G-G's tax waiver 'an insult to public'

Taxpayers Australia: "There are many people in this situation and I don't think anyone else is getting an extra amount paid because they weren't aware."

An Australian taxpayers lobby group says the Federal Government has insulted the public by waiving a $190,000 superannuation tax bill owed by former governor-general Michael Jeffery.

The Government waived the tax obligations for Major-General Jeffery after the superannuation surcharge for high-income earners, which he had been required to pay, was abolished in 2005.

Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner says the decision was taken to make sure that Major-General Jeffery paid exactly the same tax as any other Australian with the same superannuation entitlements.

Taxpayers Australia says the decision is unlikely to be applied to members of the general public.

The lobby group's superannuation tax expert Heather Schache says the move is extremely unusual.

"It seems entirely inequitable to the average taxpayer as far as I am concerned," she [said].

"The ex-governor-general's comment was that he said in 2003 he wasn't aware that the surcharge existed.

"My response to that is well, you are like any other person in that situation. You have an obligation when you enter into any employment contract to find out what your obligations are going to be. So the fact that someone turns around and says 'well I wasn't aware of that back in 2003' doesn't really seem to be a response that ... should mean that taxpayers are having to fund an extra amount that wasn't anticipated.

"I don't think anyone else would be in the same situation and the surcharge assessments, even though they actually stopped from July 1, 2005, are so behind, that there are still people getting surcharge assessments now.

"There are many people in this situation and I don't think anyone else is getting an extra amount paid because they weren't aware."

'Not good enough'

The Federal Opposition is arguing that Major-General Jeffery was given special treatment under the law.

"Lindsay Tanner has to explain in detail to the Australian people why he was prepared to give the governor-general a tax break that so many other Australians don't enjoy," Opposition finance spokesman Joe Hockey said.

"He has to explain to the Australian people why the superannuation levy was waived for the governor-general when the governor-general has been on the same tax footing as every other Australian for a number of years now.

"I don't think it is good enough to have private agreements like this to waive a debt of such a substantial amount of money when the governor-general may well be being treated differently to other Australians.

"If there was an anomaly involving the remuneration or a disagreement about the terms of the remuneration for the governor-general then it should have been transparent in the same way that the governor-general's remuneration is transparent."

Charmaine Crowe from the Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association also hit out at the decision.

"For someone who has had the role of a governor-general it seems a little bit bizarre that there's some rule for an individual in that position and quite another for the rest of the population. And given the economic crisis that everyone is experiencing it is a little bit difficult to follow for the rest of the population that this tax bill is waived."

Rapist's jail time increased on appeal

A rapist who terrorised women in Melbourne's northern suburbs will serve an extra two years in jail following an appeal by Victoria's Director of Public Prosecutions.

Sedat Avci, 22, pleaded guilty in the County Court last year to 13 charges, including seven of rape, following attacks on six women between April and August 2005.

Victoria's Court of Appeal today ruled that a minimum jail term of nine years imposed on Avci was manifestly inadequate and should be increased to 11 years.

Appeal court president Justice Chris Maxwell said: "This was a horrific set of crimes. The terror, pain and humiliation which the victims experienced is quite appalling, the long-term damage immeasurable."

Justice Maxwell said Avci's offending became progressively worse, and there was every reason to assume it would have continued had he not been caught.

"(There) was a persistent attitude on Avci's part that he was entitled to disregard entirely the rights of any woman he might select for his purposes," he said.

Justice Maxwell stressed the importance of courts "continuing to send the clearest possible message to the community that preying on innocent females, whether in their homes or on the streets, will be treated as offending of the utmost seriousness".

Justices Maxwell, Peter Buchanan and Robert Redlich re-imposed Avci's original maximum jail term of 16 years.

Nationals MP resigns over shoving incident

New South Wales Nationals MP Andrew Fraser has resigned from the Opposition frontbench after shoving a colleague in a late night session of Parliament.

The Member for Coffs Harbour was involved in a heated conversation with Labor MP John Aquilina last night when a colleague, Katrina Hodgkinson, placed a hand on his shoulder and attempted to pull him away.

Mr Fraser explained his version of events to Parliament this morning.

"I brushed my colleague's arm aside inappropriately," he said.

"As a result, I've apologised to my colleague and I apologised to the [Lower] House. I've offered my resignation as shadow minister to the Leader of the Opposition, Barry O'Farrell."

Mr O'Farrell says he has accepted Mr Fraser's resignation in line with his determination to raise standards in public life.

The Speaker of the NSW Legislative Assembly is investigating the incident that was captured by house cameras.

Previous offender

Mr Fraser was suspended from Parliament for eight weeks in 2005 for trying to throttle Labor MP Joe Tripodi.

He later apologised and blamed his actions on his frustration with the Government's lack of action in preventing deaths on the Pacific Highway.

The premier at the time, Morris Iemma, labelled him a "disgrace to democracy".

Mr Fraser eventually regained the position of Nationals deputy leader, but was dumped in favour of Adrian Piccoli six weeks ago in the wake of the party's loss in the Port Macquarie by-election.

He has now resigned as Opposition spokesman on Primary Industries, Road Safety and Rural Affairs.

Australian govt abandoning author in Thai jail

An Australian barrister is accusing the Federal Government of failing to help an Australian writer who is in jail in Bangkok on charges of insulting the Thai monarchy.

Harry Nicolaides was arrested in August because of a brief passage in a novel he published in 2005, referring to rumours about the Thai royal family.

Mr Nicolaides has been in jail for more than two months and faces a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison if convicted.

Barrister Mark Dean says the Government has failed to meet its responsibilities.

"The Australian Government, that is, the Foreign Minister, part of his principal responsibilities are to protect Australian citizens in circumstances such as this, particularly where a citizen is being used for political reasons," he said.

"And so far the Australian Government, from what we can tell, has done nothing."

17 years for killer boxer

A BOXER found guilty of murdering a partygoer who fell to his death at a warehouse rave has been jailed for 17 years. He will serve a non-parole period of at least 12 years.

The dead man's father told the Supreme Court that his sorrow at his son's death was never ending.

But Khalid Baker, 21, still protests his innocence.

"I didn't murder no one, I'm innocent," he told Justice Simon Whelan as he was led from the Supreme Court yesterday.

Baker took part in several unprovoked assaults on guests at the party in Brunswick on November 26, 2005.

Justice Whelan said Baker, of Hoppers Crossing, was involved in violent and aggressive fighting on a landing at the warehouse.

Albert Snowball, 22, was knocked out of a window and fell 5.4m, hitting his head on the footpath.

Mr Snowball, of Perth, was rushed to hospital with brain damage but died.

In May, a jury found Baker guilty of the murder.

Jonathon Snowball told the court of his grief for his son.

"Albert Snowball was my first-born son. I sat him on my knee. I read to him. I carried him against my chest," Mr Snowball said in a victim impact statement.

"He was a good, honourable human being. It is not an easy thing to watch your son die."

Justice Whelan said yesterday that Baker did not intend to kill Mr Snowball or for him to go through the window.

He said while Baker had been found guilty of murder it was a case where "the moral culpability involved approaches the confines of manslaughter".

Justice Whelan said reports tendered to the court suggested Baker had significant problems in his life, which he attributed to his troubles in learning to read and write and prejudice he had experienced because of his colour and religion.

Jail for giving murderer false alibi

A man has been jailed by the District Court for 14 months for giving a convicted South Australian murderer a false alibi.

Michael Curran was jailed for killing his drug associate Leila Drapes at Prospect in Adelaide, in 2005.

Curran was granted a retrial last year, partly because his friend Robert George Lord, 62, changed his evidence.

Lord gave a false statement to police retracting the evidence he gave during the murder trial.

But the appeal was dropped when Lord admitted to perjury.

Judge Michael Boylan said Curran owed Lord more than $30,000 and had told Lord he would only get the money back if Curran were released from jail.

Judge Boylan set an eight-month non-parole term for Lord.

Torched man's killers get 24 years

Vicki Yvonne Brooks (pictured) and Dennis William Childs will serve at least 24 years in jail for the murder of her former husband, who was doused in petrol and set alight.

Two people have each been sentenced to a minimum of 24 years in jail for burning a man to death in a hotel car park in Adelaide.

Vicki Yvonne Brooks, 41, and Dennis William Childs, 53, murdered Brooks's former husband Robert Andersen by dousing him with petrol and setting him alight in the car park of a hotel at Marion, in January 2005.

Supreme Court Justice Trish Kelly said it was a despicable crime that had left two children without their father.

The pair lured Mr Andersen to the car park under the pretence of arranging a child custody visit.

Justice Kelly said it was clear that Brooks had harboured animosity and anger toward Mr Andersen for some time and said she had enlisted her drinking partner Childs to commit what was a despicable crime.

The judge imposed a mandatory life jail sentence with a non-parole term of 24 years, backdated to the time of the arrests.

Jail for Fat Pizza brother's killing

George Nassour centre...also stabbed arrives at court today

A man involved in the killing of the brother of Fat Pizza actor George Nassour will serve at least six-and-a-half years in prison for the incident, sparked by a misunderstood rude gesture.

The disagreement between the Nassour brothers and Michael Ibrahim and three other men started on New Year's Eve 2005 at the UN nightclub on Oxford Street.

Friends of Robin and George Nassour had not been allowed access to the nightclub, owned by Ibrahim's family and at which he was a spotter.

Later that evening Robin Nassour drove past the club making a rude gesture at his brother George, who was standing outside the club. But Michael Ibrahim thought the gesture was aimed at him, the Supreme Court has heard.

A day later the Nassour brothers were called to a meeting by a friend of Ibrahim, allegedly to sort out their conflict.

They met at an apartment building in Chiswick, where they were lured into an underground car park.

When George Nassour saw Ibrahim, and the three other men, he shouted to his brother: "This is a set up."

Soon afterwards he was stabbed, but managed to run away.

He then saw the four men surround Robin and kick and punch him. One of the other men, who carried a knife, stabbed him twice, severing an artery in his leg.

Supreme Court Justice Derek Price found that while the men had planned to assault Robin Nassour and inflict physical harm on him, Ibrahim and two co-accused, Mouhamed and Sleiman Tajjour, were not aware that the fourth man was carrying a knife.

It was only when the man - who has since died - stabbed George Nassour, that they became aware of the knife.

But, said Justice Price, they had still gone ahead with the assault on his brother, aware that the knife might again be used. This made them liable to a conviction for manslaughter, to which they have pleaded guilty.

"To participate in a joint act of violence in these circumstances carries with it... a very significant degree of criminality," Justice Price said.

Ibrahim, who had prior convictions for assault, drug and fire arm possession, was sentenced to a maximum sentence of nine years and four months, but is eligible for parole in March 2013.

Outside court Emilia Nassour, Robin's mother, who was sobbing throughout the sentencing remarks, said the sentence was fair and justice had been done.

The Tajjour brothers are to be sentenced at a later date.

Quote: Amazingly this story has nothing to do with drugs? I wonder if it is because the brother was an entertainer? If they wanted to settle a misunderstanding about a rude gesture then why not just do it on the phone or in a public place?

Maybe the mother was satisfied with the outcome because no 'drugs' were mentioned? Ibrahim it stated has a prior conviction for assault, 'drug', and fire arm possesion. People at night clubs take drugs. So what were the police investigating and what questions did the judge ask all the way through the trial? Were they covering up for entertainment?

Push for overhaul of laws on terrorism

Faheem Lodhi - another non-terrorist jailed under Australia's 'anti-terror' laws?

Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Ian Carnell, has called on the Federal Government to make substantial changes to anti-terrorism laws, saying some of them can hinder counter-terrorism efforts by unnecessarily antagonising Muslims.

[However anti-terrorism laws are just 'state sanctioned terrorism' aimed at 'innocent people' and using them as 'scapegoats' for Australia's 'alleged war on terror'. These laws were meant to project 'fear' in the community that we somehow need to be protected so that the government can wage war on innocent people for resources around the world unchallenged.]

Mr Carnell said there was a strong case for reviewing the strict rules that keep "national security" information secret in trials.

"My belief is that a key test for liberal democracies in the area of counter-terrorism is a willingness to revisit what was introduced when there was a sense of urgency and, if necessary, modify the measures to ensure effectiveness, balance and proportionality," he said.

"This is particularly so if some aspects may be counter-productive, such as adding to the sense of alienation and discrimination which members of the Muslim communities can suffer."

An alienated Islamic community not only provided more fertile ground for violent extremists to emerge, but discouraged Muslims from providing counter-terrorism authorities with vital information.

[But that is what the laws were meant to do, alienate the islamic community, now let's be honest because that's all they have done and all they will do. The laws are draconian and all should be repealed.]

[However] Mr Carnell ['playing the game'] has simply recommended the repeal of the vaguely worded offence of "associating" with a terrorism group, which carries jail terms of up to 10 years.

The offence can cover those who have an innocent relationship with suspected terrorists or groups, and Mr Carnell believes the offence transgresses human rights and interferes with "ordinary family, religious and legal communication".

[As does the whole of the Anti-terror laws transgresses human rights and interferes with "ordinary family, religious and legal communication".]

He also called for the process of proscribing a terrorist organisation to be taken out of the hands of the attorney-general.

"Action on the recommendations is needed," he said.

[Allegedly], the intervention by Mr Carnell comes as the Federal Government stalls on plans to amend the anti-terrorism laws, while lawyers and judges involved in terrorism trials continue to express disquiet about them.

Justice Anthony Whealy, who conducted the [sham] trial of Faheem Lodhi and is now presiding over the trial of nine Sydney men charged with terrorism offences, has been notably vocal.

In a paper in Judicial Review he said that the National Security Information Act "gives the appearance of having been drafted by persons who have little knowledge of the function and processes of a criminal trial".

Mr Carnell said this "trenchant criticism … surely points to it being ripe for review".

[And we say totally repealed.]

The act - which dictates what evidence can be presented in open court, including whether defence teams have access to it at all - has resulted in lengthy delays before terrorist suspects appear before a jury.

In the case of the nine Sydney men before Justice Whealy, it has been 2½ years since they were arrested, and it is expected to take at least another three months before a jury is empanelled.

Related:

Haneef's lawyer says inquiry is weak
The inquiry into Australian authorities' handling of the Mohamed Haneef case needs stronger powers to avoid becoming a "toothless tiger", the former terror suspect's lawyer says.

Hicks media gag order ends
As part of the deal, he was also banned from speaking to the media after his release in December 2007.

Terror trial halted over prison conditions
A Supreme Court judge has put a Melbourne terrorism trial on hold and ordered Corrections Victoria to change prison conditions of the 12 accused men

ASIO, police don't trust each other, report finds
A LACK of trust between the Australian Federal Police and ASIO has hindered co-operation between the anti-terrorism agencies, a report commissioned after the collapsed prosecution of the Sydney doctor Izhar ul-Haque has found.

Secret policemen's bill: $7.5m
Mr McClelland separately ruled out compensating or apologising to the Sydney medical student Izhar Ul-Haque, who a Supreme Court judge said had been kidnapped by ASIO officers. The conduct of ASIO in the case of Mr ul-Haque, who was cleared of terrorism charges, is being reviewed by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Ian Carnell.

Tough police powers outlive APEC
CONTROVERSIAL powers granted to NSW police during last year's APEC summit are likely to be made permanent - or at least available to police for any special event - under a proposal to be taken to state cabinet.

Faheem Lodhi - another non-terrorist jailed under Australia's 'anti-terror' laws?
Jack Thomas, a non-terrorist, has been jailed under Australia's anti-terror laws. Now Faheem Lodhi has been convicted under the terror laws on flimsy, circumstantial evidence. It is likely he is another non-terrorist jailed for political purposes under the terror laws.

Tobacco costs more than illicit drugs

THE social costs of tobacco, alcohol and illicit drugs have been rising faster than inflation and, at more than $56 billion a year, outstrip the Federal Government's health budget.

Even though smoking rates are falling, the toll from tobacco accounts for more than half of all drug costs to the community, according to a report the Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, is releasing today.

The three drug groups cause ill-health, accidents, premature death, crime and lost productivity with their cost easily exceeding the $45 billion the Federal Government spends on health.

Ms Roxon is expected to cite the huge costs identified in the government-commissioned report to promote the need for "cultural change" to counter unhealthy habits which trigger chronic disease.

Prepared by the Sydney academics Professors David Collins and Helen Lapsley, the report is the most comprehensive study on the social costs of tobacco, alcohol and illicit drugs in nearly a decade.

Based on the latest available data, covering 2004-05 it shows the real costs of tobacco are estimated to have jumped by 23.5 per cent to $31.5 billion in the six years to 2005.

The rise in the real costs of illicit drug use was less than half, at 11.3 per cent to $8.2 billion in the same period. Alcohol was estimated to generate $15.3 billion in social costs in 2005, but the growth in costs was not available because of statistical changes.

Although the number of smokers is falling, the delayed effects of past smoking means that costs have continued to rise.

At an Australian Institute of Health Policy Studies conference today Ms Roxon is expected to warn of the difficulties in bringing cultural change to habits like smoking and heavy drinking and to reorient health policy to focus more on prevention.

"This won't be simple, and it won't be quick. Cultural shifts are complex and difficult to achieve," she says.

The Government will soon announce a national preventive health taskforce whose priority targets will be obesity, tobacco and heavy drinking. The Government has already announced $50 million for three combat plans targeted at binge drinking.

What set the Rudd Government apart from its predecessors, she said, was the recognition that the rise of preventable chronic disease "also poses a front-line economic challenge".

The impact of poor health on workforce participation and productivity was something Australia could not afford at a time of skills shortages. Greater focus on prevention, not just in the health system but more broadly, would yield economic and other benefits.

The Government had commissioned Treasury to produce a report into the economic benefits of increased focus on illness prevention.

Future intergenerational reports would include an assessment of the impact of preventable chronic diseases and policies to combat them.

Yesterday Ms Roxon urged the pharmaceutical industry to engage "more fully" in the Government's health reform agenda.

She told a Medicines Australia meeting that both the recently appointed National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission and the proposed Preventive Health Taskforce would widely consult health and community groups. "I would encourage you to take full advantage of this consultation."

Related:

Parents of drunk children face fines
Nearly 1,700 children were treated in hospital for alcohol in the past year - some as young as 10.

Support for booze public education
A SURVEY of 1000 Australians found more than three-quarters of those questioned about attitudes to drinking said there was not enough public education about the dangers of alcohol, despite the Rudd Government's promise of a multimillion-dollar binge-drinking strategy.

Message on a bottle for binge drinkers
BOTTLES of alcoholic drinks could soon carry graphic pictures warning of the dangers of excessive alcohol consumption as part of the Federal Government's latest series of measures to cut down on under-age and binge drinking.

Preventing Violence - Preventing Crime - Preventing A Prison Experience - Preventing Youth Suicide

Preventing Violence - Preventing Crime - Preventing A Prison Experience - Preventing Youth Suicide [updated 20 May 2006]

4 February 2006

Lack of social skills in my family brought on smacking and violence as a means to solve problems. When I learned how wrong this was it saddened me to learn that my own parents lacked the social skills needed to use dialogue for solving problems and taught me how to use violence.

Classically conditioned that violence wins. Bad lesson.

When parents have a child that is not the time to tell them there are better ways to bring up their children rather than belittling them, putting them down, or belting them into submission. You see this often at the market place. Even when I see it in the street parents by that stage cannot be told easily and there are reasons for it. They inherently know better? Once a parent has had a child they simply cannot be told how to raise their child based on their own past family experience, they think they have all that experience when it was passed down from the family 'they trusted the most' which is the one that raised them.

Then when the marriage breaks down usually because of the high value and principal of 'something' like 'raising children', or 'financial difficulty', or even a number of crisis all together, then taking into account both parents were raised by 'separate families' and could vary in alternative ideas and ideals. Then if a 'personality clash' occurs between them, they have to seek the real answers and when they find out that simple skills could have been learned earlier, either before or after the 'problem' they're usually shocked at the loss.

Also learning that their parents may have lacked those skills to pass on! Being locked out of skills can lead people into not taking full responsibility for their actions, crime, problem or learning curve. They could end up in jail!

Parents and governments must take some responsibility.

In my case the skills most needed were, self-worth, conflict resolution, violence doesn't win, better communication, and compromise.

Take the case of the thief who stole short change and killed his victim. If the offender in this case knew how much his victim was worth then he would have valued his victim - at least with as much worth and more than the twenty or so dollars stolen - that he was subsequently killed for. So it's not just responsibility that offender's need they also need worth and they don't get that from the prison system or being put down as a child.

In communication children and parents would have learned to only use constructive feedback or pay compliments when addressing someone but no put downs and the reasons for it ensures more friends even when one makes a remark about someone just because they were bored and thinking it was a funny thing to do at the time, for no decent reason of course, but because of that bad remark 'jokingly' has now lost a friend. To learn how much one is worth therefore is an important lesson (social skill). Self worth, self esteem, self-expression, public speaking etc. Hard to come by in a family where parents lack social skills or in a prison.

And do I trust myself! I never asked myself that question until after the offending violence and in prison for seven years! I suffered from hives and could not concentrate as a child as much as other children could and because of the violence in the home as well as a drunkard stepfather I was always looking for someone to trust but not myself. You can therefore see how this can prevent one's insight into one's responsibility or offending behaviour that can lead to prison. You may have heard of the hole? In short it's not good to fall into holes because it's cold, wet, and uncomfortable. You need to step around the hole and to do that you need to take responsibility for falling into holes.

Potential victims do this as well....Sometimes, setting themselves up for a fall because they too don't know how to take responsibility for looking after themselves. Just like the offenders don't.

I could not compromise when the value and principal 'seemed too high'. No skills e.g. compromise, win-win, win-lose, lose-lose. I could have learned that when I was eight years of age, as well as the above stated social skills. Lose the battle and win the war! But I never once asked myself did I trust myself, not to get into trouble, because I was an at risk child who was always trying to find someone to trust in my immature family who lacked social skills. In a crisis situation when the value and principal are high and one's emotional level is high because of it, then one's thinking level is usually low. In that type of crisis with little social skills, a person who has been classically condition to use violence as a means to solve a problem can reach for it in order to solve the problem they don't want. But without that lesson one would not reach for violence as a means, so easily.

1) Not every parent has the social skills to pass on. In fact up to at least three generations of parents in Australia today taking into account indigenous Australians.

2) If parents don't have social skills and can't be sold on better ways to raise children until after they've had children then they have to get those skills before they do have children.

If parents have not got them they cannot pass those skills on leaving the child or children more vulnerable and the community more at risk. Where do you get social skills if you cannot get them at home? They have to get them from school there is no alternative. Social skills and academic skills balanced into the curricula. Then all children can get social skills equally even if their parents don't have them to pass on.

3) That's is why up to 5% of people go to jail or hospital or the morgue - expensive results because of the push to produce tax-payers, academics, who may even leave university before they have attained good communication and conflict resolution skills.

Especially for those who do not get further education like me leaving school at age 15.

4) This cure is for the potential victims as well you know, not just for the offenders. How not to become a potential victim is written in the social skills curriculum under a few sections like for instance; Provocation, leaving one self-vulnerable, etc.

The most serious crimes also occur because the victim lacked social skills.

5) Youth Suicide - [updated 20 May 2006]

Lack of worth and knowledge can lead to youth suicide where as many as 300 people a year die in Australia of suicide then lessons have surely not been learnt!

Therefore the above argument raised about raising children better and making sure that all parents have better social skills to pass on to their children will prevent more victims. This is necessary for their survival. It will also prevent people going to jail. The money spent on police, prisons, hospitals, injury, or even death is returned to the community for better education instead of being constantly drained into a dead end.

Who wants to become a victim unnecessarily? Who wants to lose a child unnecessarily? Who wants to live a short life unnecessarily? Who wants to go to jail? If victims use things like 'shifting gears' conflict resolution in a crisis there will be no doubt, less victims. If they have those conflict resolution skills that is?

This will save lots the money spent on prisons and the victim industry. Funding returned to the community and the social skills industry and reduces the inflation of building new prisons etc because those five per cent will make it. This will prevent crime and is a cure for domestic violence for the whole community to absorb.

A lot of people spend time on post release and that is necessary but I spent my time on crime prevention because then post release is not so necessary nor are prisons.

*THE PUNISHMENT IS THE CRIME*
*FOR A WORLD WITHOUT VIOLENCE*
WHERE DOES THAT COME FROM?

a) DALAI LAMA: "LOVE, PEACE AND KINDNESS YOU CAN'T BREAK IT."
b) FREDERICK NIETZSCHE: "LOVE YOUR ENEMY."
THERE IS ALSO FORGIVENESS BUT YOU DON'T GET THE COMPLETE PROTECTION UNLESS YOU ACCEPT BOTH OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS.
AND FOR THAT YOU MUST COME TO TERMS WITH
c) FORGIVENESS.

Thank you for your time.

Preventing Violence - Preventing Crime - Preventing A Prison Experience - Preventing Youth Suicide [updated 20 May 2006]