Archives for category: Uncategorized

The high and lofty drugmaker of Merck pharmaceuticals moralized about President Trump’s shortcomings,……of which there appear to be an overflow.

But for this man to open his mouth against any other human being, no matter how low they appear, is the ultimate hypocrisy.

I came at this subject on my own, when I first realized that BC was using public money, and public schools to shoot Gardasil (3 shots) into our precious little NINE YEAR OLD GIRLS, with the outrageous claim that injecting chemicals now would (POSSIBLY) save the little kid from cervical cancer brought on by unsafe sex.

Oh Mr. Frazier, you may very well die rich, but I believe you will die a pauper in spirit.

There is absolutely no way that ‘science‘ can tell you loving parents what the foreign chemicals injected into your little children will do to them in their future.  Sure, maybe only a tiny percent have an immediate adverse reaction, but you are being pressured to allow your child to be a sacrificial offering on the alter of obscene profits for Mr. Frazier, and his ilk, and the dominant mantra of sex, anywhere, everywhere, with anyone, anytime.  No restraints, no warnings, no morals.    Nothing high or lofty to aim for, and definitely no reference to the guidebook of our Creator, sustainer and judge.

Just do it!  Now give us your young and your pure, and your helpless because we need an endless supply of their bodies to feed our avarice.

Possible effects of their minds and bodies down the road?  Hah.  Just try to prove the link, if you can afford a lawyer to match our lawyers in court.   

There are many concerns expressed about the safety of injecting Gardasil into little children.  This is just one of them.    –   Gerda

Gardasil – Dodgy Science – Follow the money trail

By Jenese James

The NZ Family Planning Association received $614,000 from Merck Sharp & Dohmen in 2008 …. $650,795 was given in 2009, an overall increase of 600% since they started promoting the HPV vaccine Gardasil.

Part II

When the HPV vaccination first came on the New Zealand market its $450 price tag for a series of three vaccinations was somewhat off putting. Sales were slow; this was the case all over the world. One of the ways to boost revenue for slow drug sales is to lobby the government into buying them. The FPA actively lobbied for New Zealand to buy into the trend; a guaranteed income for drug sales and Merck rewarded them well. Nothing wrong with that you say – perhaps …but….

In the face of mounting evidence and a rising tide of dead and injured girls, would this amount of funding negate speaking against Gardasil and the MoH vaccination program? 1

FPA Financial records –  2008 an 2009 scroll to end of report

Doctors offices all round the country are sending out letters to the target group of girls: But It’s not just one letter it’s three or in some cases four.

There seems to be a good deal of pressure being put on the parents of young girls and women to have the HPV vaccination by Doctors offices and schools. Could it be because the MoH is paying good money to get as much of the target demographic as possible: An entire generation of girls.

The Manawatu Standard under the heading – Schools hand girls’ info to health board – By JANINE RANKIN reported that the privacy of hundreds of girls are being breached by schools giving pupils personal contact details to District Health Boards – why? – Could it be there’s a ca$h incentive.

In early 2009 Ian Wishart, in a piece entitled Schools Bribed to market Vaccinesreported that…

“A letter sent by the Ministry of Education to school principals this week states that “To recognize the role that schools play in the program, the Ministry of Health will provide a one-off support payment to participating schools…the Ministry of Education will assist in the funding transfer to schools, by placing the Ministry of Health funds in participating schools’ accounts in April 2009, with the identifier, ‘HPV Payment’.”…..he goes on to say ….that …..“The letter, published first on a major blog site, discloses a base payment of between $200 and $300 per school depending on whether they have Year 8 classes, plus an additional $2.50 per female student eligible to receive the vaccine (years 8 to 13).
Some larger high schools could receive cash payments totaling several thousand dollars if they allow schools to be used to market and administer the vaccine to children.”

How neutral are these schools and district health boards in the face of the disturbing deaths and illness now replicating around New Zealand?

Will they withdraw their support?  We all know how underfunded schools are.

Who will speak out for the girls that have died and those now suffering debilitating adverse affects?

Remember all these girls and their parents were PRO vaccination.

We know whose speaking out for the Vaccine

We know it won’t be the main stream media which is the reason why so many citizen media sites and blogs have grown up over the years and why so many documentary films have been made and now doing the rounds in homes, bars, cafes, and other places, relying only on word of mouth.

Mainstream news controls what you see and hear; and by consequence the way you think and the things you believe or buy into.

As witnessed by ‘ What TV One news did NOT tell you” 

This Mainstream News channel, instead of warning parents of the dangers emerging overseas they deliberately gave parents a false sense of security by reiterating the standard ‘it’s ok ‘ response echoing around the world from both big Business and government health officials. They gave no warning that anything was amiss despite seeing the same information that I did and despite the rising tide of concern growing overseas at that time. They continue to do so.


Lets look at Reuters a ‘highly’ respected News agency that feeds the worlds dailies. It reported that few serious side effects were observed during trials conducted by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) officials to promote Merck’s HPV vaccine, Gardasil. That news went all over the world even as young girls where dying and their health was ebbing away – and it is still happening right now.

Only a little digging, discovers that Thomas H. Glocer, the media mogul CEO of Reuters News Service is also director of Merck & Co Inc . He is also partnered with David Rockefeller in the worlds leading biotechnology trust called “Partnership for New York City (PFNYC). ” Members of this trust advance the worlds largest companies creating global drug markets.” 

The hype coming out of the US via its news media is just that – hype – but its highly influential hype.

“Another instance of direct conflict of interest and vested interest comes from the influential US News & World Report, where vaccine industrialist and media mogul, Mortimer Zuckerman, Editor-in-Chief uses his publication to propagate the safety of the HPV vaccination. Mortimer Zuckerman advances vaccine research and development at the Mortimer B. Zuckerman Research Center (MBZRC) in association with the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Rockefeller University. The US News & World Report editor is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, largely directed by his partner, the honorary PNYC founder, David Rockefeller.”

And what are we to make of Mercks latest acquisition

Former CDC director Gerberding to lead Merck Vaccines

Who owns the media is an interesting story but not one that is within the scope of this commentary – however here is a snippet

“Who Owns The Media in NZ” by Professor Bill Rosenberg

“In 1993, the London-based magazine “Index on Censorship” commented on the news media in Australia that Australians were “losing some of their liberty to dissent at a time when the country is undergoing profound changes and the need to ventilate dissent is critical. The causes of the weakening of dissent are not for the most part, the imposition of legal limits. Rather the chief cause is a potent increase in the concentration of media control in a few hands.” Saying the Australian media was being “colonised by new global powers”, it named Rupert Murdochs News Corporation and Conrad Black as dominating the Australian press. Kerry Packer as dominating magazines and television and Packer and Murdoch as about to dominate pay television. If the concentration of control in Australia in 1993 was leading to a loss of liberty to dissent at a critical time in Australia, the loss is even more likely in New Zealand today.”….


“There is mounting evidence that journalists are experiencing unacceptable pressure to change what they write. A 2007 survey of 514 New Zealand journalists reported in the Pacific Journalism Review 568 found that more than half of those that answered this question [on commercial pressures and media freedom] (55%, n=213) agreed that newsrooms had been pressured to do a story because it related to an advertiser, owner, or sponsor”

Which is why you would never have heard the information that follows in the Mainstream media. Thus your ‘informed’ choice is limited to what Main stream media tells you unless you take the time and do your own research.

Prestigious and trusted peer reviewed medical journals have also been affected

Vaccine Studies: Under the Influence of big Pharma

This report reveals ….“In Conclusion Publication in prestigious journals is associated with partial or total industry funding, and this association is not explained by study quality or size.”

Meaning it’s not the quality of the science or even the accuracy of the science – that falls by the way side – it’s all about the MONEY!!

Further in the article the writer comments ……“It is time for medical journals to disclose all financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. It is time for studies questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines to receive a fair hearing. In scientific journals rather than editors confining themselves to primarily publishing studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry maintaining that every vaccine is totally safe, effective and necessary……..Kudos to the British Medical Journal for having the integrity to publish Jefferson’s comprehensive analysis of pharmaceutical money influence on vaccine studies published in the medical literature.”

The Truth is that as far back as 2001 it was known that HPV alone DID NOT cause cancer. This is NOT what the hype says about Gardasil – they HYPE says that it does which is why you MUST get this vaccine

The minuets from the FDA Biological Products Advisory Committee, 28th November 2001, clearly lay it out when Dr Elizabeth R. Unger stated…

“So it is believed that infection alone is insufficient to cause cancer, and additional factors are required for neoplasia.” (Means literally new growth, usually refers to abnormal new growth and thus means the same as tumor, which may be benign or malignant.)

Report available here (p. 21)

This is at the core of Merck$ Billion dollar $cam and because it is so important I will quote verbatim a news letter by Cancer Monthly dated December 10th 2007.

Gardasil – the Cervical Cancer Vaccine – FDA Approval Not Based On Actual Cancer Prevention

“The FDA-approved cervical cancer vaccine “Gardasil,” has been debated for a number of reasons including its cost of $360 (plus the cost of doctors visits to get the shots) and the fact that it is approved for young girls and the moral and sexual implications associated with this. Up until recently however, no one challenged the vaccine on the grounds of its presumed safety and efficacy. The fact that it is FDA approved was considered prima facie evidence that the vaccine is both safe and effective.
We must remember however, that the FDA approved Gardasil is an agency with countless conflicts of interest that has approved drugs and vaccines that were later found to be dangerous or deadly such as Vioxx and RotaShield.”

* Note – both these cases reveal the same thing happening again with Gardasil

“When Cancer Monthly began looking at the research that enabled this “cervical cancer vaccine” to receive FDA approval we were astounded to find that this approval was not based on the vaccine’s actual prevention of cervical cancer. Instead a surrogate was used – precancerous lesions. We were pleased to see a recent article in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) that echoed these same issues – “Questions on Efficacy Cloud a Cancer Vaccine” April 16, 2007; Page A1. The WSJ stated, “The Food and Drug Administration didn’t ask its panel of experts advising on Gardasil to rule on whether the vaccine specifically prevented the cancer itself.”

Cancer Not Measured

“How effective is Gardasil in decreasing the incidence of cervical cancer? 100%? 50%? No one really knows because this question has not yet been answered. 

As of today, the Gardasil vaccine has never been proven to decrease the actual incidence of cervical cancer. In the studies that led to the vaccine’s approval, the incidence of cervical cancer was not measured. Instead CIN (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia) 2/3 and AIS (adenocarcinoma in situ) were used as the surrogate markers for prevention of cervical cancer because according to the vaccine’s insert “CIN 2/3 and AIS are the immediate and necessary precursors of squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cervix, respectively.” While this is true it is also true that CIN 2/3 and AIS usually do not lead to cancer. For example, according to published data, CIN2 only leads to invasive carcinoma 5% of the time and CIN3 only leads to invasive carcinoma 12% of the time.

HPV Alone Insufficient to Cause Cancer
In addition, Gardasil is targeted against Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) (types 6, 11, 16, and 18). However, during discussions at the FDA it was admitted that HPV alone is insufficient to cause cancer. Dr. Elizabeth Unger of the Centers for Disease Control stated, “So it is believed that infection alone is insufficient to cause cancer, and additional factors are required for neoplasia. 

There are certainly lots of questions about HPV infection

This point is echoed in the medical text book Cancer: Principles & Practice of Oncology whose editors include Dr. Vincent DeVita, Jr. who was President of the National Cancer Institute and Dr. Steven Rosenberg, Chief of Surgery at the National Cancer Institute. According to this text,
“HPV infection is not sufficient for cervical carcinogenesis.

HPV the Correct Target?

This is of course quite rational. If HPV alone caused cervical cancer then the number of cases in the U.S. would be the same as the number of women with HPV infections. Since only a relatively small percentage of HPV infected women get cervical cancer this raises the question whether a vaccine against HPV is the right target at all? 

In fact, according to the text Cancer: Principles & Practice of Oncology, “In most studies, HPV status was not a strong independent prognosticator of outcome in cervical cancer patients; however there appears to be a trend for HPV-negative tumors to do worse …those tumors containing HPV DNA tend to be of an early stage and low grade.” This suggests that if the goal is to reduce deaths from cervical cancer the target should not be HPV at all because the tumors without HPV actually “do worse.”

Concern at the FDA

Obviously a vaccine designed to prevent cervical cancer should have measured cervical cancer during testing, but it did not. 

During meetings at the FDA, Dr. Karen Goldenthal of the FDA discussed this very point. She said, “Now, here is some advantages of cervical cancer as an endpoint. Clearly the major concern is cervical cancer. This would be viewed as very, very definitive data, and it may be easier to identify any unanticipated vaccine associated problems. “Nonetheless, the FDA did not require that the actual number of cervical cancers be measured.” 

As a result we now have an FDA approved “cervical cancer vaccine” that is yet unproven to reduce or prevent cervical cancer.

Leap of Faith

As quoted in the Wall Street Journal article, Scott Emerson, a professor of biostatistics at the University of Washington who sat on the FDA advisory committee, says he’s not persuaded the vaccine is worth the billions of dollars likely to be spent on it in coming years.   “I do believe that Gardasil protects against HPV 16 and 18, but the effect it will have on cervical-cancer rates in this country is another question entirely…There is a leap of faith involved,” Dr. Emerson said.”     END

*See end notes in article proper. 

Professor Scott Emerson is not the only one thinking and saying such a thing. The vaccines chief researcher no less has said similar and more

Dr. Diane Harper. The recipient of a Masters Degree in Public Health, is a Professor and Vice-Chair of Research at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, specializing in Community and Family Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bioinformatics and Personalized Medicine.

Dr Harper is an international expert on HPV, which was why she became the lead researcher in the Gardasil clinical trails. She has a bit more intimate relationship with the vaccine than many other commentators.   Dr Harper has been a consistent voice speaking out about its dangers and shortcomings including an interview on NZ National Radio when Gardasil was about to be released here. There are numerous articles on what she has said, the most recent from the Huffington Post, US, December 2009

Note – Read entire interview as I will only take out relevant bits for the purpose of this article

An Interview with Dr. Diane M. Harper, HPV Expert 

Right off the bat she says…

“The most important point that I have always said from day one, is that the use of this vaccine must be done with informed consent and complete disclosure of the benefits and harms of Pap screening and HPV vaccines. The decision to be vaccinated must be the woman’s (or parent’s if it is for a young child), and not the physician’s or any board of health, as the vaccination contains personal risk that only the person can value.” 

We know that this isn’t happening; only the benefits are being focused on and the harm minimized or ignored completely. Any one who tries to talk about the side affects and dangers is dismissed and put down as an “anti vaccination liar.” We know that both parents and young girls are under pressure from all sides including peer pressure at school with the slogan – “be wise – Immunize” – a catchy little propaganda phrase.

Remember however that all these parents and girls were once PRO vaccination.

The interview

Interviewer – “Do you believe that the Gardasil vaccine, as it currently stands, could present more risks to a young girl or woman than the possibility of cervical cancer?

Dr Harper – “Pap smears have never killed anyone. Pap smears are an effective screening tool to prevent cervical cancer. Pap smears alone prevent more cervical cancers than can the vaccines alone. ….Gardasil is associated with serious adverse events, including death. If Gardasil is given to 11 year olds, and the vaccine does not last at least fifteen years, then there is no benefit. Only risk for the young girl. Vaccinating will not reduce the population incidence of cervical cancer if the woman continues to get Pap screening throughout her life.”

That’s worth repeating ….If the vaccine does NOT last for at least 15 years, and we know it DOESN’T it lasts for only 5 years – Then there is NO benefit and only RISK …..the vaccine will NOT reduce the population incidence of cervical cancer !!

Continue on and you will read evidence that Gardasil may actually increase the cervical cancer rate in the years to come.

What else has Dr Harper got to say

Interviewer – “Has the original Gardasil marketing campaign of “one less” muddied the waters and misinformed the public, who heretofore believed that a Pap smear was sufficient to protect them from cervical cancer?”

Dr Harper – “Yes, the marketing campaign was designed to incite the greatest fear possible in parents, so that there would be uptake of the vaccine.” 

And we are seeing how the pressure has been put on girls and parents in New Zealand. Fear has been the prime motivator of all government agencies to get people to buy into and support various agendas. Its always been used in selling vaccinations to parents through fear and guilt.

Interviewer – “Could you clarify the content and context of the statements that you made at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination in October 2009, which have been so widely read and misquoted? Specifically the reported quote, “The rate of serious adverse effects is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer.”

Dr Harper – “The rate of serious adverse events reported is 3.4/100,000 doses distributed. The current incidence rate of cervical cancer in the United States is 7/100,000 women. This is what I said.”

Ok lets stop a minuet and review that sentence. What would this relate to in New Zealand? Since I am hopeless at math’s I found someone who had already worked it out – big thanks to you Cathy van Miert

Gardasil – The Mercky World of Anti-Cancer Vaccines

“How much does “One Less” cost???

The current incidence (new cases per year) of cervical cancer in NZ is 14 per 100,000 women – and one in three will die from the disease.

The cost of the 3 vaccinations required is $450.00. Once the GP fees are included (around $50.00 per visit) the total cost is roughly $600.00.

GSK’s (glaxo Smith and Klien) rival cervical cancer vaccine was shown to have “efficacy [antibodies in the blood] for up to 4.5 years”. If we assume Merck’s vaccine to be slightly superior, and generously allow up to 5 years protection (and it is a big if) and then calculate the number of HPV 16 and 18 associated cancer incidence:

14 X 70% (HPV-associated cervical cancer) = 9.8 cases per 100,000
9.8 X 30% (non HPV 16, 18-associated cervical cancer = 2.94 per 100,000
9.8 – 2.94 = 6.9 per 100,000 women per year with an HPV16,18-associated cervical cancer
6.9 per 100,000 equates to a 1 in 14,492 chance per year of getting the type of cancer associated with the strains of HPV in the Gardasil vaccine.

Put another way, 14,492 females would have to be vaccinated to prevent one case of cervical cancer:

14,492 X $600 = $1,739,040
5 years

$1,739,040 X 3 = $5,217,120

To possibly prevent one death from cervical cancer”
At the conference itself Dr Harper gave more revelations. This is a first hand account

Merck Researcher Admits: Gardasil Guards Against Almost Nothing

“Just as I began, in my own mind, to question ethics of mass vaccinations of prepubescent girls, Dr. Harper dropped another bombshell. “There have been no efficacy trials in girls under 15 years,” she told us…… “Merck did study a small group of girls under 16 who had been vaccinated, but did not follow them long enough to conclude sufficient presence of effective HPV antibodies.”
“If I wasn’t skeptical enough already, I really started scratching my head when Dr. Harper explained, “if you vaccinate a child, she won’t keep immunity in puberty and you do nothing to prevent cervical cancer.”

And this …..

Gardasil Researcher Drops A Bombshell the US Bulletin October 2009

“This is not the first time Dr. Harper revealed the fact that Merck never tested Gardasil for safety in young girls. During a 2007 interview with KPC, she said giving the vaccine to girls as young as 11 years-old “is a great big public health experiment.”…..At the time, which was at the height of Merck’s controversial drive to have the vaccine mandated in schools, Dr. Harper remained steadfastly opposed to the idea and said she had been trying for months to convince major television and print media about her concerns, “but no one will print it.”

“It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11 to 12 year old girls,” she said at the time. “There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue.”

When asked why she was speaking out, she said:

“I want to be able to sleep with myself when I go to bed at night.” 

Here are some more disturbing FACTS about the actual HPV virus that few want you to know

“Thomas R Broker, President of the International Papillomavirus Society, made this comment1 at a talk:

“Papillomavirus is in, effectively, all the vertebrates: snakes, amphibians, birds, and almost all the mammals. This virus coevolved with the vertebrate kingdom, and it’s just part of what it is to be alive. It’s a virus that’s extraordinarily successful at persisting and passing itself down to the next generation not just in people but in any animal you’ve ever seen. So it’s something we just have to deal with.”


“There is a very large transfer of the virus amongst children and this study concluded that HPV?16 DNA in children’s’ mouths was a transient event, and that the virus is most probably acquired from their peers.

In a 1994 study which found perinatal transmission of HP viruses 16 and 18 in 55% of babies, the authors cautioned that, “Information on the persistence of perinatally acquired human papillomavirus is required before rational vaccination programmes can be considered.”

Persistent HPV 16 and HPV 18 infection10 was found in infants in 1995, which led to those authors saying: “the observation that infection with high cancer risk genital HPVs may occur in early life and persist is of considerable importance for HPV vaccine strategies.”

In 1996 11 different researchers found the same thing, and listed studies which found HP16 viruses in children whose mothers did not have evidence of HP16.

Again, in 1998 researchers said: “Thus the traditional view that cervical cancer associated HPV infections are primarily sexually transmitted needs to be re? assessed…These facts are pertinent to those developing prophylactic vaccines to prevent high?risk HPV infections and cervical carcinoma.”

See studies here

Dr Thomas Broker continues: “So, we know there are a huge number of these viruses, perhaps millions, and every time they turned around to look at someone, they found a new type.” He went on to say: “We also know that in the developed world, herpes viruses which cause clinical problems are mainly a problem for people whose immune systems are suppressed somehow.”

Researcher writer and concerned mother Cynthia Janak also came to this realisation via her investigation into Gardasil. In her article dated August 8th, 2009 and entitled Pandemic of Harm She explains

“Out of 1,000,000 females the likelihood of exposure to HPV at some time in their early lives is 97.4%. That gives us 974,000 females who may have been exposed to HPV previous to inoculation. If 44.6% of those females are at a greater risk of later life cervical cancer after inoculation then we will have 434,404 young women who by the time they reach middle age and have families could acquire cervical cancer via a persistent infection with HPV types in the vaccines.

This makes perfect sense when you look at the reports of genital warts popping up in young girls who are not sexually active after inoculation. To me this means that HPV is present in the body in some way because of prior exposure. …..

“In my opinion, what we have done by allowing this vaccination program to continue is that we have just put 97.4% of our youth at risk for cervical cancer”. 

Sadly Cynthia and others just may be right.

And what about Menstruation ?

Vaccinating Teens During Menstrual Phase May Increase Adverse Reactions

“Every cycling woman, who is aware of the changes that her body goes through prior to menstruation, knows that she is more prone to infections, colds, fatigue, irritability and a general feeling of malaise at this time. All of these issues are a direct result of hormonal changes that are cycling through her entire body, from the brain right on down to the uterus. Why haven’t the clinical researchers, FDA/CDC oversight committees, gynecologists, pediatricians or family practice physicians who have approved and administered Gardasil® considered how the injection of this chemical cocktail might affect a still maturing female body that is least able to defend itself during the paramenstrum?”

Gardasil is also one of the first vaccinations that is genetically engineered

“Gardasil is made with GE virus-like proteins (VLP) that are obviously not the same as the HPV proteins and only resemble them,” said Claire Bleakley, President of GE Free NZ in food and environment. “This raises the possibility of allergic reactions and changes in the immune system.”

And why are our doctors not aware of what’s going on. One answer can be found in the heading of this article. If your selling Gardasil your not going to want Dr’s to take notice of any criticism are you so you wont tell them will you


“Physicians have spoken and reps DO have a pivotal role in keeping physicians informed. According to a recent survey of physicians, 74% of respondents said they rely on pharmaceutical companies and their reps to stay informed about medications to treat certain conditions. The online survey conducted by S&R Communications Group also found that physicians considered gaining insightful information from representatives to be a higher priority than searching for relevant information on the web or through the FDA.”

NONE of this information is NEW – it’s been doing the rounds of news and health sites, blogs and alt radio shows for a few years now.

As seen in part one – web sites with forums for affected girls and their parents are everywhere and they make for sad reading as mothers feel guilt and devastation. After all they did what they were told was good for their daughters, they trusted the government, they trusted the MoH and they trusted their Doctors. Now that the money is in the bank no one wants to know them. Most doctors scoff at the idea that the sacred cow of medicine – a vaccine – could be responsible for any harm especially one that industry reps assured them is totally safe, side affect free and will be the he best thing since sliced bread. Thus mothers/parents and the suffering girls have zero support or voice.

Will ‘Inside New Zealand or 60 Minuets or Sunday contact these mothers, will they do a balanced piece giving significance to those whose voices are ‘off the radar’?

Will they put all this evidence on the table and do some real investigative journalism and tell the truth of these girls stories? Only time will tell, but please – don’t hold your breath.

Meanwhile Merck has protected itself from any liability for your daughters death or injury in what Erin Brockovich calls …….

“About as big a tort reform as I have ever seen.”

She goes on to say ….“I do not believe the big drug companies should be able to do what they want to do, unchecked. The high ceiling of damages is about the only thing that can touch, reach and affect a huge corporation. The problem with tort reform is that it is legislation designed to reduce liability costs through limits on damages and modification of liability rules. Simply, that means reducing the damage to fat cat Merck who has made upward of a billion and a half in profits, leaving behind a marketing battlefield scattered with the shells of sick and dying girls. (Even ONE is too many–what if she were YOUR daughter?) This kind of reform is meant to protect the corporation and allow them to keep raking in money hand over fist–over the bodies of our injured daughters.”

Speaking of making money hand over fist, did you know that the world actually has a Cervical Cancer Market? Yes you heard right but that’s the way the world does business these days – nothing personal its just all about money – your daughters are the pharmaceutical corporations cash cow.

The Cervical Cancer Market is Forecast to Show Significant Growth until 2016

In the face of all this evidence what can you do?
Remember your rights

Right 6: the right to be fully informed.
Right 7: the right to make an informed choice and give informed consent.

If you’re a concerned parent contact these web sites listed below. (both links are directories)
Seek registered alternative health care providers such as homeopaths  and naturopaths. 

It may be the only chance your daughter has of regaining her health

Vist these sites for help and advice

Women’s health action trust

Read “GARDASIL – CARTWRIGHT’S DAUGHTER?” by Lynda Williams. An aptly named speech given at the annual luncheon to commemorate one of the biggest scams New Zealand had ever seen – The Cervical Cancer Scam.

Write to your local newspaper – send this article to your doctor – local MP – gather as much information as you can and pass it round. Stand strong in the face of ignorance and being seen as an ‘anti’ vaccination’ activist which you will probably be accused.

What we need to remember is that if people stop buying into the fear campaigns i.e. educate and don’t vaccinate – then there is no market. It is via the support of the masses i.e. buying into the hype and the fear that drives it – that big business continues to thrive.

I challenge all health official’s who are dispensing this vaccination to read this article, follow the links. Do your own research instead of buying into pharmaceutical spin and to take off your professional mask and stand in your humanness and speak out to the parents of affected girls – or have an open and public debate about this issue.

I know from experience that most health professionals are beautiful people who think that what they are doing is right and good, thus they fully believe the spin, support the spin and promote the spin without ever fully looking into the ‘other’ side of the spin – the victims side.   Its time for change.

Too much damage has been done already, and given what we know about the science and the history of pharmaceutical companies this vaccination needs to be STOPPED –and an official enquiry held and compensation paid to the families of affected girls NOW before we start seeing a real version of – “the children of men” that if we don’t wake up – could one day be our future

Post Script.

Over the last couple of days and just before I post this article, a few timely news items
Merck has now been given permission to expand its Billon dollar bus$nes$$ to include your sons and all females from the age of 12 – to 45 years

Britain apologizes 50 years after Thalidomide scandal

Prompting Thalidomide UK to remind us that ….

“The thalidomide disabilities was man-made by a drug, which could have been so easily avoided if the manufactures and suppliers had carried out the adequate testing on the drug. Those who were responsible for the marketing of the drug did not have a care for human life.”

Sixty years later – same story – different decade – new generation – déjà Vu

Other headlines that should alert our authorities that something is seriously wrong



And this, just so you know that they really don’t give a flying F%$# – they have enough money to fight anything

Seven billion dollars in fines for big pharma since May 2004… and they keep breaking the law

We now know that Gardasil is far from being adequately tested and its long-term affects are unknown. We do know however that it has the ability to cause large scale sterility, disability and death.
Counter act the MoH slogan ‘Be wise – Immunize”

Investigate before you vaccinate

From: Gerda Peachey <>
Date: Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 3:13 AM
Subject: Land Use Contracts
To: premier <>, “deJong.MLA, Mike” <>, Darryl <>,, Rich Coleman <>

Dear Premier Clark, and MLAs De Jong, Plecas, Gibson and Coleman:

A week from today I’m going to the Abbotsford City Council meeting to challenge the way our city conducts Public Hearings.

City staff say they are following Provincial guidelines, so before I speak to them next Monday about their seriously flawed process, I want to point out to you this problem, and to ask you to amend the guidelines you currently have in place for municipal governments.

Apparently there are many Land Use Contracts in BC, and the goal you have is to provide more manageable, more uniform zoning to replace what is currently somewhat of a hodge-podge of LUC’s that all have unique special features.

So you decided that by 2024 all LUC’s had to be replaced by suitable zoning under municipal oversight.

Fine.  That kind of makes sense, and 2024 is eight years down the road, which gives everyone time to learn what will change about their land, and to make plans for the future.

These land use changes are of great interest to elected politicians.  Beyond the duty to serve their public, and to make wise and careful decisions for the good of the citizenry, some of the people highly placed in your government are among the landlords who scoop up affordable housing, and add multiple properties to their personal holdings.

To his credit, Finance Minister, Mike de Jong listed his assets, not hiding behind numbered companies, so it is part of the public record that he owned property in my community, that is the focus of this letter.

Other folk in the government also listed multiple properties as part of their financial holdings.

According to the media, a few years back, Ujjal Dosanjh owned rental property deemed to be slum housing. That happens regularly with rental homes.  Even the poor take pride in their humble dwellings, if they own the place, but landlords can have a very different focus.

Affordable homes bought by speculators are often allowed to degrade to slum status.  Landlords don’t particularly care if a nice house becomes a grow-op, prostitution place or flop-housing for welfare addicts, just as long as the rent money keeps flowing in. The landlord doesn’t live there and is waiting for an opportune time to get local government to rezone, so landlords rarely lose.  But the blight of slum-housing spreads so that people give up and sell.  All good for speculators waiting in the wings.

Our re-zoning proposal looks different, but can create a similar domino effect.  These lovely humble properties will likely be gobbled up and replaced by large houses that max out the footprint. And legal suites, along with lots of illegal ones to help pay off the large houses.  That is what we see happening all through our city.

I make these points because the matter of how the municipality goes about implementing your mandate to remove all LUCs by 2024 has come quite swiftly and in a very shoddy manner to my community, not in 2024, or 2022 but now, in 2016,……eight years before your date.

We have been covered by this LUC since the inception of our unique place of some 150 properties, all mobile homes, on their own land, since about 1972.

People living on Oakridge Crescent, Monarch Court, Crystal Court and Lombard Street bought here knowing that restriction.  There is no expiry date on our LUC’s.

This has been a haven, enabling people to buy a home, average working couples who had to borrow and live comparatively frugal lives in order to make ends meet.  Most people I’ve talked to these last few weeks are deeply concerned how this sudden by-law amendment will affect their ability to stay on here if the taxes rise to match future monster housing assessments.

Last March someone bought a property, on my street, and set about getting the LUC lifted, so she could pull out the mobile, put in a large house and suite,…..thus setting a precedent for the rest of our community.

City Hall had first and second reading of K. K. Gill’s application on July 11th and set July 25th as a Public Hearing.  A few of us got a card from City Hall and,…… but for one alert man,…. this applicant would probably be on her way to radically altering our entire community by now, with all the other speculators soon building their large houses, where once stood mobile homes.

What’s the problem?

Besides losing lovely affordable housing, to treeless properties with monster houses, BC Assessment would asses all these properties to match the assessed value of the large new houses. Taxes on all these currently affordable houses would rise. The families who barely make ends meet,……..won’t be able to any longer.

And they will sell to folk who buy up properties, not for a home, but to build more large houses, filled with renters.

Well so what? That’s business, and there’s nothing illegal about buying properties and making money on them.

There are serious flaws in how this is happening here.  You (the provincial government) set a time, in the future, but suddenly that future evaporated in the heat of July, 2016.  In the middle of summer vacation, a land-use speculator tries to alter 44 years of a protective LUC in 14 days, while many people are gone from home.

Council met on Monday, July 11th, sent out some cards on a Tuesday.  Some of those cards might have arrived on a Wednesday.  Mine arrived on the Thursday, and some of the recipients got their card late the following week.

Now Abbotsford council says that is all okay because they are following Provincial guidelines.  So as long as they drop some cards in the mailbox at City Hall TEN DAYS before a Public Hearing, that’s fine, according to you.

That’s TEN DAYS.  I checked at City Hall today.  It is not even TEN BUSINESS DAYS,…..just ten days.  Subtract the days needed for the mail to be in transit.  I sent some letters to friends last week, just to see how many days it takes from the desk at the main post-office to destination.  Some arrived in one day, another in two, and one has still not reached it’s destination.

So you at our BC Provincial Government think that we the working public should be content with being informed about a meeting that might have tremendous import, about our homes, which for most of us is the biggest expense we have. We should be satisfied with a notice that might give us as little as 10-9-8-7-6-5…….maybe even 0 days to know about a Public Hearing that might have profound impact on our lives.

You, government employees and elected officials likely get at least three weeks vacation.  Would you be okay with coming home and finding that the zoning on your neighbourhood got changed, while you were on holiday?  Would you be okay with coming home to a radically altered zoning for your home and neighbourhood?

Did you, like us, buy in good faith, liking what you knew about the place,….trusting your local government zoning would not change without your knowledge and input?

I have done a number of Freedom of Information requests over the past few decades

Are you aware that the city has THIRTY BUSINESS DAYS to provide an answer to an FOI? Thirty business days translates into FORTY days to provide (an often blacked-out, redacted) response. And, the city can, and does, extend that time period for various reasons.

In fact I have an FOI waiting for you, the Provincial Government, to answer an FOI for over half a year now.

I asked for a copy of your contract with the Merck pharmaceutical company that is injecting Gardasil into little public school children.  That has been happening for some time and is costing the public millions.  Dubious claims about protecting little children from future sexually-transmitted diseases.  Unknown what harm these chemicals might do to kids who are NOT sick now, but are merrily being given 3 injections of Gardasil. All chemicals can cause other reactions, not necessarily immediately.  Will Gardasil be a factor in the phenomenal rise of auto-immune diseases? So I want to know how much we the public are paying Merck, and what guarantees are in place.

I’ve asked crystal clear questions but months go by and still the government of BC  provides no answers.   MONTHS, to not answer questions about where and why public money is being spent. But you think that we, regular working folk,  do not merit the same leisurely time that you grant yourselves.

Ordinary people can be happy they’ve been given a few days warning before the rug beneath their home is yanked away.  For most of us, our homes are the largest investment of our lives.

Abbotsford council may be technically correct to say they are simply following your guidelines, but your guidances are deeply flawed.

Being high up in government apparently allows you to be among the speculators who can afford to scoop up affordable housing, but it is also you who make the rules that seriously disadvantage the populace you promised to serve.

It is completely meaningless for city council to have first, second, and even sometimes third reading, all done in one breath.  Why bother pretending there is a real second reading.  There isn’t even one minute between those words, let alone weeks during which the public has a chance to digest a re-zoning proposal.

Developers are engaged with staff for months.  The public may have no knowledge of a proponents plans that can have a direct impact on the value of their land, or the quality of their life.  An application that seeks to alter existing by-laws must be done in the context of time,  enough time to inform and consult with a community.  Don’t betray the people who need you, the government to protect their property rights.

When an application goes before council let there be a real first reading, followed by an actual second reading at the following council meeting, so that the affected public has time to inform themselves and engage themselves in important issues.

Mandate a longer period for a re-zoning sign to be posted, like at least one month.  Expand the size of the zone to be notified.

That would slow development applications down by some weeks, but who should be your primary concern, ordinary working, tax-paying citizens or wealthy speculators?  Trusting citizens should not be kept in the dark until it’s too late for meaningful action on their part.

So much talk about affordable housing and so much bad policy. Legislative decisions that ensure the loss of affordable housing while more wealth accumulates to people who clearly have enough.

A couple in my neighbourhood came back from a short vacation, on July 26th. The omission of a re-zoning sign caused staff to pull this item off the agenda the morning of the hearing, otherwise council likely would have approved the re-zoning application. These people were shocked such a thing could be done in the few days they’d been gone from home.

Ten days, or less, to inform affected property owners about a potential by-law amendment is not enough time.  It is an injustice that you, who created this mess would not tolerate for yourselves.   You show contempt and disrespect for the land-owners in BC when you say they must wait 30 business days to get information about where their tax dollars are being spent, while expecting them to be satisfied with a 10 day heads-up about potential changes to their zoning.

I ask that you make swift changes and inform all municipalities that Public Hearings can’t be held without advance information and adequate time given to affected parties. Ten days and postcards mailed to properties within a 100 meter radius is woefully inadequate.

Gerda Peachey,


Requiring people to use their real names would be a great change.  Right now the Internet is the domain of cowards.

“On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.”

TURNING 20: The most reproduced New Yorker cartoon in the magazine’s history. (by PETER STEINER – The New Yorker magazine (1993))

A friend, who is a really nice fellow, sends me a pretty regular barrage of things we are supposed to pass on to others.  They all claim to be of top priority, and reasons why, we should be very concerned, about the current topic.  So because I like this man I try to verify what he sends me.  And most of the time that is not possible.  

Today’s email had to do with the lack of transparency on funding to first nations.  I too think Justin Trudeau is wrong to just funnel millions of dollars into the hands of people who show little wisdom in the use of money extracted from the general public. So I wrote to my friend, (again) to caution him against joining that invisible army of purveyors of junk emails, because, again, there was no link to the original.  So far that hasn’t seemed to stop his enthusiastic forwarding of dubious articles.  

I’ll post this on my blog, in hopes of encouraging someone out there to check out the facts of a matter, before obeying those urgent messages that claim to be true, and that must be passed on,…… if we don’t want our world to disintegrate tomorrow.


HI (Name)   ——-  August 15, 2017


For these articles to have any merit, they must be traceable back to the original source.  Most of the emails that swirl endlessly around the Internet, like this one, will say something vague about the source, but for some mysterious reason the senders almost never provide a link.   Why not?  


What would be so hard about sending the reader back to the original article?  But even if the sender is a bit computer challenged, why would you not just type in some simple data, like: ……….. the author’s name,…… the date of the article,…… and the newspaper or magazine, and the page number.


But these articles that people are encouraged to freak out about are deliberately vague about such details and blur the message with other words that perhaps are not those of the original article.


That is not only unscholarly, but misleading.  So you should not forward emails that lack transparency.  There might be a lot of truth within the article, but the overall impression is one of sneakiness and deception.



Many of my friends say they are Christians.  And that is good news.  But what is a Christian if not a follower of Jesus Christ.   One who believes that Jesus is God incarnate, and that he alone is the saviour of lost humanity.

But what causes me to wonder if my friends are fellow sojourners to heaven is their disinterest in the authority of the word of God.

We’ve moving like a speeding locomotive to pile on to an earlier train-wreck just around the bend.  All the rules of God, given for us to know him, love him, serve him and leave this short life to live forever with our Lord,……all those rules have been broken.  Smashed, shattered and declared to be irrelevant.  In fact to believe in God our creator is to set ourselves up for mockery, derision and possibly persecution.

I don’t want persecution.  I love my life and all the blessings the Lord has given me.  But what about all of my friends and everyone else in a world that is destroying truth and replacing it with smooth assurances that God does not exist.  Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you die.   Only you don’t.   Your soul will live forever, either with God in Heaven, or the Devil and his followers in Hell.

The Bible is God’s revelation to you.  Everything you need to bring you to him, to see yourself through his light, and to find in him the strength to overcome your lower nature is there in his holy word.

The teaching of evolution is designed by the enemy of your souls, the father of lies, to lure you away from turning to God, who loves you, and sent his only son to set you free from sin.

So to my friends who believe they can call themselves Christians and also believe the just-so stories of their millions of years of ascent from microscopic (miraculous) life, through untold (miraculous) transformations that finally brought them to this grand apex of profoundly amazing humanity, all by way of the destructive and crude processes of purported evolution, to you I say, at least look honestly at what God has told you about your beginnings, and compare that account with the claims of evolutionists.

This is from the course Richard taught at Willingdon School of the Bible in 2016.





IMG_1629 (1)


Score one for the Devil.  Colby Cosh in his article, ‘Scopes Trial is still theatre of the absurd’, writes:  ….“in a way, that new statue of Clarence Darrow  [in Dayton, Tennessee] is a tribute to him, and to the spirit of even-handedness he was trying to preserve.” 

Even-handedness isn’t how the doctrine of evolution gobbles up the souls of men. But the Devil, that enemy of our mortal souls has seemingly won millions of human minds, away from trusting in God our creator, sustainer, saviour, truest friend and ultimate judge.  Colby is one among many who have bought into the fraud of evolution.

The 1960 move ‘Inherit the Wind’ distorts the 1925 ‘monkey trial‘,  but millions have been fed those deliberate distortions, and believe them to be factual.  The trial itself was very much political theatre, intended to create a scenario whereby evolutionists could force a contrived drama to favour their attack on the Biblical account of creation.

But the drama was not sufficient to satisfy the need to remove God from the mind of man,…. so they created a compelling fiction.   That works every time.

I was out hiking with some naturalists when we found some delicate little orchids.  One of the men spoke in awed tones about the co-evolution of orchids with the insects needed for their pollination.   I think he said that happened 26,000 times.  That this really nice guy with such a sharp mind could believe something so absurd called for at least some effort to research his claim.

Now I know that neither orchids nor insects ‘evolved’.  For life to evolve even once is mathematically impossible.  And co-evolution of myriad tiny plants and animals should stretch the credulity of anyone,…..let alone the common-sense of my well-educated companions, but common-sense has been shoved aside by relentless indoctrination. 

So lets peek back in time,…millions and millions of years back to a little proto-orchid thinking how to proceed in it’s evolutionary ascent, so as to keep step with the proto-moth, (or proto-bee…)  that is somewhere out in that emerging, seething earth.  Little protos want to ensure that when the perfect time comes in their development,……they will be an exquisite fine-tuned match,…..made by the clumsy, harmful happenstance, mutations, survival of the fittest, luck, and no divine hand needed.

 Someone sent this discussion about the astounding design of the albatross, with the comment:  “So cool! How are these guys not instantly creationists???”

What drives so many outwardly decent, civilized people to not only accept nonsense, but to themselves become purveyors of junk science?

The theory of evolution cannot survive a critical analysis, which is why it must be taught as inviolable fact, using all the determination and skill and artistry available to man who sets himself against the truth of God.  Children must be taught the lie that they are the product of millions of years of evolution, before they can process data with their own wonderful capacity to discern the world around them.

And so many wonderful people holding prestigious degrees are not devils in disguise.  They believe!

They believe pretty much everything they are told, for example about orchids.  References abound, so you too can check out the information.  You will be told there are some 35,000 species of orchid.  You’ll also read there are 25,000 species.  You’ll also read there are 20,000 species of orchids. Oh well,……there are lots.

And there are lots of insects too.  Some say 30 million insect species, some say 2 million.  Meh!  What’s a paltry 28 million among friends? Oh, and some insects live only a few hours after they emerge as adults, some live only a day, or a few days.  Quite amazing on the part of those little critters to do so much planning about their future perfection with such speed.

Okay let’s not get hung up on a few digits of difference.  Whatever.   The salient point to remember is that each of these amazing plants planned precise and perfect processes that matched the precise and perfect progress of the insect, mammal or bird they would need for their reproductive needs.

So simple and so beautiful,……..but only if you’re willing to remain a simpleton.

No biologist on earth can tell you that any plant, or insect, or fish, or bird, or mammal is simple.  On the contrary it takes years to earn university degrees, but still our finest minds combined can only scratch the surface of comprehension when studying the natural world.  We build on the research and knowledge of previous generations.   We study nature and we try to emulate it.  From the plant and animal world we obtain everything we need to sustain life.  The SIMPLEST bacterium is more complex than ANYTHING man can devise.

Nevertheless, evolution is now the ruling paradigm, and it claims as its victims almost all segments of society, across the vast expanse of the earth.  God allows us the freedom to reject Him, and we reap the harvest of barren souls.

Movie, ‘Inherit the Wind:  As Randy Moore reviewed the 1960 movie (see his article in The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 61, No. 4 [April 1999], pp. 246-250 [available at]), he noted the following historical discrepancies (among others):

Movie: Scopes is a central figure throughout the trial. He is referred to as a martyr (11:40).

Trial: Scopes was a relatively minor figure in the trial. On days that Scopes was late for the trial, the proceedings often started without him. . . .

Movie: Scopes’ defense team consists only of Darrow, who is assisted by H. L. Mencken. The prosecution’s team consists of Bryan and a local attorney.

Trial: Both sides were represented by teams of attorneys. The counsel for the prosecution included Bryan, Bryan’s son (William Jennings Bryan, Jr.), Ben McKenzie, J. Gordon McKenzie, A. T. Stewart, Wallace Haggard, and brothers Sue and Herbert Hicks. Counsel for the defense included Darrow, John R. Neal, Arthur Garfield Hays, Dudley Field Malone, W. O. Thomson, and F. B. McElwee, and was assisted by biblical authority Charles Potter. Mencken had no role in the defense team. . . .

Movie: The jury is never excused; they are in the courtroom at all times.

Trial: The trial lasted from July 10 to July 21, 1925, but the jury was in the courtroom for only about three hours. . . .

Movie: Bryan betrays the confidence of Scopes’ fiancée by forcing her to testify against Scopes (1:08:02), thereby making Scopes look like a nonbeliever. Bryan’s fanatical examination of Rachel leaves her in tears (1:12:52).

Trial: No women participated in Scopes’ trial. Bryan was courteous to witnesses; it was Darrow who was cited for contempt. . . .

Movie: Expert witnesses are not allowed to testify (1:16:30).

Trial: Twelve scientists and theologians were allowed to make statements as part of the record presented by the defense. None of the expert witnesses was cross-examined. . . .

Movie: When called by Darrow as a witness (1:28:50), Bryan claims that he takes every word of the Bible literally.

Trial: Bryan volunteered to Darrow that he didn’t believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

Movie: Bryan says he has not read (and would not read) Darwin’s Origin (1:30:38).

Trial: Bryan read Origin in 1905; he was familiar with Darwin’s work.

Movie: Darrow asks Bryan about sex in the Bible. Bryan tells Darrow that all sex is sin (1:36:35).

Trial: There was no mention of sex or sin at Scopes’ trial.

Movie: Bryan claims that creation occurred at 9:00 a.m. on 23 October 4004 BC, as proposed by Bishop Ussher (1:41:20).

Trial: Bryan didn’t claim to know the age of the Earth. When cross-examined by Darrow, Bryan handled most of the questions well.


Said waaaaay back in August of 2017 . . . .



Monday July 31, 2017

I came across this interesting story that should be read, especially if you go out to vote even if this story is about the US, it might have implications for Canada as well – Richard

Defcon hackers find it’s very easy to break voting machines

Voting is at the foundation of every democracy. Hackers find it’s on shaky ground thanks to shoddy technology.

Alfred Ng/ CNET

by Alfred Ng July 30, 2017 5:00 AM PDT


When the password for a voting machine is “abcde” and can’t be changed, the integrity of our democracy might be in trouble.

The Advanced Voting Solutions WinVote machine, dubbed “America’s worst voting machine,” came equipped with this simple password even as it was used in some of the country’s most important elections. AVS went out of business in 2007, but Virginia used its insecure machines until 2015 before dropping them for scrap metal. That means this vulnerable hunk of technology was used in three presidential elections, starting with George W. Bush’s re-election in 2004 to Barack Obama’s in 2012.

In addition to Virginia, Pennsylvania and Mississippi used the WinVote without knowing all the ways it could be hacked. Unlike other technology — your phone, your laptop, connected cars — security wasn’t really a focus.

Google and Apple invite hackers to find flaws in their code and offer hefty rewards to those who find them. It’s a common practice in the industry. The government’s done it too, with programs like “Hack the Pentagon.”

But opportunities to test how secure our voting machines are from hackers have been rare. Manufacturers like to keep the details of voting machines secret. And they don’t often provide machines for people to test.

That’s why hackers swarmed to the Voter Hacking Village at Defcon in Las Vegas. The massive hacker convention is split into “villages” based on themes such as lock picking, encryption, social engineering and, for the first time, voter machine hacking.

Defcon received more than 30 voting machines to play with, providing a rare opportunity for hackers to find the flaws in our democracy’s technology. (The organizers didn’t specify how many models the 30 units represented.) Voting technology was elevated into the political spotlight in 2016 as lawmakers raised concerns about Russian hacking and President Donald Trump’s road to the White House.

To be clear, there’s no evidence any votes were hacked during the 2016 presidential election. But there hasn’t been much research on the voting machines to see if it’s possible.

“The exposure of those devices to the people who do bug bounties or actually look at these kind of devices has been fairly limited,” said Brian Knopf, an internet of things security researcher for Neustar, a security analysis company. “And so Defcon is a great opportunity for those of us who hack hardware and firmware to look to these kind of devices and really answer that question, ‘Are they hackable?'”

After just about an hour and a half, the answer was an emphatic “yes.”

In the time it takes to sit through “The Emoji Movie,” you could break into the WinVote machine through its Wi-Fi system, like DemTech’s investigator Carsten Schürmann did on Friday. DemTech is a research project that’s been looking at voting technology in Denmark.

He used a Windows XP exploit from 2003, which the voting machine never patched, and got remote access. That meant he could change the votes from anywhere.

Out of ctrl-alt-del

Synack, a security platform based in San Francisco, had its hands on the WinVote machine months ahead of Defcon. It discovered a host of serious flaws with the system.

While many people at the Voter Hacking Village zeroed in on the weak mechanical lock covering access to the machine’s USB port, Synack worked on two open USB ports right on the back. No lock picking was necessary.

The team plugged in a mouse and a keyboard — which didn’t require authentication — and got out of the voting software to standard Windows XP just by pressing “control-alt-delete.” The same thing you do to force close a program can be used to hack an election.

“It’s really just a matter of plugging your USB drive in for five seconds and the thing’s completely compromised at that point,” Synack co-founder Jay Kaplan said. “To the point where you can get remote access. It’s very simple.”

Synack’s team was able to access the voting machine from a mobile app by installing a remote desktop program on it.

Once you’re out of the voting program on the machine, it’s just like any old Windows XP computer, Synack found. In one case study, the company found a poll worker in Virginia had hacked the machine so she could play Minesweeper on it.

When you’re in the machine, changing votes is as simple as updating an Office document.

It’s like an Excel file in which “you would just change the number and upload it back,” said Anne-Marie Hwang, an intern at Synack, who demonstrated the vote changes.

The voting machine puzzle

Back at the village, once a voting machine was hacked, it could be reset to its original state for the next person to try his or her hand at it. It was like messing up a Rubik’s Cube before passing it to the next person to solve.

On Friday afternoon, a hacker tapped into the Windows XP side of the AVS WinVote machine and installed Windows Media Player on it. He then rickrolled the room by playing Rick Astley’s “Never Gonna Give You Up” on the voting machine.

A hacker calling himself “Oyster” and his team tried to break into a Diebold voting machine on Friday after another team had successfully compromised it.

“I hope that we find a load of vulnerabilities in these just so we can open it up to the public to see how serious the problem is,” he said.

Diebold said it sold its voting machine business in September 2009, and declined to comment for the story.

The village is expected to return to Defcon for the next three years, right up until Trump’s potential re-election campaign. The hackers at Defcon hope by 2020, their exploits will lead to changes in voting booth technology.

“Hacking it is good because it’s able to inform politicians and people in Congress about what they should do with voting machines,” Hwang said. “If no one ever hacked them, we might be still using things like this.”

Update, 8:30 a.m. PT: Corrects name of Diebold voting machine.


The Supreme Court of Canada never ordered a multimillion dollar payout to Omar Khadr, and in fact never dictated any monetary compensation at all.

Dear Richard,

Justin Trudeau seems to have found a new defence for his choice to make a convicted terrorist a wealthy man.

After first blaming the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, then the Supreme Court, then the previous government, Trudeau is now saying the Government of Canada could pay now, or it could pay later. Omar Khadr, according to the Liberals, was going to get his millions either way.

The Liberals are deliberately saying things that are not true to hide the fact that this payout was 100% their choice. But the majority of Canadians simply aren’t buying it.

The Supreme Court of Canada never ordered a multimillion dollar payout to Omar Khadr, and in fact never dictated any monetary compensation at all.

The Supreme Court ruled that in very narrow circumstances, Omar Khadr’s rights were violated. Conservatives accept that finding. We accept the extremely important principle that the Charter applies to all Canadians, no matter how heinous the crime.

The inconvenient truth for the Liberals, is that the court left it to the government of the day to determine the appropriate compensation for these violations. A lower-court ruling had indicated that the appropriate remedy for Omar Khadr would be repatriation. In other words, the wrong could be righted by allowing Khadr to serve out the rest of his sentence in Canada.

The previous Conservative government accepted the court finding. Omar Khadr was brought back to Canada and able to enjoy the benefits of the Canadian justice system — the same justice system that has been generous enough to give him his freedom today, while his victims remain dead, wounded, or grieving. That is all the compensation he deserves. Anything above that is a secondary compensation that goes over and above what any court has ordered.

Yet Justin Trudeau felt it appropriate to turn Khadr into a millionaire, even rushing payment to him as quickly and quietly as possible.

By handing payment to Omar Khadr in secret, Justin Trudeau would surely have understood that Tabitha Speer and her children — the family of Omar Khadr’s victim, Sgt. Christopher Speer — could be denied any access to the compensation.

Justin Trudeau could have taken a stand and fought the Khadr case until the very end. Last week, in his latest desperate attempt at deflecting blame, Trudeau has asked us to believe that he was so worried about spending taxpayers’ money, that he surrendered the legal fight.

For the man who is plunging Canada into massive deficits and borrowing more and more money from future generations of Canadians, this last excuse is almost laughable. Besides, principles are worth fighting for.

Conservatives believe in supporting the women and men in uniform who put their lives on the line to keep us safe, not those who target them.

So I understand the vast majority of Canadians who are upset by the prime minister’s decision. I am too. A government I lead would be guided by a set of principles that would have ensured we fought this case to the end.

For Justin Trudeau to suggest this was OK — indeed, to go even further by attempting to dodge any responsibility once he got caught — is not what we need in a prime minister.

Justin Trudeau had a choice. He could have fought this in court. No court decision is ever a given, no matter how many Liberals pretend otherwise.

And when the House of Commons returns in the fall, our Conservative caucus’s first task will be to hold Justin Trudeau accountable for his choice.

He cannot hide from it. That isn’t to say he hasn’t tried.

Trudeau was absent for the Liberal government’s apology to Omar Khadr. He was absent for the announcement of the payout. He has let others in his government do the dirty work, and made himself invisible in the meantime.

Most shockingly, after being forced to explain his decision, Trudeau claimed he speaks for all Canadians when it comes to his secret Khadr payout.

It is typical Liberal arrogance for Trudeau to claim he represents what Canadians think and feel about this issue. He represents the government of Canada, not the core beliefs of its people.

So my question to you is simple.

Do you agree with Trudeau’s secret payout to Omar Khadr? Does Trudeau speak for you?

Andrew Scheer
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

P.S.: You can have your say on my Facebook page.