they fail.

What does the doctor do when the drugs don’t work?

He fulfills his obligation to the patient and ensures the lack of pain by putting the man to sleep to stop the pain. Per the agreement and the Advance Care Directive or Living Will he gave an injection and had the life extending nutrition and hydration removed. A series of scheduled bed checks and additional sedation maintains sleep until death three days to a week later.

At this point the physician is blameless and bears no responsibility for the death.

1.    He fulfilled his first responsibility until he could extend the patients life no more.
2.    He fulfilled his second responsibility by putting his patient to sleep and not disturbing it.
3.    He has no responsibility for the shortening of the life span: Either natural causes from the illness or intentional suicide by starvation was the cause of death.
4.    In all likelihood he is obeying the Golden Rule and “Doing unto Others”: after all Physicians die too!

The lack of hydration and nutrition is a natural cause that accelerates death and is the wish of the patient.

It’s a simple and sensible way to get around all the moral and legal objections to suicide. It is not only applicable for physically painful exits but for virtually any other reason to justify why you don’t want to live any more! Mental and emotional pain can all be considered because pain is pain and when it becomes intolerable it can be eliminated.

 CMA President Dr. Chris Simpson has planned a re-examination of the Physician’s role in all End of Life issues including Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. I want to ensure that the CMA considers the “Sleep, Slide and Away” Treatment and hopefully deems it an acceptable practice for physicians in future if requested of them. So I asked them

Monday 2 February 2015

My Complaint and Request to Mayor Hepner




My Complaint and Request to Mayor Hepner
I Have a Right to Speak to my Peers

To all you, my readers: I think my right to Freedom of Speech was violated and I won’t take that lying down. There is a “Gag Rule” in Surrey that prevents me from addressing them as a group on City Property. It is a form of complete censorship  with no way around it and no appeal process. It is well intended to protect Seniors from the weevils of the world but the Seniors never requested it and I as a Senior resent it. I have requested two minor things from the City that cost nothing to eliminate the problem. Initiate a screening and approval process and grant let me educate my friends.

To clarify my complaint to Mayor Hepner: the text of my Seminar has already been posted here and follows this one. Please read them both and draw your own conclusions.


To: The City of Surrey                                     February 02, 2015
Attn: Mayor Hepner 

TODAY MY FREEDOM OF SPEECH WAS VIOLATED

Dear Mayor Hepner:
I am a Senior citizen, a resident of Surrey, and I use Medical Marijuana. I am also a Medical Marijuana Advocate and I have an excellent knowledge of the pros and cons of its use. I am also aware of the opposition from the government, including Surrey, which is compounded by the Canadian Medical Associations refusal to sign applications. Applications are blockaded. At this point I have no way to renew my license and if I could, all legal marijuana is way too expensive and out of my reach.

Medical Marijuana in Canada is in a state of total disarray and in the course of my advocacy I have found a great number of Seniors who have a marijuana knowledge base from the 1960’s and are totally ignorant of the significant advances made in understanding how it can help with medical problems. Two weeks ago I decided to inform my friends at the Seniors Center at the Guildford Recreation Center and educate them to what they have missed and what the state of Medical Marijuana is today.

I spent the last couple of weeks preparing a Seminar on Medical Marijuana that is addressed to Senior Citizens. By and large my generation is like the general public who are not really aware of the critical state of Medical Marijuana. Unfortunately, they are the most likely group to need it and the Boomer generation is arriving. They deserve to be informed.
I spent the past week advertising my Seminar by visiting the Seniors Room at the Guildford Recreation Center yakking with the members telling them what I was up to and leaving Notices and Signs and Brochures about it. It was to take place at 10AM-2PM today Friday the 30TH. From the response I got there was a lot of interest and I was certain I was going to get a good turnout. I felt welcomed by a great bunch of very nice people and I was really looking forward to my day on the Pulpit.

I ran down to the Seniors room, parked, grabbed my paperwork and went to enter. I was met by two Guildford Rec Center employees who advised that I was not allowed to deliver my speech. WTF? It wasn’t a nasty confrontation but apparently the City of Surrey considers Seniors so sensitive, subjective and fragile that they were protecting them from any harassment or disturbance of their tranquility. I was informed that no personal, private, or corporate soliciting or promotion was allowed at any of the Seniors Centers. 

I protested that I was soliciting or promoting nothing, that I was conducting an educational lecture to my peers to inform them of the current state of knowledge about marijuana, its composition and effects. I was telling them both its claimed benefit and the claimed risk of using it. There was nothing promotional just criticism of the system. I was advised to Complain to City Hall and that is a foregone conclusion.

I think my right to Freedom of Speech was violated. All I wanted was to inform my friends but I am silenced on Surrey City Property. Bullshit 

 As evidence of what they suppressed I have posted the basic outline of my seminar lecture on my blog. 


Where is the crime in telling the truth about a health choice that is a Seniors right to hear in order to make an informed decision?
Go figure.

Dear Mayor Hepner:

As a Senior I appreciate the concern and protection but I do protest it is arbitrary and all encompassing. As a Senior I resent the fact that Seniors have not requested nor approved your protection. There is no way to submit any personal private or corporate solicitations or promotions to the City to gain approval and a judgement of the worth of a presentation. If there was you might find that among all those requests there are some that have content that the seniors will find entertaining, informative, and worth listening to because it is their right to know material that is to their benefit. Right now the rule is blanket censorship of everything on the presumption that it is of no value. Seniors are barred from hearing what they find of value.


Request #1: Establish a Screening Process to Determine Worth

I want to request that the City augment the system to add a screening before any request for a presentation is denied. If it does not prove acceptable then its denial should be accompanied by the reasons for refusal. Only then will the submitter know how to correct, revise and resubmit a corrected copy for approval. You will need to pay for the service: charge for the consideration to prevent spurious applications.

If on the other hand if it is found that the material provides substance and information worth the Seniors hearing Approve it and assist in its promotion and preparation.


Request #2: I want Exemption.

Your consideration of Request #1 is going to take time. To expedite my educational project I would like you to read what I was going to tell my friends. You can read it at


I think you will find it an excellent presentation of information Seniors have a right to know. If you find it acceptable I would like exemption to the rule as it now stands and permission to address all the Senior Centers in Surrey on a repeat basis. I need to spread this knowledge while I am still able to. I have survived 17 years more than I ever expected and I don’t have time to waste.

I would very much appreciate a prompt reply and a decision. If my request for an exemption is refused please advise the reasons in detail and to whom I should address my appeal.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.
In anticipation of your reply
Best regards

Blaine Barrett

255 10202-149St.
Surrey BC  V3R 3Z8

Phn: 604-585-0236

<><><><><><><>
Now I wait for an answer to my request, stay tuned.