[Peace-discuss] Fw: Re: [CentralILJwJ] Fw: Fact Sheet: The Truth About the Health Care Bill
Jenifer Cartwright
jencart13 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 26 09:53:19 CDT 2010
Thanks for the additional info, Claudia -- it's reassuring to know this. --Jenifer
--- On Thu, 3/25/10, Claudia Lennhoff <claudia at shout.net> wrote:
From: Claudia Lennhoff <claudia at shout.net>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [CentralILJwJ] Fw: Fact Sheet: The Truth About the Health Care Bill
To: "Jenifer Cartwright" <jencart13 at yahoo.com>
Date: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 10:47 AM
Hi Jenifer,
You are correct that co-pays for preventive care will be abolished. Any
new health plans cannot charge co-pays or co-insurance.
For Medicare, they are adding an annual check up that will be covered
(right now, Medicare only covers a check up when you
first get signed
up, and then every other year). Also, there will be no out of pocket
expenses for preventive care -- so, my client who can't afford her $100
copay for her colonoscopy, which she is supposed to get because of past
health issues, will be able to get the colonoscopy.
Thanks, as always, for being a voice of reason and compassion.
Take care.
Claudia
On 3/25/10 10:02 AM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> THANKS for taking the time to write this, Claudia.
>
> Friends, I'm more disgusted w/ the naysayers on the left than those on
> the right. The former care about their fellow humans and should know
> that a half a loaf is a start; the latter begrudge the poor the merest
> crumb...
> However, many of us progressives were holding out for the public option
> in the hopes that Congress would cave and add it to the present bill,
> making it better prior to
passage... but a friend pointed out that that
> adding it now (when the bill is already on shaky ground) would cause
> more to vote against it, causing the bill to fail, which is NOT what we
> really want. So yes, the thing to do is pass this bill, warts and all,
> and work hard to make it better.
>
> I do want to say is that $437/month is a lot of money, more than many
> can afford, not to mention the co-pays and other out-of-pocket medical
> expenses not covered by ins on top of that... which makes it 'way more
> than many can manage (my sister is an invalid w/ serious health problems
> and "affordable" insurance PLUS astronomical medical bills, so I know
> what I'm talking about!)... but fortunately, as I understand it, the new
> Healthcare Reform Bill addresses this as well, so that sick people w/
> ins and houses have a shot at keeping their homes (right, it's not
where
> it should be... yet). And of course, many "seniors" are not eligible for
> Medicare part B.... Again, on a positive note, I think I read somewhere
> that the Healthcare Reform Bill provides FREE preventive care -- regular
> check ups, shots, etc -- to children and some adults (sorry, I can't
> remember the specifics on this).
> --Jenifer
>
> --- On *Wed, 3/24/10, Claudia Lennhoff /<claudia at shout.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Claudia Lennhoff <claudia at shout.net>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [CentralILJwJ] Fw: Fact Sheet: The
> Truth About the Health Care Bill
> To: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>
> Cc: "JWJ C-U" <centralILJwJ at yahoogroups.com>, "Dave Powers"
> <pengdust at aol.com>, "Neil Parthun" <lennybrucefan at gmail.com>,
> "sf-core" <sf-core at yahoogroups.com>, "william gorrell"
> <laborhour at yahoo.com>, "Jim Eyman" <banjogramps at yahoo.com>, "Tristan
> geo/iww B" <tristan.bunner at gmail.com>, "Damien Mathew"
> <dmathew at mailaps.org>, "Dan Elgin ( 2nd e-mail )"
> <danelgin at gmail.com>, "Peace-discuss"
> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>, "Bill Gorrell" <laborer at mchsi.com>
> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:30 PM
>
> Dear Dave, and all,
>
> Dave Johnson forwarded this message which contains seriously
> bad/wrong advice.
>
> The only reason I'm responding is because this message went to a lot
> of people through listservs, and the advice or recommendation in it
> is so dangerous that I feel it must be addressed.
>
> Also, I'm tired of some of the very narrow analysis of the health
> reform law.
>
> I will say my peace here, and I won't be writing back or engaging in
> an e-mail discussion about this,
since I already work on health
> reform and health system change and am regularly communicating about
> these issues.
>
> So, for what it's worth, these are the comments I wanted to offer
> (it's lengthy, but I hope helpful and interesting, if nothing else).
>
> Regarding what I see as a very dangerous assertion:
>
> Suggesting that a family of four would be better off saving the
> supposed $5,243 they would pay for insurance, to go uninsured
> instead, and use those "savings" to pay directly for medical care is
> really bad advice. That is $437 a month. What if someone gets
> diagnosed with cancer or has a car accident and needs
emergency
> surgery and then follow-up care and physical therapy? A family of
> four implies 2 - 3 children. Children need regular health care, and
> they tend to need more health care visits throughout the year. What
> if a child breaks his/her arm. Do people have any idea how much that
> costs? An appendicitis would easily wipe out that amount. The people
> giving this advice apparently have NO concept of the cost of care,
> or the fact that when you run out of money and can't pay for your
> care, you are out of luck -- no matter how much chemo you need, or
> how much physical therapy you need, etc. Your care stops. What if
> you need care, AND a medical
device, like a CPAP? If you think it
> doesn't happen to cancer patients, think again. We at CCHCC see this
> situation, in some form or another, every single day.
>
> How can anyone give such advice? It makes me think that they must be
> totally out of touch with the cost of care and the fact that we as
> consumers/patients have no knowledge in advance of what we will
> need, and what it will cost us. Or maybe these people are proponents
> of medical savings accounts? (their suggestion is actually the
> "logic" behind medical savings accounts - a bad idea for most people)
>
> Also, where is the consideration about the fact that uninsured
>
consumers are charged the highest sticker price for care, frequently
> 2 to 5 times higher than the cost of care charged to an insurer, and
> that's part of why uninsured individuals can amass so much medical
> debt? This is really dangerous advice and seems very out of touch.
>
> I don't know much about Jane Hamsher and whether she has health
> insurance or is personally wealthy and could forego health insurance
> because she has the means to pay for her care directly. I know she's
> had cancer and has gotten treatment for it, unlike some of my
> low-income uninsured patients. Most people don't have the means to
> pay for the care they need out of
pocket.
>
> Moving on, I also want to offer this editorial comment:
>
> It's amazing to me how many people want to act like this new law,
> unlike the current situation, is a windfall for insurance companies
> -- AS IF the current (pre-health reform) situation is not.
>
> Of course the new law is a windfall for insurance companies! But at
> least it provides protection to consumers who will be purchasing
> health insurance, unlike the current situation, and it forces
> private insurance companies to insure those whom they currently
> refuse to insure or whom they price out of the market.
>
> If anyone thinks that the current
(pre-health reform) situation is
> not a windfall for insurance companies, they are sadly mistaken. The
> fact of the matter is that insurance companies, right now, because
> of the lack of regulation, actually make far more profits by
> refusing coverage to many, while jacking up the rates for existing
> members, than they would if they tried to insure a larger number of
> people, including those with health problems.
>
> In other words, right now, they make record profits from
> cherry-picking, denying coverage, and also from the extra $1,000 or
> more built into everyone's premiums to cover the cost for the
> uninsured. And if you think you're not
paying for it even if you
> don't have health insurance, think again. You pay taxes, don't you?
> Most government employees have health coverage (whether they are
> teachers, state employees, etc.) through employment, with private
> insurance companies, and that's subsidized by taxpayers.
>
> The current situation is not just a windfall for private insurance
> -- it is a tremendous burden for we, the people (directly, and
> through our taxes). And what do we get right now? Uninsurance.
>
> Because currently insurance companies do NOT have to insure sick
> people, the sick people -- and therefore the costliest people --
> frequently land on the
government programs such as Medicaid and
> Medicare (if they live long enough to get Medicare), community
> health centers, and hospital ER's (all federally subsidized), and
> the government -- meaning US, the taxpayers (whether insured or
> uninsured) pay the lion's share of the cost of providing care to our
> nation's sickest (remember also that the sickest 10% of the people
> account for 70% of the costs in Medicare).
>
> In other words, right now, even with 45 million uninsured, WE are
> paying these high costs, but we are paying with our money, AND our
> lives (rather, the uninsured are paying with their lives).
>
> I'm really tired of, and
disgusted with, these very narrow analyses
> where people act like the current disasterous situation has somehow
> NOT been a windfall for insurance companies. It IS a windfall
> already, AND people are going uninsured, getting sick and disabled,
> suffering, and dying prematurely -- I see this all the time at CCHCC.
>
> I want to see Medicare for all. And we're working on it. But I think
> it's dangerous and irresponsible to act as if people will not
> benefit from the health reform law that just passed. People WILL
> benefit -- even as the insurance companies benefit. But right now,
> pre-health reform, ONLY insurance companies benefit.
>
> I
thought it was dangerous and irresponsible for some progressives
> to say that this bill was worse than no bill, and to act as if this
> bill somehow precluded the possibility for single-payer.
>
> I probably hate health insurance companies more than anyone I know
> -- I am VERY intimately acquainted with the very dirty tricks they
> play, and I've witnessed the devastation of individuals and families
> when health insurance companies find ways to not cover care. Even
> with my views and awareness, however, don't try to take away my
> PersonalCare health coverage! Without health insurance, I would have
> been dead several years ago when I got very sick with a
mysterious
> illness that took 6 years to figure out. Without health insurance, I
> couldn't have gotten it figured out because I couldn't have pursued
> care and diagnosis (and treatment), and I would have been long dead.
>
> If I could, I'd give every single one of my uninsured clients
> private health insurance right now! Just as I would give them
> Medicaid or Medicare -- anything I could get my hands on in order
> for them to have a passport to health care. I'm not "too pure" to
> walk away from a private plan if it will help someone.
>
> Jane Hamsher says "I understand the temptation to offer 30 million
> people health care." The
"temptation?" That's like saying "I
> understand the temptation to feed starving people." For those of us
> who work on the front lines, it is not a temptation but an
> imperative. This isn't theoretical for us. This is life and death,
> health and disability, suffering and wellness -- no trivial thing.
>
> People who say that it is bad that we are going to insure "only" 30
> million of the currently uninsured with this bill and we should
> therefore hold off on health reform until we have national
> single-payer are basically saying that they would be willing to
> sacrifice the health, and possibly the lives of those 30 million
> until we can get
something "better." Really? That can't really be
> the progressive position, can it?
>
> Also, remember that it's not just 30 million -- without this
> legislation, the number of uninsured was going to continue to climb
> every single day, week, month, and year - and this would mean that
> the number of people who would die simply because they lacked health
> coverage would also continue to climb.
>
> And yeah, I hate that the main provisions of the new law won't take
> effect until 2014, but before this law, what year were people going
> to finally get health coverage and protection from the abuses of the
> health insurance industry? Also, what
makes people think that
> advocates and organizers are just going to be sitting around waiting
> for 2014, as opposed to working on new legislation to help bring
> better changes?
>
> Maybe those who are new to the struggle and the issue think that we
> just sit back passively once legislation has been passed, and then
> live with those consequences, rather than working day in and day
> out, year and year out, to make progress.
>
> Medicare was not created whole with one piece of legislation.
> Neither was Social Security. But by some people's current analysis
> of health reform, they would have advocated against those landmark
>
social programs because they didn't go far enough when first
> proposed, or because they also involved the private for-profit
> sector in some form or another.
>
> As much antipathy as I have for health insurance companies, my
> compassion for people is far stronger. I'm not too "pure" to say
> that private health insurance coverage is better than no coverage.
>
> Also, I reject the notion that working to advance this health reform
> legislation is against the interests of single payer. This
> legislation takes government overpayments away from private Medicare
> Advantage insurance companies and strengthens Medicare -- the very
>
program on which single-payer will be based. Medicare has been
> getting raided for years by the Medicare Advantage program, yet
> where were all these new "experts" on health reform? CCHCC has been
> working with other advocacy organizations for years to get
> legislation passed that would cut these overpayments.
>
> Lastly, people should know that the new health reform bill has a
> state waiver that allows states to opt out of the health reform law
> if the state is able to find another means to provide coverage for
> everyone. Yes, there are critiques of the state waiver, but it is
> not just a gimmick, as has been suggested. It is a tool to work
>
with, and we can always work to improve the waiver. No one ever said
> single payer was going to be easy. Being right (correct) is not
> enough. We always have to be working and building on whatever gains
> we make. That's how we'll get there.
>
> I just really don't understand why certain progressives only
> critique (not always accurately) the health reform law, but avoid
> providing information about the benefits of the law. Believe it or
> not (and, if I may say so, I think I should know), there ARE
> benefits. To me, being a progressive was never just about having an
> analysis and a critique. It was about working for justice, and
>
central to that is working to improving people's lives.
>
> We at CCHCC will continue our work with the single-payer movement
> nationally and statewide, even as we work hard as hell to get people
> the benefits of this new legislation.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Claudia Lennhoff, CCHCC Executive Director
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/24/10 7:14 PM, unionyes wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* David Sladky <mailto:tanstl at aol.com
>
</mc/compose?to=tanstl at aol.com>>
> > *To:* usgp-media at gp-us.org </mc/compose?to=usgp-media at gp-us.org>
> <mailto:usgp-media at gp-us.org </mc/compose?to=usgp-media at gp-us.org>>
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 24, 2010 7:40 AM
> > *Subject:* Fact Sheet: The Truth About the Health Care Bill
> >
> >
>
>
> > Fact Sheet: The Truth About the Health Care Bill
> >
> > March 22, 2010 by Healthcare-NOW!
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/author/jtmhcn/>
> > Filed under Single-Payer News
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/category/single-payer-news/>
> >
> > *
> >
> > Firedoglake released this fact sheet
> >
> <http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/files/2010/03/mythfactshcr-2.pdf> that
> > exposes some myths about the bill passed on Sunday.
> > By Jane Hamsher for Firedoglake
> >
> <http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/fact-sheet-the-truth-about-the-health-care-bill/>
> > –
> > The Firedoglake health care team has been covering the debate in
> > congress since it began last year. The health care bill will come
> up for
> > a vote in the House on Sunday, and as Nancy Pelosi works to wrangle
> > votes, we’ve been
running a detailed whip count on where every
> member of
> > Congress stands, updated throughout the day.
> > We’ve also taken a detailed look at the bill, and have come up
> with 18
> > often stated myths about this health care reform bill.
> > Real health care reform is the thing we’ve fought for from the
> start. It
> > is desperately needed. But this bill falls short on many levels, and
> > hurts many people more than it helps.
> > A middle class family of four making $66,370 will be forced to pay
> > $5,243 per year for insurance. After basic necessities, this
> leaves them
>
> with $8,307 in discretionary income — out of which they would have to
> > cover clothing, credit card and other debt, child care and education
> > costs, in addition to $5,882 in annual out-of-pocket medical expenses
> > for which families will be responsible. Many families who are already
> > struggling to get by would be better off saving the $5,243 in
> insurance
> > costs and paying their medical expenses directly, rather than being
> > forced to by coverage they can’t afford the co-pays on.
> > In addition, there is already a booming movement across the
> country to
> > challenge the mandate. Thirty-three states already have bills
moving
> > through their houses, and the Idaho governor was the first to sign it
> > into law yesterday. In Virginia it passed through both a Democratic
> > House and Senate, and the governor will sign it soon. It will be
> on the
> > ballot in Arizona in 2010, and is headed in that direction for many
> > more. Republican senators like Dick Lugar are already asking
> their state
> > attorney generals to challenge it. There are two GOP think tanks
> > actively helping states in their efforts, and there is a booming
> > messaging infrastructure that covers it beat-by-beat.
> > Whether Steny Hoyer believes the legality of the bill will
prevail in
> > court or not is moot, it could easily become the “gay marriage”
> of 2010,
> > with one key difference: there will be no one on the other side
> > passionately opposing it. The GOP is preparing to use it as a massive
> > turn-out vehicle, and it not only threatens representatives in states
> > like Florida, Colorado and Ohio where these challenges will
> likely be on
> > the ballot — it threatens gubernatorial and down-ticket races as
> well.
> > Artur Davis, running for governor of Alabama, is already being put on
> > the spot about it.
> > While details are limited, there is apparently
a “Plan B” alternative
> > that the White House was considering, which would evidently expand
> > existing programs — Medicaid and SCHIP. It would cover half the
> people
> > at a quarter of the price, but it would not force an unbearable
> > financial burden to those who are already struggling to get by.
> Because
> > it creates no new infrastructure for the purpose of funneling
> money to
> > private insurance companies, there is no need for Bart Stupak’s
> or Ben
> > Nelson’s language dealing with abortion — which satisfies the
> concerns
> > of pro-life members
of Congress, as well as women who are looking
> at the
> > biggest blow to women’s reproductive rights in 35 years with the
> passage
> > of this bill. Both programs are already covered under existing
> law, the
> > Hyde amendment.
> > But perhaps most profoundly, the bill does not mandate that
> people pay
> > 8% of their annual income to private insurance companies or face a
> > penalty of up to 2% — which the IRS would collect. As Marcy Wheeler
> > noted in an important post entitled “Health Care on the Road to
> > NeoFeudalism,” we stand on the precipice of doing something truly
>
> radical in our government, by demanding that Americans pay almost as
> > much money to private insurance companies as they do in federal
> taxes:
> > When this passes, it will become clear that Congress is no longer the
> > sovereign of this nation. Rather, the corporations dictating the laws
> > will be.
> > I understand the temptation to offer 30 million people health
> care. What
> > I don’t understand is the nonchalance with which we’re about to
> > fundamentally shift the relationships of governance in doing so.
> > We started down a dangerous road with Wall Street banks in the early
> > 90s, allowing them to
flood our political system with money and write
> > our laws so that taxpayers would subsidize their profits, assume
> their
> > losses and remove themselves from the necessity of competition. By
> > funneling so much money into the companies who created the very
> problems
> > we are now attempting to address, we further empower them to
> hijack our
> > legislative process and put more than just our health care system at
> > risk. We risk our entire system of government.
> > Congress may be too far down the road with this bill to change course
> > and save themselves — and us. But before Democrats cast this
>
vote, which
> > could endanger not only their Congressional majority but their
> ability
> > to “fix” things later on, they should consider the first rule of
> patient
> > safety: first, do no harm.
> > Tags: Barack Obama <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/barack-obama/>,
> > firedoglake <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/firedoglake/>, health
> > care <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/health-care/>, Healthcare
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/healthcare/>, Healthcare Reform
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/healthcare-reform/>, jane hamsher
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/jane-hamsher/>, Nancy Pelosi
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/nancy-pelosi/>, public option
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/public-option/>, Single Payer
> > Healthcare
> <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/single-payer-healthcare/>,
> > universal healthcare
> > <http://www.healthcare-now.org/tag/universal-healthcare/>
> >
> >
> > Comments
> >
> > *One Response to “Fact Sheet: The Truth About the Health Care Bill”*
> >
> > 1.
> > Cathy Deppe says:
> > March 23, 2010 at 9:56 am
> >
> <http://www.healthcare-now.org/fact-sheet-the-truth-about-the-health-care-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-7558>
> > I believe we on the left should also refuse this mandated
> > insurance that just enrichs insurance company profits and
> > ultimately insures, instead, the total corporate control of our
> > government. We should say no to this – and no again, to paying for
> > the wars our government has sold us. Our lives are in the balance,
> > as Jackson Brown sang: “They sell us the president the same way,
> > they sell us our clothes and our cars, they sell us everything
> > from youth
to religion, the same time they sell us our wars.” We
> > must begin to refuse to pay for defective products, be they
> > useless insurance plans or endless wars.
> >
> > 2.
> >
> > __._,_.___
> > Reply to sender <mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net
> </mc/compose?to=unionyes at ameritech.net>?subject=Fw: Fact Sheet:
> > The Truth About the Health Care Bill> | Reply to group
> > <mailto:CentralILJwJ at yahoogroups.com
> </mc/compose?to=CentralILJwJ at yahoogroups.com>?subject=Fw: Fact
> Sheet: The Truth
> > About the Health Care Bill> | Reply via web post
> >
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralILJwJ/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJwanZhcGk4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRtc2dJZAM0MDcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxMjY5NDc2MTAz?act=reply&messageNum=407
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralILJwJ/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJwanZhcGk4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRtc2dJZAM0MDcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxMjY5NDc2MTAz?act=reply&messageNum=407>>
> > | Start a New Topic
> >
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralILJwJ/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmc243bDU1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEyNjk0NzYxMDM->
> >
> > Messages in this topic
> >
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralILJwJ/message/407;_ylc=X3oDMTMzZ3AycDQzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRtc2dJZAM0MDcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxMjY5NDc2MTAzBHRwY0lkAzQwNw-->
> > (1)
> > Recent Activity:
> >
> > Visit Your Group
> >
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralILJwJ;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZDVoa2FuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEyNjk0NzYxMDM->
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups
>
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMHA0bDJmBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIzNjI3MTE0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDYxOQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTI2OTQ3NjEwMw-->
> >
> > Switch to: Text-Only
> > <mailto:CentralILJwJ-traditional at yahoogroups.com
> </mc/compose?to=CentralILJwJ-traditional at yahoogroups.com>?subject=Change
>
Delivery
> > Format: Traditional>, Daily Digest
> > <mailto:CentralILJwJ-digest at yahoogroups.com
> </mc/compose?to=CentralILJwJ-digest at yahoogroups.com>?subject=Email
> Delivery:
> > Digest> • Unsubscribe
> > <mailto:CentralILJwJ-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> </mc/compose?to=CentralILJwJ-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com>?subject=Unsubscribe>
> •
> > Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> > .
> >
> > __,_._,___
>
> -- This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> </mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100326/22a35244/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list