New Pi Ready to elimate plastic bags at all stores 31 July 2015

Posted on July 31, 2015 by Charlene Lange

New Pi ready to eliminate plastic grocery bags at all stores

Zach Berg  |  Iowa City Press-Citizen  5:08 p.m. CDT July 31, 2015 Facebook Twitter Email
Plastic grocery bags will soon be a thing of the past at all New Pioneer Food Co-op stores.
New Pioneer announced Friday that by the end of August, plastic grocery bags will be eliminated at the company’s three stores in Iowa City, Coralville and Cedar Rapids.
New Pi’s marketing manager Jenifer Angerer said Friday that the three stores all have plastic grocery bags stocked and ready to carry groceries, but that the stores will no longer purchase plastic bags after they run out of their current stock.
Angerer estimated that all stores would run out of plastic bags by the third week of August. “That gives us some time to educate our customers about our plan,” she said.
Angerer said paper bags still will be available at checkout, and the small plastics bags that usually hold produce would still be in store because they are compostable.
The move represents a new phase of the grocer’s plan to limit its environmental impact, Angerer said. For 25 years, Angerer said, the stores have offered customers 5 cents if they bring their own reusable bags. Six years ago, the stores began charging 5 cents for each bag — plastic or paper — the customer used.
More than 50 percent of the co-op’s customers already use reusable bags, Angerer said, but co-op officials knew when they began to charge customers for bags that they would someday stop offering plastic bags altogether.
“When it comes to paper vs. plastic, their negative impact on the environment during their creation is pretty even, but it’s the plastic bag’s impact on the environment after they are used that really made us focus on getting rid of plastic,” Angerer said.

Mary Kirkpatrick, a member of the 100 Grannies environmental group that worked with New Pi on the decision, said that plastic bags often slip into the environment, clog waterways, strangle wildlife and pack landfills and garbage patches that float in various oceans.
“People have to take responsibility and start using reusable bags if they want to help better the environment,” Kirkpatrick said.
Kirkpatrick said that the 100 Grannies ultimate goal was for the Iowa City Council to pass an ordinance banning plastic bags from being used at all grocery stories, but that she was “delighted” when she got the news from New Pi.
For Hy-Vee, the area’s largest grocer, the topic of getting rid of plastic bags “has not been discussed,” Ryan Roberts, store director at Iowa City’s First Avenue Hy-Vee, said Friday.
“We have bins at every store where people can drop off their plastic bags. A lot of the bags are recycled and made into things like park equipment,” Roberts said. “But within the Hy-Vee community, getting rid of plastic bags hasn’t been discussed.”
Lynda Leidiger, a shopper at the Iowa City New Pi store, said Friday she is in favor of New Pi’s move.
“Anything that encourages people to use cloth bags is fine by me,” Leidiger said, with the cloth bag she got from New Pi on Earth Day five years ago in hand.
Angerer said New Pi likely will hand out free cloth bags again in August, but was not certain when.
Mary Mahaffa, another shopper the Iowa City New Pi, said she doesn’t mind using paper, but that she wishes the store would keep a couple plastic bags at checkout because “sometimes the bottles of maple syrup leak a little and they get sticky.”
“Hopefully, this will raise awareness on the dangers of plastic bags,” Angerer said. “The states that boarder the ocean are already aware. California cities have already banned the use of plastic bags. We don’t have an ocean, but we have a river and that’s worth protecting.”
Reach Zach Berg at 319-887-5412, zberg@press-citizen.com, or follow him on Twitter at @ZacharyBerg.

Posted in Publicity | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on New Pi Ready to elimate plastic bags at all stores 31 July 2015

Grandparents Climate Action Day in DC 2015

Posted on July 18, 2015 by Katharine

100Grannies in DC.

Video: Flash dance in Union Station

Picture: Link & then page down:

https://www.popularresistance.org/climate-expert-james-hansen-weve-got-an-emergency/

ECA_logo.jpg
http://www.consciouselders.org/Elders Climate Action is a project of The Conscious Elders Network (CEN) a movement of vital elders, dedicated to growing in consciousness while actively addressing the demanding challenges facing our country.
Posted in Education | Tagged , | Comments Off on Grandparents Climate Action Day in DC 2015

Lynn Gallager LTE, PC 7/8/15

Posted on July 8, 2015 by Katharine

Livestock industry is devastating the planet

I am pleased that Pope Francis, Bishop Pates and others are speaking out strongly about climate change and the need for action. Unfortunately, they have not discussed an issue that must be addressed if we want to limit climate change : diet. We must reduce the consumption of meat and animal products. This was stated in the U.N. report called “Livestock’s Long Shadow,”

It is the topic of the documentary, “Cowspiracy,” which I encourage everyone to watch.

The livestock industry is devastating to the planet. This is a fact that people don’t want to face, but it is the truth. If you are concerned about the environment and climate change, I ask you to begin reducing your consumption of meat and animal products.

Lynn Gallagher- Solon

note: Our library has the DVD “Cowspiracy”

Posted in Archive, Publicity | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Lynn Gallager LTE, PC 7/8/15

Naomi Klein article from billmoyers.com July 6, 2015

Posted on July 7, 2015 by Katharine

Everyone includes political leaders, of course. But having attended many meetings with social movements about the COP summit in Paris, I can report this: there is zero tolerance for yet another failure being dressed up as a success for the cameras. Until a week later, when those same politicians are back to drilling for oil in the Arctic and building more highways and pushing new trade deals that make it far more difficult to regulate polluters.

But having attended many meetings with social movements about the COP summit in Paris, I can report this: there is zero tolerance for yet another failure being dressed up as a success for the cameras.

If the deal fails to bring about immediate emission reductions while providing real and substantive support for poor countries, then it will be declared a failure. As it should be.

What we must always remember is that it’s not too late to veer off the dangerous road we are on — the one that is leading us towards four degrees of warming. Indeed we could still keep warming below 1.5 degrees if we made it our top collective priority.

It would be difficult, to be sure. As difficult as the rationing and industrial conversions that were once made in wartime. As ambitious as the anti-poverty and public works programs launched in the aftermath of the Great Depression and the Second World War.

But difficult is not the same as impossible. And giving up in the face of a task that could save countless and lives prevent so much suffering — simply because it is difficult, costly and requires sacrifice from those of us who can most afford to make do with less — is not pragmatism.

It is surrender of the most cowardly kind. And there is no cost-benefit analysis in the world that is capable of justifying it.

***

“Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

We have been hearing these supposedly serious-minded words for more than two decades. For the entire lifetime of today’s young climate activists. And every time another UN summit fails to deliver bold, legally-binding and science-based polices, while sprinkling empty promises of reshuffled aid money, we hear those words again. “Sure it’s not enough but it’s a step in the right direction.” “We’ll do the harder work next time.” And always: “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

This, it must be said inside these hallowed walls, is pure nonsense. “Perfect” left the station in the mid-1990s, after the first Rio Earth Summit. Today, we have only two roads in front of us: difficult yet humane — and easy yet reprehensible.

To our so-called leaders preparing their pledges for COP 21 in Paris, getting out the lipstick and heels to dress up another lousy deal, I have this to say: Read the actual encyclical — not the summaries, the whole thing. Read it and let it into your hearts. The grief at what we have already lost, and the celebration of what we can still protect and help to thrive.

Listen, too, to the voices of the hundreds of thousands who will be on the streets of Paris outside the summit, gathered simultaneously in cities around the world. This time, they will be saying more than “we need action.” They will be saying: we are already acting.

We are the solutions: in our demands that institutions divest their holdings from fossil fuel companies and invest them in the activities that will lower emissions.

In our ecological farming methods, which rely less on fossil fuels, provide healthy food and work and sequester carbon.

In our locally-controlled renewable energy projects, which are bringing down emissions, keeping resources in communities, lowering costs and defining access to energy as a right.

In our demand for reliable, affordable and even free public transit, which will get us out of the cars that pollute our cities, congest our lives and isolate us from one another.

In our uncompromising insistence that you cannot call yourself a climate leader while opening up vast new tracks of ocean and land to oil drilling, gas fracking and coal mining. We have to leave it in the ground.

In our conviction that you cannot call yourself a democracy if you are beholden to multinational polluters.

Around the world, the climate justice movement is saying: See the beautiful world that lies on the other side of courageous policy, the seeds of which are already bearing ample fruit for any who care to look.

Then, stop making the difficult the enemy of the possible.

And join us in making the possible real.

“People and Planet First”: On the Moral Authority of Climate Justice and a New Economy

Posted in Publicity | Tagged , | Comments Off on Naomi Klein article from billmoyers.com July 6, 2015

Mark Reynolds, CCL, P-C

Posted on July 7, 2015 by Katharine

Mark Reynolds of CCL (Citizens’ Climate Lobby)

Everything you think you know about Republicans, climate change is wrong

Here’s what we know about climate change: 97 percent of climate scientists are convinced, based upon the evidence, that human-caused global warming is happening.

The popular narrative in the media these days, however, is that Republicans in Congress don’t accept this fact and that the GOP is in denial about the science around climate change.

Well, I have some surprising news: Everything you think you know about Republicans and climate change is a myth that I will now explode.

Our organization, Citizens’ Climate Lobby, recently sent 800 volunteers to meet with more than 500 House and Senate offices in Washington. This was our opening in those meetings: “We’re here to talk about a policy that can grow the economy, add jobs, increase our competitiveness with China, and make our air and water cleaner.”

That policy, our volunteers would go on to explain, is to place a gradually-rising fee on carbon and return the revenue to households. They also shared the results of a nonpartisan study that found such a policy would cut CO 2 emissions in half within 20 years, while adding 2.8 million jobs to the economy and saving 13,000 lives annually because of reduced air pollution.

So, what happened when our volunteers engaged Republicans in this conversation?

In most instances, there was keen interest, active listening, productive discussions and — in some cases — expressions of support for our proposal. In very few instances, however, was there pushback from the staff or member of Congress about the science of climate change.

In meeting after meeting with Republican offices, the unspoken agreement seemed to be: “Let’s not argue about the science; let’s talk about solutions and where we might find common ground.”

But what about everything we’re hearing on TV and reading in newspapers about Republican presidential candidates pushing back on the pope’s encyclical? What about a certain member of Congress who tossed a snowball on the Senate floor to dispute global warming?

These are the more sensational reactions that make the news because the media thrives on conflict. No conflict. No news.

Despite the headlines, CCL has found in the past year that the propensity among congressional Republicans to dispute climate science has waned considerably. So, why has that changed and why were we ever arguing the science to begin with?

The answer, I believe, lies with the solutions being proposed, which all involved more government, more red tape and more regulations — things that are anathema to conservatives. Whether it was the 1,600 page cap-and-trade bill that failed to pass the Senate or the current Clean Power Plan to regulate carbon dioxide at electrical plants, Republicans aren’t seeing solutions to climate change they can readily embrace.

Don’t like the solutions? Don’t admit there’s a problem.

But what if there was a solution in harmony with the conservative values of less government and doing things that grow the economy, a market-friendly approach that doesn’t dictate which technologies win or how we should conduct our lives?

Such a solution exists with Carbon Fee and Dividend, the policy I described earlier. By returning all revenue from the carbon fee to households, we accomplish two things: Keep the federal government from getting bigger and add jobs by putting money into the pockets of people who will spend it.

Republicans, by and large, like the sound of that, and a funny thing is happening as our volunteers talk to more and more members of Congress. The conversation is shifting away from the so-called “debate” about climate change and toward finding suitable ways to address the problem.

The premise that Republicans can talk about solving climate change comes as no great shock when you consider the following: During his presidency, Theodore Roosevelt protected approximately 230,000,000 acres of public land.

President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970.

Under President Reagan’s leadership, the U.S. entered into the Montreal Protocol, which phased out ozone-depleting chemicals.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) introduced the Climate Stewardship Act in 2003, 2005 and 2007.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the co-sponsor of the CLEAR Act in 2009, legislation to reduce carbon emissions through a cap-and-dividend system.

So, everything you think you know about Republicans and climate change is, for the most part, wrong. The chance that Republicans will lead on this sooner rather than later has never been more obvious.

And if Republicans are looking for a dramatic moment to lead on climate change, Sept. 24 — the day Pope Francis speaks to Congress — would be the perfect time to introduce a Carbon Fee and Dividend bill.

Mark Reynolds is executive director of Citizens’ Climate Lobby.

Posted in Publicity | Tagged | Comments Off on Mark Reynolds, CCL, P-C

Hughie Tweedy LTE PC, 6/16/15

Posted on June 16, 2015 by Katharine

The company trying to buy right-of-ways for the Bakken pipeline offered Mr. Tweedy a $2500 teenage prostitute. That guy should be jailed. Anyway, I thought we should certainly include Mr. Tweedy as a friend and hope he hangs tough. Here’s his letter:

The Iowa state flag has the powerful motto, “Our Liberties We Prize, and Our Rights We Will Maintain.” Surely property rights are one of the rights our motto refers to. The Dakota Access pipeline mafia has invaded this state, torn up our flag and used it for toilet paper.

Eminent domain is defined in my dictionary as “superior ownership.” We must stop the abuse of this power. For the Iowa Utilities Board to grant superior ownership to an out of state private corporation for their benefit and profit would be unconstitutional, a slap across the face of Iowa property owners, would tear the soul out of this earthly body and is just plain wrong. I am not a land pimp, and I will not prostitute out my family heritage or have our sacred family farm and forest desecrated for money. No means no.

Iowa does not need this pipeline; this pipeline needs Iowa. It’s time to stand and fight against it, and I for one will never back down.

Hughie Tweedy

Montrose

Posted in Education, Publicity | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Hughie Tweedy LTE PC, 6/16/15

Dawn’s research into state law – 2

Posted on June 13, 2015 by 100 Grannies

I looked at Iowa anti corporate farm legislation again, and it seems that the legislation mentioned in my previous email – “Iowa recently amended its anti-corporate farming statute to ban output contract farming. Iowa Code Ann. ¤9H.4 (West 1995). The law prohibits corporations, limited liability companies, and trusts – other than family farm corporations, authorized farm corporations, family farm limited liability companies, authorized limited liability companies, family trusts, authorized trusts, revocable trusts, or testamentary trusts – from acquiring an interest in any agricultural land in the state. – was overturned.

This is a study from Drake University.  http://students.law.drake.edu/aglawjournal/docs/agVol09No1-Chester.pdf

In May 2002, a federal district court in South Dakota held that South Dakota’s anticorporate farming amendment violated the Dormant Commerce Clause. Eight months later, a federal district court in Iowa invalidated that state’s anticorporate farming statute on the theory that it violated the Dormant Commerce Clause as well. These two blows dealt to anticorporate farming legislation will have wide-ranging effects on the future of anticorporate farming statutes.

Eight months later, in January 2003, a federal district court in Iowa struck down that state’s anticorporate farming statute as being unconstitutional in a farther-reaching opinion than Hazeltine.  In Smithfield Foods, Inc. v. Miller, a federal district court in Iowa concluded that Iowa’s anticorporate farming statute was facially, purposefully, and effectually discriminatory and hence, unconstitutional under the first tier of the Dormant Commerce Clause inquiry. The Iowa court held that the anticorporate farming statute “narrowly tailors its prohibitions to cast a wide net around [p]laintiffs’ economic activities, all the while reserving the same economic activities for Iowa cooperatives or cooperatives with an Iowa component.” While the court thought the preservation of family farmers was a “noble” goal, in strong language the court held, “[a]fter careful consideration, the [c]ourt is left with but one conclusion, [Iowa’s anticorporate farming statute], on its face, in its purpose, and in its effect unconstitutionality discriminates against out-of-state interests in favor of local ones.”143 Moreover, after the state argued that the specific clause in question be severed from the entire statute, the court responded, “simply severing the cooperative exemption from [Iowa’s anticorpo-rate farming statute] does not remedy the statute’s defects . . . the Act was passed with a discriminatory purpose to effect a discriminatory result. Accordingly, while severing the cooperative exemption might cure some of the facial defects, the Act’s discriminatory purpose and effect persist.” Appeals from the rulings in Hazeltine and Smithfield are currently pending.

The increased value of farmland has been dramatic. In Iowa, for example, the estimated market value of farmland and buildings, averaged per farm, jumped from $283,597 in 1987 to $566,587 in 1997. The same holds true in Nebraska, where the value of land and buildings per farm has increased from $344,253 in 1987 to $567,468 in 1997. It appears that by restricting potential buyers of farmland, anticorporate farming legislation has increased the value of land. However, the effect of the corporate prohibition means a small family farmer is prohibited from selling land to those who might be able to afford it, such as large agribusinesses. This effect of “locking in” small family farmers has hindered their financial status and success….

Posted in Community Rights, Legislative | Comments Off on Dawn’s research into state law – 2

Dawn’s research into state law – 1

Posted on June 9, 2015 by 100 Grannies

I was listening to an interview of Paul Cienfuegos – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObK3EWEs0hY –  and he mentioned that Iowa was one of the states that had an anti-corporate farming law.

This is what I found:

Iowa

Iowa’s anti-corporate farming statute is located at Iowa Code Ann. ¤172C.5A (West 1990). Iowa recently amended its anti-corporate farming statute to ban output contract farming. Iowa Code Ann. ¤9H.4 (West 1995). The law prohibits corporations, limited liability companies, and trusts – other than family farm corporations, authorized farm corporations, family farm limited liability companies, authorized limited liability companies, family trusts, authorized trusts, revocable trusts, or testamentary trusts – from acquiring an interest in any agricultural land in the state.

The major organizational exemptions require (1) that the shareholders be related, (2) that the stockholders all be natural persons, and (3) that sixty percent of the gross revenues of the corporation over a prior three year period have been derived from farming.

Other exemptions include (1) land owned by nonprofit corporations, (2) land owned by municipal corporations, and (3) agricultural land held for research or experimental purposes. Enforcement of the Statute may be carried out by the Attorney General or the County Attorney. Penalties may be assessed up to $25,000 and the corporation forced to divest the farmland within a period of one year. Enforcement is assisted by the lengthy requirements imposed on the submission of reports which must be sent annually to the Secretary of State by contract feeders and by any corporations owning farmland in the State.

Iowa law also makes it unlawful for beef and pork processing corporations to own, control, or operate a feedlot. This section of the law proclaims that “[i]n order to preserve free and private enterprise, prevent monopoly, and protect consumers” there shall be a separation of ownership and processing corporations. See Iowa Code Ann. ¤9H.2. Violations of this portion of the statute may be assessed a penalty of up to $25,000. The Attorney General or a County Attorney may bring suits on behalf of the State to enforce the provisions of the Act.

———————————————————————————————————–

Barbara: So why isn’t this being enforced?  I wonder.

Dawn: I think that the local farmer is used by corporations so the corps appear to be complying with the letter of the law — the corporation doesn’t actually own the CAFO or feed lot.

Tom Fiegen said he has been the attorney for farmers who have signed CAFO agreements prepared by the firm of one of Branstad’s cronies.  I’m attaching a scan of Tom’s biographic info.

I think Tom is eager to talk with the 100Grannies – we have an awesome reputation with people who know about us. Maybe we can invite him to a Democracy School session (and invite other interested Grannies and environmentalists, if desired.)  In Fairfield, he suggested that one way to fight CAFOs is to have an animal density zoning ordinance.  We could ask for specifics about that and get our questions answered about why the anti-corporate farming law isn’t keeping big ag out of animal production.

I asked him what his position is on corporate personhood and he said he thinks corporations should have the right of perpetual life and to borrow money.  I asked if he thought the Bill of Rights applied to corporations and he said no that they were for humans.

Note: Tom Fiegen is running for Senate.

I might have more to report: the Washington County Board of Supervisors has an information item about bird production on today’s meeting agenda.

———————————————————————————————————–

Paul has a 3 hour class (sliding scale $6 – $40) that is followed by a 90 minute Q and A session.  We might want to think about viewing this as a group.

Posted in Education | Comments Off on Dawn’s research into state law – 1

Becky Ross 6/8/15 letter to editor, Press-Citizen

Posted on June 8, 2015 by Katharine

Decrease plastic use to help environment

Iowa is a long way from an ocean, but many of us like to vacation near the ocean. We want our water and beaches to be clean and the ecosystems to be healthy for snorkeling and scuba diving.

Oceans contain 96.5 percent of the Earth’s water, leaving only 3.5 percent as freshwater, polar ice caps and glaciers. There is a huge “blob” of water 1,000 feet by 1,000 feet and about 300 feet deep that is 2 to 7 degrees warmer than normal in the Pacific. This anomaly helped create the drought in California and changes our weather patterns in the Midwest. This temperature change makes marine life harder. They may have to change eating habits or move to a completely different area.

Our oceans are also polluted by huge quantities of plastic. The gyre in the Pacific is twice the size of Texas. Plastic is getting into our food chain because marine animals think it is food.

I am asking you to celebrate our oceans by doing something positive for their health. Try giving up single use plastic of all types. Use your own shopping bag. Use a reusable bottle for drinks. Quit using plastic straws. Ask for biodegradable carry out containers or ask to have your leftovers wrapped in foil.

I would also recommend visiting the Iowa Arts Festival Global Village from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Sunday in downtown Iowa City. 100Grannies For a Livable Future will have a booth featuring information about the Maldives Islands in the Indian Ocean. These islands, only 3 meters above sea level, are experiencing rising seas due to climate change and melting glaciers.

Becky Ross Iowa City

Posted in Archive, Publicity | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Becky Ross 6/8/15 letter to editor, Press-Citizen

Tom Fiegen in Fairfield (6 Jun 2015)

Posted on June 6, 2015 by 100 Grannies

Report from Dawn:

I had a wonderful day at Fairfield listening to Tom Fiegen discuss food and climate issues with Jefferson County folks.  (Saturday, June 06, 2015)

When I said I was a member of 100Grannies, everyone had heard of us and most said, “Wow!”

I told Fred Rosenberg that I’d keep in touch about Thomas Linzey’s visit and our plans for Democracy School.

Tom Fiegen would like to talk with the Grannies.  The environmental issues he mentioned today included getting the nitrates washed off of tiled fields to be designated point pollution sources so they can be regulated; changing zoning to limit the number of animals per unity of land; and decreasing our carbon footprint by switching to small farms growing local and organic foods.  He said that farmers with CAFOs are paid $8 per hog, are not allowed to refuse any hogs sent to them (not even sick ones), and that Cargill mandates a high protein diet that the pigs cannot digest after they reach a certain age.  This faulty digestion is a big part of the odor problem, but now that China has bought Smithfield, the Chinese corporation is planning on using an enzyme that decreases the odor substantially.  (No one knows what the enzyme is or how it will affect the hogs or the environment.)  Also Terry Branstad’s friend Gross is a member of the law firm that writes the CAFO contracts and Branstad is an active promoter of CAFOs.

Tom’s goal is to help rewrite the 2019 Farm Bill with most of the aid going to farmers with less than 400 acres, some going to those with 400 to 1000 acres and none to the big corporate farm corporations.

He is advocating local food systems as Iowa’s way to gain importance.  He mentioned that before Iowa started growing commodity crops we had 11 Representatives; now we have 4.  He believes that switching to local food (as opposed to corn and beans agriculture) will bring young families back to Iowa.  His vision is a couple on an acreage with one of them holding a regular job until they are established as organic growers with contacts who will buy their produce.  With the draught in California, it is a good time for Iowa to create orchards.

Local foods and being a good neighbor are concepts that have been well received in throughout Iowa.

What is the procedure to see if the Grannies would like to have a discussion with Tom?

—————————————————————————————————–

This was the schedule for today:

Maharishi World Peace Vedic Organic Greenhouse-Tour by Maharishi Vedic City Mayor Bob Wynne

Local Food Systems – Barbara Stone, Director, SE Iowa Food Hub, Stuart Valentine, Director, BioMimicry Local Food Systems Challenge, Fred Rosenberg, M.U.M. Permaculture Club Newsletter

Genetic Engineering – Steve Druker, (by phone) Executive Director, author of new book: Twisted Genes, Altered Truth and Anne Dietrich, Director, Truth in Labeling Coalition

Addressing Hunger – Chad Romer, Director, Carry on Bags – a Jefferson County program to send non-perishable food home with school kids on Friday afternoon), Harold and Louise Frakes, Owners, A Place in the Heart/Brighton Community Garden; Steve Winn, Director, Fairfield Soup Kitchen.  (All programs were designed to be discrete.  Steve Winn said that he originally thought that young women who bought lattes at Starbucks didn’t need to come for a free meal, then he realized that someone who needed to maintain her social position by spending her limited money on a status coffee item really did need both, position and nourishment. I hope you will get to watch the video as he said it very beautifully.)

Posted in Activism, Education | Comments Off on Tom Fiegen in Fairfield (6 Jun 2015)