“Atheism is the state of disbelief or non-belief [1] in the existence of a deity or deities. [2] It is commonly defined as the positive denial of theism (ie. the assertion that deities do not exist), [3] or the deliberate rejection of theism (i.e., the refusal to believe in the existence of deities).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

“Theism is the belief in the existence of one or more divinities or deities.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism

I believe that an agreement can be reached between theists and atheists that will end their age-old conflict about the creation of everything, and allow them to proceed to another discussion or controversy.

All that is required is sanity.  I believe that there can be sane theists and sane atheists; and there can be delusional people who call themselves either theists or atheists.  I assume, for purposes of sane discussion, that there are no delusional people, either theists or atheists, here right now.

A workable (not absolute) criterion and procedure for differentiating sanity from insanity can be the distinguishing between reality and illusion.

The sane can accept that everything is.  Another way of stating this is that the sane can accept that what is, is.

The sane also recognize that what does not exist is not a part of what does exist.  This is a clear arithmetic statement, perhaps as basic as is humanly attainable, on which sane theists and sane atheists can agree.

The delusional will insist that something that does not exist is, or could be part of what exists.  The delusional will necessarily have to redefine existence as nonexistence; or reality as illusion.  But by definition, and pursuant to the rules sane people live by, these delusional redefinitions cannot be true.

If there does not exist a purple elephant, not even the proverbial one, then a purple elephant is not part of everything.  If a purple elephant is brought into existence, then it will be part of everything.

We, quite obviously, do not know what is included in everything.  We do not know, and perhaps cannot know, if even herds of purple elephants are included in everything that exists.  But we can know that what exists exists, and that it is everything that exists, or simply, everything.

Mathematics is (my dictionary says) a science that deals with the relationship and symbolism of numbers and magnitudes and that includes quantitative operations and the solution of quantitative problems.

Math is and works the same for theists and atheists.  These two groups of people can both use the same sets of numbers and magnitudes and both do the same mathematical operations with the same results. Theists and atheists may at times apply math to different problems, but the math can be the same.

What constitutes everything is arrived at by the simplest of mathematical operations, addition.  Everything consists of its bits or components added up.  It might be that multiplication or quanta, for example, are real, so they can be added in.

It is true that an imaginary everything can be calculated in exactly the same way, by addition of its parts, and, being imaginary, can be of any imaginary magnitude.  But it is not necessary to consider imaginary everythings, or imaginary anythings, in order to consider the arithmetical calculation of the real everything.

It is also not necessary in considering the calculation of the total of everything to determine or answer the question of whether the physical world is an illusion, or whether a part or aspect of the world is illusion.  Whatever is illusory simply is not part of what is real, and not part of what adds up to everything.  This is true without knowing or having to know what if anything is illusory and what if anything is real.

So sane theists and sane atheists can agree that everything exists; or, again, said another way, that what exists constitutes everything [that exists].

Sane theists and sane atheists can also agree that everything that exists came from something or somewhere.  Without considering the nature or qualities of what or where everything comes from, that is, the nature or qualities of what caused everything, it is possible to accept and know that it was caused by something. If everything has always been here, then it is causing itself and always caused itself. But again, putting aside any discussion of the cause’s nature, it can be seen that whatever is real has a cause.

The nature of what caused everything that exists could be a big bang, it could be a spark in mud, it could be an error, it could be a non-error, it could be conscious, it could be unconscious, it could be a one-shot deal, it could be a continuing process, it could be everything itself.  It is not necessary to know what caused everything to know that everything was caused.

It could be that today’s oak tree is caused by an acorn of two hundred years ago, or by that acorn’s cause, which could have been another tree and another acorn two hundred years earlier; or by the acorn plus all the sun, soil and water over the hundreds or thousands or millions or billions of years.  It is not necessary to know what caused the oak tree to know that it was caused; if the oak tree exists.

It is not necessary to know if identical or different factors comprise the cause or causes that brought into effect two different parts of everything to know that the two parts were caused.  The oak tree has, for example, its seed, sun, soil and water, if those things comprise its cause; and the clam has its parents, its seed, its sun, its soil and its water too that cause it to be part of everything.

It is not necessary to know if the cause for anything that exists knew what it was doing in causing that thing in order to know that there was a cause.  Even if whatever was caused was caused by quote accident it still had a cause.

Just as everything that exists at this moment can be determined by the simple arithmetic operation of addition of its parts, so too can everything that caused everything that exists be determined by adding up that cause’s parts.

Just as it is not necessary to know what all the parts of everything are, and what the nature of all of the parts is, to be able to know that they add up to everything, it is not necessary to know what all the parts are of what caused everything, and what the nature of all the parts that caused everything is, to be able to know that they add up to everything’s cause.

That sum or totality of whatever, in the beginning or at any time, caused that which exists is properly called “God.”  The theists have almost owned the word, and the atheists, to my knowledge, have oddly objected to using the word, but have never really had another word for it. Fitting “that sum of whatever, in the beginning or at any time, caused what exists” into all the places a person could say “God” is so cumbersome and goofy that the atheists perhaps avoid even getting near those places at all.

God, as the cause or Creator of all that exists, without considering God’s nature or qualities, is what sane theists and sane atheists can agree upon. They can talk together about oak trees coming from acorns, thoughts being created by minds, or man causing pollution, overpopulation or his own destruction.  And now sane theists and atheists can talk about God, those causes added together that resulted in whatever is real.

Whether that cause or Creator created everything in Love, or is a God of Love, or an all-knowing God, or a just God, or is in fact Everything Itself Anyway, does not have to be considered to know that the sum of all causes caused all that is.

God could be a force, an “accident,” a wave, a particle, a static, an evolution or a Big Bang, but these natures or qualities of God do not have to be considered to know that God, the sum of all causes, caused all that is.

It is true that knowing that God caused or created everything might very well cause a search for God’s nature and qualities, and even God’s intention, reason and wisdom.  Very possibly, some people will be led to a belief that God is omniscient, omnipresent or all-loving; and some people may be led to a belief that God is capricious, mechanistic or even hateful.  Some people may be led to the belief that God caused everything and then left the building.  These beliefs might influence people’s lives, but it is not necessary to know if any of these beliefs about God’s nature or actions are right or wrong to know that God caused or created everything.

_____

This proof is sound biblically, conforming to the words and thought contained in John 1:3 (KJV) “All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.”

A usual response from someone who takes offense at this simple proof is to try to project a straw believer’s qualities for God onto the basic identity of God, which is given here deliberately without qualities.  It will be argued that it is improper to use the word “God” without considering God’s nature and qualities beyond God’s being “the sum of all causes for everything.”

Either there is a cause for what exists or there is not. If there is a single cause, the theist says, the name for it is “God.”  If causation has component parts over time that added together form the sum of all causes, the theist says that the name for that sum is “God.” No nature or quality of any part of that cause or sum of those causes is considered in calling it “God.”

In order to prove that the cause for everything could not be God; that is, that the cause for everything could not be the cause for everything, a person must start by proving that there could be no cause for anything.  Since we are so overwhelmingly surrounded by everything that exists, and form ourselves a part of what exists, such a “proof” can only be “accomplished” by resorting to delusion or insanity, and pronouncing everything to be nothing, reality to be illusion.

There is no need whatsoever to sacrifice our God-given, or God-caused, minds and to opt for delusion.  The simplest conclusion happens to be the sane one. Everything exists. God did it.

Nathalie Atkinson wrote in a May 1 article on magazine cover design, “Cover pages of the ages:” http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=483708

“Singling out a feature on persecuted former Scientologist Gerry Armstrong, the current issue of Montreal-based magazine Maisonneuve has a grainy cover image of a young man resembling Armstrong, kneeling in prayer and illuminated from above by an unidentified flying object. It takes a page from Lois and is witty, clever and austere in its simplicity. I was waiting in the express lane and, dear reader, I bought it.”

I’m the persecuted ex-Scientologist in writer Bruce Livesey’s Maisonneuve story, but the guy kneeling in prayer on the cover resembles, or is supposed to resemble, Tom Cruise. Miss Atkinson’s comment almost even influenced the artist Payallin, who blogged: “Ok, the person on the cover is supposed to look like Tom Cruise but if it looks like Gerry Armstrong that works too.”

Tom’s resembling me has certainly been good for his career, although I’ve never exploited it, until now. There are clear differences, however, and I’ve uploaded as evidence a photo just taken of me in prayer in my office in Chilliwack.

[My anonymous friends should get a lol or two from this]

Notice that praying man Tom has his eyes wide open, as if it’s because he just knows, whereas for all I know I might not even know if I was off somewhere in samadhi.

Hello, my name is Harland Giesbrecht, and here is a little bit about myself:

I’m a musician and I’ve been playing professionally since the age of 10 when I started in my dad’s band.

I’m also a songwriter, producer and recording engineer. I’m currently teaching at a recording school and very much enjoying it. Music has been my passion as long as I remember. I corresponded for some time with L. Ron Hubbard and sent him some of my music and poetry, and his letters in response to these are some of my most treasured possessions.

I live in Vancouver, BC and go to the Church of Scientology there. I have also been many times to Advanced Organizations in Los Angeles and Florida for services.

http://scientologist.myhomepage.org/harlandgiesbrecht/myself.htm

Here’s an image that pretty well confirms that Giesbrecht’s the cult’s black PR artist in Vancouver: http://www.columbia-academy.com/images/harland_giesbrecht_tn.jpg

I tried to engage him in conversation but he was very rude, and dramatized pretended ignorance, which is a universal Scientologist trait when interacting with wogs the Scientologists evaluate as critical of their cult’s abuses and criminality, and therefore SPs.

At one point, and without provocation, he pushed me, so he has the potential for violence that folks at future Vancouver protests should be aware of. I told him that he would be very wise to not push people or even put his hands on them because it constituted physical assault, and he asked if I was threatening him. I told him that no, I was warning him.

Since Giesbrecht claims to have been many times to the “Advanced Organizations” in Los Angeles and Florida for services, he’s probably “OT,” which explains his aggression, his willingness to black PR the good people attempting to reform his cult, and his willful OT-level pretended knuckleheadedness.

I took some photos of him to document his participation in Scientology’s world wide campaign to black PR the anonymous people protesting its fraud, human rights abuses and other crimes. I stated my view of this campaign in a letter to cult head David Miscavige that I handed out at the March 15 protest:

I believe that your current handling and nano-management of the Anonymous phenomenon is incitement to violence. It is sociopathically sponsible of you to not deal with your organization’s unconscionable policies, practices and activities that provide anyone, Anonymous or Non, with ample reason to oppose you and your organization. It is moreover wickedly irresponsible that your treatment and handling of people’s legitimate criticisms of Scientology, and your response to legitimate, orderly protests of your orgs, is to label the people criminals and terrorists and blame them for a manufactured list of crimes and threats. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/6

Giesbrecht handed out most of his black PR flyers in front of the Waves Coffee Shop at the corner of Richards and Hastings a block west of the org. This was where a couple of the protesters had this very interesting conversation with him:

http://forums.enturbulation.org/129-canada/vancouver-british-columbia-18404/2/

Seated behind Giesbrecht and taking photos is the guy who tailed a couple of my friends and me at the April 12 protest. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/171

He called me by name, and when I asked him his name he said, “Pissoff.” I’m not sure of the spelling. It might be “Pissauf” or something else, but it sounded like “Pissoff,” and I’m not sure if that’s his surname or his given name.

Giesbrecht wouldn’t give the other protesters or me a copy of the flyers in which his cult was black PRing the anonymous people, but handed them out to every passerby who would take them. And the passersby happily passed them on to us.

Dear Mr. Cruise:

As the putative second in command of the Scientology religion or organization, and as ecclesiastical head David Miscavige’s best friend, or vice versa, you are very aware of who I am. You are also aware of the Scientology v. Gerry Armstrong contract and injunction, and you are aware of the actions to enforce them over the past many years.

You cannot but know that you have been a beneficiary in the contract and injunction since the first time you volunteered years ago to do anything for any Scientology or Scientology affiliated church, organization or entity. According to the Morton biography, your volunteerism starts in the late 1980’s, not long after Mr. Miscavige mocked up the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and made volunteers beneficiaries.

If Scientologists aren’t being forced to do whatever they do in Scientology, as opposed, for example, to Scientologist RPF assignees who are forced to do the RPF, then the unforced Scientologists are volunteers. If the volunteers get paid, they become another beneficiary category, for example “employees.” The Miscavige regimers, who concocted the contract and injunction, don’t always immediately inform volunteers that they have become beneficiaries, because the purpose of these documents or fatwas is so blatantly evil.

The purpose, as I keep pointing out, without rational argument or disagreement from any beneficiaries, is the suppression and destruction of basic human rights. Very probably the regimers didn’t tell you, when you began doing whatever you’ve done voluntarily in Scientology, that you had also been made such a beneficiary to such evil.

You are now, of course, a representative and a de facto agent, which are two other beneficiary categories. “Ambassador” is not a specific Scientology v. Armstrong beneficiary category, but is included in the more embracive beneficiary category of “representative,” even within the OT Ambassadors’ definition for yourselves. Your wife Katie Holmes should be told that she is a beneficiary.

Last week, I wrote a letter to all the beneficiaries requesting that you all remove yourself as beneficiaries in the contract and injunction and the enforcement efforts. I have even provided a Beneficiary Removal Form to facilitate the beneficiary removal process. The purpose of this letter is to ask you to remove yourself as a beneficiary.

I have also written today to Mr. Miscavige as beneficiary head to urge him to come to his senses and stop contracting all the beneficiaries, you included, to the global suppression and destruction of basic human rights. As I mentioned, he has tried to prevent many beneficiaries from finding out they’re beneficiaries. I’m sure you would agree that he would never be so uncompassionate, however, that he would stop you, especially since you’ve become his best friend, or vice versa, and his number two in Scientology, from finding out you’re a beneficiary.

Because of your intimate relationship with Mr. Miscavige, and because of your statements I know of that have been made public, I can only conclude that you are a beneficiary at cause. You causatively seek the benefits being a beneficiary confers on you, which are specifically the suppression and destruction of my basic human rights specifically, and potentially everyone’s human rights. You are not a spectator, and have even asserted that you had cancelled spectatorism in your area.

Because the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and enforcement efforts bind all the beneficiaries to deprive their victims of their human rights in violation of US civil rights criminal statutes and international human rights charters, the beneficiaries, including you, comprise a criminal conspiracy. Because you are aware you are a beneficiary, and causatively support and seek the suppression and destruction of human rights, I conclude you are a criminal at cause, which is the state of OT.

Even though Mr. Miscavige, you, certainly all your fellow OTs in the world, and your fellow Miscavige regimers, are at cause beneficiaries, your individual and joint intention, program and actions, to enforce the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and obtain those benefits, are total failures. These documents’ purpose of suppressing and destroying human rights is not just evil but also utterly miscarried and bootless. You do not even get the benefit that being a suppressor and destroyer of human rights often gains such suppressors and destroyers, the suppression and destruction of human rights. Thank God and thank everyone you fail to suppress or destroy that this is so.

You get to be known as a rich guy dramatizing the global and fascistic evil purpose of suppressing and destroying human rights, and failing. And it’s your intended victims, right now, here, in present time, who bring your intention, which is every beneficiary’s intention, into view and public consciousness. You are at the effect of me and every person on earth who would act in concert with me by not being suppressed or destroyed by you.

If you removed yourself as beneficiary, you really could cause something, because other beneficiaries, even celebrity Scientologist beneficiaries, could follow your example and remove themselves as beneficiaries. When all the beneficiaries remove themselves, Scientology’s evil purpose will disappear, or be erased. And those former at-cause suppressors and destroyers of human rights will cause the extension and creation of human rights.

I’m not sure how best to get a letter to you, so I’ll make this an open letter and disseminate it as broadly as reasonable to make sure you get it.

Yours knowingly,

Gerry Armstrong
#2-46298 Yale Road
Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 2P6
Canada
604-703-1373

David Miscavige
Religious Technology Center
1710 Ivar Avenue, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90028 U.S.A.

Also by E-mail

Dear Mr. Miscavige:

As you know, a week ago I wrote, webbed and posted a letter to the beneficiaries in the Scientology v. Gerry Armstrong contract and injunction.

I mentioned in the letter that it was you and your regimers, as opposed to the majority of individual beneficiaries, who concocted the contract and the injunction and made all beneficiaries beneficiaries. I also said that you have prevented a number of beneficiaries certainly from finding out they’re beneficiaries.

You clearly do know that you yourself are a beneficiary and that all of the beneficiaries are beneficiaries. You also know the contract’s and the injunction’s purpose, and you know how evil that purpose is.

You want and seek to stop people from discovering the truth, of course, because the contract’s and injunction’s purpose is the global and wholesale suppression and destruction of basic human rights. You are brazen beyond bastards, but have not yet acquired enough power to openly proclaim what your real evil purpose is.

The Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and the record of what you have done, and had your fellow beneficiaries do, to enforce these unconscionable fatwas expose your covert and cloaked, but nevertheless cult-wide, command intention. The words are written down and have been spread beyond any possibility of silencing, first by copiers and now by the Internet. You and your co-beneficiaries are all exposed, ethically and legally.

People around the world haven’t got it yet, because you’ve been somehow successful in preventing virtually everyone from getting it. You get it, because you could not possibly have squandered so much, worked so many years, and continue to risk so much, to stop all the wogs, as well as the beneficiaries, from getting it. Characteristic of criminals, you are trying to stop people from getting what you’ve got, from discovering what you’re source of.

Your regimers get it, because many of them are your attorneys or intelligence ops. Having got it, they dread the day when my attorney, or a US attorney, who’ve got it, gets the willful, or even some unwillful, beneficiaries in a deposition or on the stand. There is no way for you and all the beneficiaries on the planet to suppress or destroy the record. You and your regimers therefore have a terrible motivator to obliterate me. I’m writing as well then to try to get you, and your regimers, and all the beneficiaries, to change your motivators. Your individual and joint evil purposes of suppressing, destroying and obliterating good people can end when you remove yourselves as beneficiaries. These ev purps, moreover, cannot end for any beneficiaries unless you remove yourselves.

While I’m at it, I’ll again ask you to return the manuscript, art work, other documents and the briefcase you had stolen from my car. You could actually greatly alleviate your intention to suppress, destroy and obliterate me by returning all the things you’ve stolen from me. You of course have never wanted to alleviate your evil intentions toward me, so you have willfully kept my property all these years.

When exactly wogs world wide will get Scientology v. Armstrong is truly on God’s timetable, and is out of my hands. Some of it is still in your hands, however, because you can stop stopping everyone from getting anything at any time. You could even confess and announce and renounce what you’ve gotten. As I’ve said so many times before, however, I cannot expect you to do what is decent, in the same way that I would expect conscienceful people to do what’s decent, because you’re a sociopath. I also cannot expect any other beneficiaries to do what is decent as long as they are under your domination.

Nevertheless, it still makes sense to ask all the beneficiaries I can contact to remove themselves as beneficiaries. There is evidence that God has softened very hard hearts, even ones with OT obduracy. And I know there must be a remnant of benevolent and brave beneficiaries out there, and brainy enough to understand their situation and condition.

A number of wogs have a fairly good sense of the facts, in fact the abundance of facts, but still haven’t gotten Scientology v. Armstrong the way you get it. They haven’t spent all the years as you have, of course, conspiring to concoct and enforce the contract and injunction. You know these documents and the Scientology v. Armstrong war are key to the whole world getting your organization’s nature, doctrines, duplicity and threat. The case and the war also bring into focus your own individual and personal nature, doctrines, duplicity and threat, because you have run the litigation and the extra-litigation programs involving all beneficiaries over the last twenty-two years.

It’s impossible that the world will become aware that all your lies are true. That’s in fact why Scientology can never work – its lies, with every Scientologist postulator postulating together, will never be true. It is, however, possible that the world will become aware that all your lies are lies. It is impossible as well for you and all your fellow beneficiaries to suppress and destroy my record, but it is very possible that the world will become aware of your command intention to do so.

Now is the time for all beneficiaries, you included, to stop being beneficiaries of suppression and destruction, and to remove yourselves. Here’s a Beneficiary Removal Form to facilitate your removal.

Yours judiciously,

Gerry Armstrong
#2-46298 Yale Road
Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 2P6
Canada
604-703-1373

As possible, I am writing each of you individually and personally, in addition to writing the Scientology and affiliated churches, organizations and entities, because you are all beneficiaries in the Scientology v. Gerry Armstrong contract and injunction.

You are also all responsible for the past and continuing judicial and extrajudicial efforts to enforce this contract and injunction against me and against others for your personal and joint benefit. The beneficiaries are also specifically identified at http://inconcert.xenu.ca/beneficiaries.html

Some of you might not have been aware that you are beneficiaries. Scientology head David Miscavige and his regimers, who concocted the contract and the injunction and made you all beneficiaries, have doubtlessly worked to stop a great number of you from finding out that you are such beneficiaries.

Regardless of whether or not you know you are beneficiaries, however, being beneficiaries in the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction makes you human rights suppressors and destroyers. It is what your fees and your labors buy.

All Scientology and affiliated churches, organizations and entities are also, by the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction, human rights suppressors and destroyers.

I am writing to ask you to formally remove yourselves as beneficiaries in the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction, and to formally remove your support from the campaign to use the contract and injunction or enforce them for anyone’s benefit.

The sole, inarguable purpose of the contractual clauses that you beneficiaries seek to enforce against me, and your sole purpose as beneficiaries for enforcing these clauses, is the suppression and destruction of my human rights. The sole, inarguable and unlawful purpose of the injunction is the suppression and destruction of human rights, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, self defense, freedom from slavery, and most egregiously freedom of religion.

As the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and the unrelenting enforcement efforts over twenty-one years demonstrate, Scientology’s claims of defending and promoting human rights are willful lies. The contract and injunction demonstrate that the Scientology “Creed” is a litany of lies. You are all luring people into the Scientology religion and organization to become, whether you are aware of it or not, beneficiaries in the Scientology v. Armstrong war and suppressors and destroyers of human rights.

Please consider that your contractual, judicial and extrajudicial suppression and destruction of basic human rights in and with Scientology v. Armstrong includes not only my rights, but the rights of everyone who but acts in concert with me. Since everyone can in some way act in concert with me, and since I ask that they do and I make it so easy to do, you, as beneficiaries, are contracted to suppress and destroy the human rights of potentially everyone on earth.

It should be clear to the Scientologist beneficiaries that the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction, and the effort you support to suppress and destroy others’ human rights, also suppress and destroy your individual and joint human rights. You are paying and working to make it lawful, and lawfully enforceable by the secular judicial system, to prevent anyone from speaking his conscience and expressing his religious beliefs about your individual and joint religion, Scientology.

Please discuss the beneficiary issue with your fellow beneficiaries, or with people you trust who are not beneficiaries. Please seriously consider your participation as a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and in the judicial and extrajudicial efforts to enforce them. Please understand that, unless you are an attorney or agent who benefited monetarily from the creation and enforcement of the contract and injunction, the sole benefit being a beneficiary bestows on you is the suppression and destruction of basic human rights.

If you are a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction and you want to end your support for the suppression and destruction of human rights by being removed as a beneficiary please complete the Beneficiary Removal Form.

Gerry Armstrong
#2-46298 Yale Road
Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 2P6
Canada
604-703-1373
gerry@gerryarmstrong.org

David J. Schindler, Esq.
Latham & Watkins LLP
633 West Fifth Street, Suite 4000
Los Angeles CA 90071-2007

By E-mail: david.schindler[at]lw.com

Dear Mr. Schindler:

It has come to my attention that you are an attorney for one or more Scientology churches or organizations. Therefore you are a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Gerry Armstrong contract and injunction and my letter of today to all beneficiaries applies to you.

Any other attorneys in your firm that are legal counsel to any Scientology or affiliated church, organization or entity are also beneficiaries.

For your convenience and security, my letter to all beneficiaries also follows. The letter on my web site contains links to the underlying legal documents. If you or any other attorney wish to be removed as a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Armstrong contract and injunction I’ve created a Beneficiary Removal Form.

Sincerely,

Gerry Armstrong
#2-46298 Yale Road
Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 2P6
Canada
604-703-1373
gerry@gerryarmstrong.org