budbromley

Selected quotes by Dr. James Hansen, former NASA scientist and administrator, true believer in human-caused global warming, Al Gore’s science guru:

“We have at most ten years—not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.”

“We cannot afford to put off [climate policy] change any longer. We have to get on a new path within this new administration. We have only four years left for Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take the lead.”

– James Hansen, 2009 (“President ‘has four years to save Earth’“, The Guardian, January 17)

“Did you know that cap-and-trade is by and for big banks? In the U.S. there is a revolving door between Wall Street and Washington. The skilled trading units at JP Morgan Chase and Goldman-Sachs can make enormous amounts from cap-and-trade, every dime coming out of the public’s pockets.”

“The half-baked 3000+ pages of the Waxman/Markey cap-and-trade scheme in the U.S. (and scheme is the right word) were not written by our Senators or Representatives slaving into the night. They were written by lobbyists for special interests and stapled into the bill by our elected representatives, who are beholden to the special interests.”

“Our representatives, in both parties, seem to feel entitled to the Washington life style, once elected. Did you know that Dick Gephardt, after retiring as House Democratic Leader, received $120,000 per quarter from a single source (Peabody Coal)? I doubt that Peabody wastes its money — they probably get their money’s worth in lobbying. I don’t mean to pick on the Democrats; one party is not noticeably better than the other in this regard.”

“We seem to have a situation where members of both parties like their status and don’t really want to stanch the money flow. And the electoral system has been pretty well rigged such that it is very hard for a third party to rise.”

– James Hansen, Facing Facebook: Australia’s Cap-and-Tax, July 29, 2014.

– James Hansen, 2006 (“The Threat to the Planet,” New York Times Review of Books)

James Hansen on California Cap-and-Trade (2012)

“You don’t want [California’s] system with caps, where you have trading, you have derivatives, you have markets that then collapse and don’t actually reduce emissions much. That’s been tried in Europe, and it didn’t do much.”

– James Hansen, quoted in David Baker, “James Hansen Blasts Cap-and-Trade,” San Francisco Chronicle, December 5, 2012.

James Hansen on U.S. Congress’ Federal (Waxman-Markey) Cap-and-Trade (2009/2010)

“Cap-and-trade’s complexity provides a breeding ground for special interests…. Why do those special interests deserve it anyhow?”

– James Hansen, “The People vs. Cap-and-Tax,” New York City, January 12, 2010.

“The truth is, the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. It is an exceedingly inefficient way to get a small reduction of emissions. It is less than worthless….”

– James Hansen, “Strategies to Address Global Warming,” July 13, 2009.

“Governments are retreating to feckless ‘cap-and-trade,’ a minor tweak to business-as-usual….

“Why is this cap-and-trade temple of doom worshipped? The 648-page cap-and-trade monstrosity that is being foisted on the U.S. Congress provides the answer. Not a single Congressperson has read it. They don’t need to – they just need to add more paragraphs to support their own special interests. By the way, the Congress people do not write most of those paragraphs—they are ‘suggested’ by people in alligator shoes.”

– James Hansen, “Worshipping the Temple of Doom,” 2009.

“The Waxman-Markey and Boxer-Kerry cap-and-trade bills in Congress are larded with 2,000 pages of give-aways to special interests, soaking the public who must pay higher energy prices.”

“What is the chance that a United States cap-and-trade law could be a precursor for a global agreement? Zero. There is no chance that China will accept a cap. Nor should they. They are still in the early phase of their economic development.”

“Congress is accustomed to working with special interests. There is a revolving door between Congress and lobbyists. Ex-members know the Washington ropes. The lobbyists wrote most of the pages in the 2,000-page bills in Congress.”

– James Hansen, “The People vs. Cap-and-Tax,” paper delivered to the Chairperson of the Carbon Trading Summit, New York City, January 12, 2010.

“Cap-and-trade is a hidden regressive tax, benefiting the select few who have managed to get themselves written into the … bill…. Think revolving door between the government and Wall Street. Think revolving door between Congress and lobbyists.”

– James Hansen, “I Just Had a Baby, at Age 68,” (2009).

“Other characteristics of the ‘cap’ approach: (1) unpredictable price volatility, (2) it makes millionaires on Wall Street and other trading floors at public expense, (3) it is an invitation to blackmail by utilities that threaten ‘blackout coming’ to gain increased emission permits, (4) it has overhead costs and complexities, inviting lobbyists and delaying implementation.

“The biggest problem with [cap and trade] is that it will not solve the problem. It may slow emissions, but because of the long lifetime of atmospheric CO2, slowing the emissions does little good. As long as fossil fuels are the cheapest form of energy they will be used eventually. There is no hope that cap and trade can get us back to 350 ppm CO2.”

– James Hansen, “Strategies to Address Global Warming,” 2009.

quotes compiled by By Robert Bradley Jr. — September 29, 2015, atMasterResource.org

https://www.masterresource.org/china-international/china-cap-and-trade-james-hansen-on-cronyism/

https://www.masterresource.org/hansen-james/james-hansen-false-alarms/

Here is just one of the UN’s BIG lies which are passed on by Obama, Gore, Kerry, the EPA, the Supreme Court, and virtually all Democrats and RINOs, not to mention all of the so-called “green” special interest non-governmental agencies like World Wildlife Fund, Nature Conservancy, National Geographic, Greenpeace and global banks and many private family foundations:

“Thanks to the IPCC, this is what we know:” “From 1880 to 2012, average global temperature increased by 0.85°C.” (See UN website link below)

However, as pointed out by the French Société de Calcul Mathématique (link below), today we do not have the ability to calculate average global surface temperatures today, much less in 1880.

“Let us make a rough analysis of how well stations are distributed. Let us say that the information provided by a sensor is representative of weather conditions in the surrounding 100 km2.”

“The Earth has a total surface area of approximately 500 million km2; this means that a reliable global analysis would require at least five million sensors, which is 1,600 times more than the 3,000 stations being used at the moment. And that is simply for the calculation of surface temperatures. This distribution would have to be repeated at every layer of the atmosphere and every depth of the seas.”

“This simple calculation clearly demonstrates that there are not enough stations to model the surface temperature of the globe, and satellites cannot replace surface stations. The reduction in the number of sensors being used is fundamentally unsound: temperature varies from one place to another, from one hour to the next, and this natural variability can be tracked only by a very dense network of sensors.” page 15. http://www.scmsa.eu/archives/SCM_RC_2015_08_24_EN.pdf

The BIG Lie http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change-2/

The following is a letter about “the global warming scam” to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emeritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.  

To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society 

6 October 2010 
Dear Curt: 
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). 
Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence – it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be? 
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society. 
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist. 
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it… 
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club.

CO2 is not a problem on earth, and it will never be a problem. It is 100% natural plant food. It makes the planet greener and provides food. Satellite studies show that the earth is becoming greener as the CO2 concentration in air is increasing. Many peer reviewed science studies show that increasing CO2 increases the volume of plants. Photosynthetic incorporation of CO2 from the atmosphere into plants is the ONLY significant mechanism of building carbon based life.

It is impossible for CO2 to increase to a concentration that becomes dangerous. Henry’s Law defines the relative concentration of any gas in air versus any gas dissolved in water. CO2 is highly soluble in water. According to Henry’s Law, the concentration of CO2 in air will never exceed 1 part versus 50 parts in water. Most of Earth is covered with oceans. Dissolved in these oceans are an abundance of minerals such as calcium. In the top 200 meters of ocean water alone, there is more than enough calcium to combine with all of the carbon on earth and convert it to calcium carbonate, which will precipitate out and fall to the bottom of the oceans as limestone. This has been happening for millions of years. The layers of limestone and marble are the geological record of this. Enormous heat is required to reconvert this limestone or marble into CO2 and calcium. The heat of a volcano is required. All of this has been known for many years. It is available in textbooks for ocean and atmospheric chemistry. This information is usually ignored by so-called climate scientists. Become conversant in Henry’s Law and Earth’s natural carbon cycle and you will know with certainty that human caused global warming is a scam.

The following is a letter about “the global warming scam” to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emeritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence – it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it…

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club.

I don’t often post things from RT, because it is so loaded with propaganda, but sometimes RT does report the truth. This is one of them. This is Syrian President Assad, who Obama (and his neo-con predecessors) and NATO madly want to replace like they did Gaddhafi in Libya, Mubarak in Egypt, Saddam in Iraq and many more going back to before many of you were born. America did not start the tribal violence in the middle east – and they will continue fighting after we are gone – but we are making it worse. Empire Amerika and our “allies” have been supporting and fighting wars of convenience for many decades. It is long past time for patriotic Americans to stand down our government, stop their meddling, and stop killing our young people, stop killing people in other countries for causes and histories we don’t begin to understand, stop wasting resources.  At the end of the day, this blood is on your hands too.  http://www.rt.com/news/315431-assad-interview-refugee-terrorists/

The U.S. has almost 10,000 years of natural gas supply. The U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) reported that in 2014 the U.S. consumed approximately 26.79 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of natural gas. According to the report submitted to Congress by the National Research Council (NRC) entitled “Charting the Future of Methane Hydrate Research in the United States,” the total United States resources of natural gas hydrates have been estimated to be on the order of 200,000 trillion cubic feet (TCF); that’s almost 10,000 years supply of natural gas. According to a report by the National Commission on Energy Policy entitled “Ending the Energy Stalemate–A Bipartisan Strategy to Meet America’s Energy Challenge,” the United States may be endowed with over 1/4 of the methane hydrate deposits in the world.

About 1,000 years supply of natural gas (methane) at current US level of use is in the Gulf of Mexico. Combustion of natural gas under easily achievable settings produces ZERO pollution. In 2008, US Geological Survey (USGS) and Minerals Management Service (MMS) assessed methane gas hydrate volumes in place in the Gulf of Mexico. On the outer continental shelf are 21,444 Trillion Cubic Feet (TCF) and of that volume, 6,717 TCF are located in sand reservoirs, which are considered the most favorable for methane production. The MMS report is available here:  http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program/Resource_Evaluation/Gas_Hydrates/MMS2008-004.pdf

According to Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) data highlighted by the immigration subcommittee staff of U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions – chairman of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest – in FY 2013, 91.4 percent of Middle Eastern refugees (accepted to the U.S. between 2008-2013) received food stamps, 73.1 percent were on Medicaid or Refugee Medical Assistance and 68.3 percent were on cash welfare.

Germany has re-instituted border controls between Austria and Germany. The Schengen open-border policy among 25 or so European countries will not survive this.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/13/germany-to-close-borders-exit-schengen-emergency-measures

As I have said before, multi-culturalism and moral relativism are failed philosophies that lead inexorably to collapse of civilization and chaos. They have failed in their European experiment and everywhere they have been tried. Unfortunately, US intellectuals and elites have not yet learned that lesson. Obama has committed to bringing tens of thousands of Syrian refugees and millions of Latin American refugees into the US. Our union will not survive this either, if this is allowed to continue.

Here is the view of the current refugee crisis in Europe presented in the Wall Street Journal. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-roots-of-the-migration-crisis-1441995372

Here is a different view from that of the WSJ, NYT and Washington elites: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/09/13/whos-to-blame-for-syria-mess-putin/

Like Dr. Feynman said, “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.” – Richard Feynman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIxvQMhttq4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement

The case of activist federal judge Bunning is a sad one.

As has occurred so many times in the past, in the case of Kentucky clerk Mrs. Kim Davis, the media and activists present two sides of an argument, supposedly fair and balanced, and they let you decide. And as has occurred so many times in the past, the truth and facts are in neither of those two sides. The facts are not investigated or even mentioned. The public was presented a false argument surrounded by spin in order to sway public opinion. They keep doing that because people keep falling for it. And here they go again. Did you fall for it?

Discussion in the public square (social media) exhausts people’s energy and motivation on the wild goose chase. By the time and if the facts finally do come out and the dots are correctly connected, the public has lost interest and moved on. Thus the consensus desired by the activists like federal judge Bunning hold sway. Politicians especially depend on this process.

Kentucky Clerk Mrs. Kim Davis asks: ‘Under what law am I authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license?’ There is no such law. In fact, the opposite law is still on the books. Kentucky passed Amendment 1 in 2004, prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriages. It passed by a 75-25 percent margin. In 2004, the citizens of Kentucky, along with Arkansas, Georgia, Utah, Mississippi, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Oregon passed – by substantial margins – bans on same sex marriage. In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed by veto proof majority the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and President Bill Clinton signed it into law, now known as U.S. Public Law 104-199.

Section 3 in DOMA defined marriage for all federal law purposes as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor that section 3 of that DOMA law (ONLY section 3) was unconstitutional under the due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment. [As a result, the federal government was ordered to issue Windsor a tax refund.]

But DOMA in Section 2 also confirmed primacy of state law in these matters and that part of the federal law known as DMOA still stands. And that is further confirmed in Windsor.

[R]egulation of domestic relations is an area that has long been regarded as a virtually exclusive province of the States.” U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Windsor, 2013. Only 2 years ago is ancient history when civilization and law are in free fall after self-glorified tyrants shoved them off the cliff of fascist transformation.

Please read section 2 of the federal law, DOMA, which is still law of the land.
[104th Congress Public Law 199]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
Public Law 104-199
104th Congress
An Act
To define and protect the institution of marriage. Sept. 21, 1996 –
[H.R. 3396]
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
Defense of Marriage Act.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Defense of Marriage Act”.
SEC. 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES.
(a) In General.–Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding after section 1738B the following:
“Sec. 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof
“No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian
tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or
judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe
respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is
treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory,
possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such
relationship.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.–The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 1738B the following new item:
“1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof.”.
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
(a) In General.–Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
“Sec. 7. Definition of `marriage’ and `spouse’
“In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any
ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative
bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage’ means
only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,
and the word `spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is
a husband or a wife.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.–The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 6 the following new item:
“7. Definition of `marriage’ and `spouse’.”.
Approved September 21, 1996.

What we have is a rogue federal judge Bunning. Fortunately, someone got to Bunning and corrected him before he further harms himself and Mrs. Davis. Judge Bunning released Davis. Federal judge Bunning, who illegally ordered clerk Kim Davis to jail, was previously overturned on appeal after he ordered students to attend “anti-harassment sessions” designed to instruct students “to withhold Christian viewpoints about homosexual behavior.” Bunning’s ruling against the students, a direct ban on free speech, was overturned on appeal. It turns out that Bunning is an activist unlawfully acting out his personal opinions.

Justice Anthony Kennedy writing the opinion of the Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges, that is the opinion of 5 of 9 justices of the Supreme Court in the same sex marriage case: “Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here.”… “It must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.” “The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.” In other words, federal judge Bunning who imprisoned Mrs. Kim Davis defies the Supreme Court and is acting illegally.

In Obergefell, the Supreme Court was instructing THE STATES, about 29 of them, to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but left alone the right of individuals to act on their conscience. So far, Kentucky and the other states have taken no action.

Justice Kennedy is correct according to the Constitution, which means federal judge Bunning is wrong and acting illegally. Federal judge Bunning should be impeached for his lawless action. Mrs. Davis is breaking no law. On the other hand, Davis would be breaking Kentucky law and her oath of elected office if she granted marriage licenses to same sex couples.

If you read the Supreme Court case in Obergefell (link below), the majority 5 justices “held” in their opinion that the “due process” clause of 14th Amendment applies to marriage. Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” But, clearly and obviously state governments, local governments and federal government do just that in thousands of laws and regulations.

You see, in the opinion of 5 justices some of whom are gay, gay people are special and in need of dignity. The Supreme Court claims that denying marriage licenses to gays is depriving them of life, liberty, or property. Dignity fits in there somewhere. But licensing for anything deprives one group of something and grants it to another based on certain standards set by the society. Fourteen years old is too young to drive. Eighteen years old is too young to drink alcohol. You have to pass this test before you can be licensed to practice law, or medicine, or engineer buildings or many other things. Society sets its standards by passing laws in the legislative process wherein the people weigh in through their representatives or through referendum, not through appointed judges.

Judges do not make law in America. We must keep it that way. Under the spurious logic of 5 justices, who could – based on their logic in Obergefell – stretch the 14th Amendment to overturn all local and state licenses, licenses which are by definition exclusionary. The opinion of the Supreme Court is cut from cloth that is wholly subjective. Essentially, these 5 justices have declared that duly passed and enacted state laws and the duly passed and but poorly enacted federal law known as DOMA are invalid. But the Supreme Court has no authority to make or amend laws or to enforce their opinion.

Judge Bunning might have had legitimacy in his ruling if he had ruled against the state of Kentucky instead of Mrs. Bunning. Obergefell requires THE STATES to issue licenses to same sex couples, but leaves intact the rights of individuals to act on their conscience. We will have to wait and see what, if anything, the states do.

Contempt of court (which was Judge Bunning’s charge against Kentucky clerk Kim Martin) is the appropriate act of disobedience against such judicial tyranny, unless you want to continue living under the tyranny of the subjective opinion of an elite minority. Be prepared.

What are you going to do when a government official or judge orders you to do something which is illegal or against your conscience? Will you obey orders like Hitler’s millions? Or will you disobey like Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Mrs Kim Martin?

Click to access 14-556_3204.pdf