Sandra Finley

Mar 202017
 

Vodafone and trio of high street banks take action as industry and UK government ask how their ads became attached to extremist material

 The Google logo reflected in the pupil of a human eyePhotograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

The Google logo reflected in the pupil of a human eye

Sky, Lloyds, HSBC and RBS have joined McDonald’s and Audi in suspending advertising with Google

@ByRobDavies

Google executives are bracing for a two-pronged inquisition from the advertising industry and the government over the company’s plans to stop ads being placed next to extremist material.

A slew of big-name companies, advertising firms and government departments have either pulled their adverts from Google and its YouTube video site or are considering whether to do so, with media giant Sky, telecoms group Vodafone and a trio of banks adding their names to a growing list over the weekend.

The internet firm’s European head, Matt Brittin, is one of two Google executives due to speak at the annual Advertising Week Europe event, attended by major companies in the advertising world.

Sources said Brittin was likely to face a flurry of questions about how adverts for major brands ended up attached to videos by extremists, including hate preachers and former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

The ads help fund payments to the people who post the videos, with every 1,000 clicks worth about £6. Experts estimate this could have been worth £250,000 to extremists.

Brittin will be among the first people to address delegates on Monday when speakers will also include Unilever’s chief marketing officer, Keith Weed.

Unilever declined to comment on whether it had suspended advertising through Google.

Leading advertising agencies have been quick to react, with French marketing firm Havas, whose clients include O2 and Royal Mail, pulling its adverts late last week. Publicis, the world’s third-largest advertising firm, said it was reviewing its relationship with Google and YouTube.

The world’s largest advertising firm WPP, via its media-buying division GroupM, has stopped short of cancelling ads but has written to major clients asking them how they wish to proceed.

GroupM’s chief digital officer, Rob Norman, told Sky News that Google should apologise publicly to companies whose reputation has been “compromised”.

Mark Howe, head of Google’s agencies business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, will also speak at Advertising Week Europe. His responsibilities, according to a company biography, include ensuring that Google “builds lasting & trusted relationships with its customers”.

Brittin and Howe will be exposed to questions from advertising luminaries at the start of a week in which executives will have to explain themselves in a second meeting about the affair with government ministers.

In a letter to the company, Yvette Cooper, who chairs the home affairs select committee, accused the company of “profiting from hatred”.

And senior figures from Google were summoned to the Cabinet Office last week over concerns that taxpayer-funded adverts were appearing alongside “inappropriate” YouTube videos. Google executives apologised but were told to come back to the Cabinet Office this week with a plan and a timetable to remedy the problem.

The decision by Vodafone, Sky, HSBC, Lloyds and Royal Bank of Scotland to suspend their ads, or review whether to do so, follows action last week by other brands. They include McDonald’s, L’Oréal, Audi, Sainsbury’s, Argos and the BBC. Government spending has also been suspended while Tesco is understood to have “paused” spending on YouTube.

BT said: “We take our responsibilities as an advertiser seriously and have a robust set of safeguards in place to make sure our adverts don’t appear on websites or content which may be dedicated to offensive themes”

While Google is yet to reveal what it plans to do, it is understood that advertisers will be told that they may not be making enough use of existing tools and it will offer to provide advice on how companies can better use these.

However, Google is also expected to take a wider look at how ads are placed, including whether it has put enough checks and balances in place to avoid unfortunate juxtapositions.

“We’ve heard from our from our advertisers and agencies loud and clear that we can provide simpler, more robust ways to stop their ads from showing against controversial content,” Ronan Harris, managing director of Google UK, said last week.

The Guardian is among the organisations to have withdrawn its advertising. Ads for the Guardian’s membership scheme are understood to have been placed alongside extremist material after an agency acting on the media group’s behalf used Google’s AdX ad exchange, which uses an automated system known as programmatic trading.

Mar 192017
 

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/outintheopen/how-to-change-police-1.4008099

In the wake of civilian shootings and harassment claims on the force, many are calling on law enforcement to change.

Out in the Open explores how police are changing, how some think they should, and how the job changes the human wearing the uniform. 

– – – – – – – – – – –

The top-of-page photo for the podcast, “How to Change Police” is from the G-20 Summit in Toronto in 2010. When the last bills were paid, Canadians paid roughly $1 billion dollars. Expenses included outrageous boondoggles.   But, the majority of the costs were for security, with the RCMP’s bill coming in at $330 million. . . . Peaceful Protestors, with very good reason to protest, were robbed of their civil rights. A chilling experience. The largest mass arrests in Canadian history happened at the G-20 in Toronto, 2010.

Other countries who hosted G-8 and G-20 Summits, in the same era, paid a fraction of what we paid: Pittsburgh hosted a G20 summit that resulted in no great breaches of public order but whose security-related costs totaled only about $12.2 million (U.S.) — less than 1.5 per cent of the projected costs of the summits in Toronto and Huntsville.

Italy – – similar experience. Costs NO WHERE NEAR what Canadians paid.

There are very good insights in the podcast, not only for Police, but for citizens who need to understand what’s going on.

Canadians need to pay attention, actively, to the state of policing in this country. Sort out what’s good, what’s bad, and find actual solutions. NOW.

Scroll down for descriptions of the stories from this episode.

 

Police on duty at G20 summit in Toronto, 2010

Police on duty at G20 summit in Toronto, 2010 (Chris Huggins/Flickr/CC)

 

stories from this episode

Mar 162017
 

With many thanks to Jake from way down there in the USA!

He draws this Canadian story to attention.  I hadn’t heard about it.

The decision of the Board that heard the case against high school biology teacher, Timothy Sullivan —   UPDATE:   see  2017-06-12  Vaccinations:  Tim Sullivan, School Teacher disciplined

 The story is spreading fast,  and well beyond Canadian borders.   For good reason.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

I spoke with Timothy Sullivan:

I called Tim to let him know that there are lots of people standing behind and supporting him.  We had a good conversation – – he is well informed.

Tim has his own children; and his work is with kids – – in the classroom and as a coach of sports teams.

(NOTE:  Tim is not responsible for what I understood him to say.)

In our conversation, a source of information on vaccines that he came back to at least twice:

the folded-up, in-small-print paper that is enclosed with the vaccine itself.  (Drugs routinely come with an information sheet from the manufacturer on dosage, side effects, etc. .  So do vaccines.)

Tim applied known side effects stated by the manufacturers of the vaccines,  to what he sees among the kids.  Example:   4 of the 12 girls on the basketball team use “puffers”.   Known side effect:  inflammation of the bronchi.  He did not say that that was the only evidence he relied on, and it was not all that he cited.    A reasonable person has questions and looks for answers.  Nor did he say this which I am saying now:   I know that Tim is like thousands of others.  Once you open the file on vaccines, you see who it is that manufactures the “fake news”.  Thank-you big pharma.

(The increase in numbers of vaccinations given to kids from infancy on, is well recorded on this blog and elsewhere.  Not discussed with Tim.)

My ego self considers me to be more informed about vaccines than the “average” Canadian.    Tim Sullivan added to what I know;  but this posting is about what happened to Tim!

Tim has had calls from, e.g.,  Guyana – – a fellow there invited him down, said he had a place for Tim and his family;  someone from Australia contacted him,  …  etc.    Tim’s students and former students started a petition to support him.  The parents of his students support him.  Most of his fellow teachers have been great.

In Tim’s view,  lots of people are waking up to the problems with vaccines.   (But not his Union – – he went by himself to Toronto for his hearing.  He was appreciative that a knowledgeable lady showed up, to support and help him.   She was not allowed to speak at the hearing, because she is not a lawyer!)   He is currently waiting for the outcome of the hearing.

Tim has received some media from across Canada.  And local coverage.  But he said the experience has opened his eyes on media coverage.   (I noted to myself:  Yes, if not for our networks through social media,  I would not know of this very significant development.    People might KNOW about, and avoid vaccination.   It is an entirely different matter to remain standing when the well-intentioned and trained nurse comes with the needle pointed at your kids.   Who are the kids of other people.)

I discovered that the views of Tim and myself, on the corporatocracy that has usurped democracy, are in alignment.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

National Vaccine Information Centre (U.S.)

(I read “about them” and signed on to their email list.  Numbers count.)

Science Teacher May Be Disciplined for Urging Students Be Informed of Vaccination Risks

http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2017/03/science-teacher-may-be-disciplined-for-urging-students-be-informed-of-vaccination-risks/

Story Highlights

  • An Ontario science teacher is facing disciplinary action for trying to ensure students were informed about the risks of vaccines they were receiving at school.
  • The complaint against the teacher is that it was inappropriate for him to express his concerns to the students over the risks of vaccination.
  • It is a fact that there are risks of serious adverse reactions to vaccinations.

 

In March 2015, science teacher Timothy Sullivan approached public health nurses administering vaccines to high school students at his school in Waterford, Ontario, Canada and asked whether they had appropriately informed the students about the potential risks of the shots they were giving. He noted that the teenagers were required to give informed consent and the nurses, therefore, had the obligation to make sure they were fully informed.1

Mr. Sullivan also made the point that, “some of the components in the vaccines were deemed ‘toxic’ in his science lab.” The nurse allegedly answered that they alerted parents and teens about common vaccine risks like fever or soreness at the injection site and she claimed that “a screening tool allows nurses to assess if there are any underlying conditions that would trigger a more serious reaction among students” and added that “the risk of death from receiving a vaccine is so very, very rare.”1

Who Decides What Facts Can or Cannot Be Taught?

The complaints against Mr. Sullivan appear to have focused on how disruptive his comments were to the planned vaccination event rather than the accuracy or inaccuracy of his views. The reality of vaccine risks for death and serious side effects has been acknowledged by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). All of these organizations have stated that vaccines may cause adverse reactions and death in a small percentage of patients. According to the CDC, “although immunization has successfully reduced the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases, vaccination can cause both minor and, rarely, serious side effects.”2

The CDC acknowledges the “possible” though “rare” association between “hepatitis B vaccine and anaphylaxis; measles vaccine and a) thrombocytopenia and b) possible risk for death resulting from anaphylaxis or disseminated disease in immunocompromised persons; diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine (DTP) and chronic encephalopathy; and tetanus-toxoid-containing vaccines and a) Guillain-Barre syndrome, b) brachial neuritis, and c) possible risk for death resulting from anaphylaxis.”2

An article from the journal Vaccine, published on the NIH website, stresses that vaccines are safe for most people, but admits there are “cases where a known or plausible theoretical risk of death following vaccination exists [that may] include anaphylaxis, vaccine-strain systemic infection after administration of live vaccines to severely immunocompromised persons, intussusception after rotavirus vaccine, Guillain-Barré syndrome after inactivated influenza vaccine, fall-related injuries associated with syncope after vaccination, yellow fever vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease or associated neurologic disease, serious complications from smallpox vaccine including eczema vaccinatum, progressive vaccinia, postvaccinal encephalitis, myocarditis, and dilated cardiomyopathy, and vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis from oral poliovirus vaccine.”3

In the case of Mr. Sullivan, he claims to be not so much against vaccines as for the concept of informed consent, although after acquiring the package inserts pertaining to the vaccinations being administered to the students, he said he found it “embarrassing really that I didn’t know about the effects as a parent, as a teacher, as a biology teacher. I was unaware of the severity of some of the side-effects.”

Mr. Sullivan has now been found guilty of professional misconduct by the disciplinary board of the Ontario College of Teachers.4 With the conviction of Mr. Sullivan, the college is asking for penalties including a formal reprimand, a month-long suspension, and completion of an anger management course.

In deciding on the penalty phase, the board could strip Mr. Sullivan of his teaching certificate and impose fines of up to $5,000. The complaint against Mr. Sullivan holds that he was out of line in addressing the students, and that it is a parent’s place, not a teacher’s to address vaccine concerns. Mr. Sullivan said, “I teach science. You don’t just teach one side of the story.”5

 

Mar 162017
 

D’Arcy writes:

This interesting article appears in the newest Canada’s History, a popular magazine definitely not known for being even the slightest bit leftist.  However, it shows the length to which Canada’s intelligence services were (and continue to be) monitoring “radical” groups on campus, including the anti-nuclear movement.

(Steve Hewitt did his M.A. and Ph.D. in History at the University of Saskatchewan.)

For the RCMP after the war, communists were the subversives.

But when dissent flowered in the 1960s, the Mounties were flummoxed.

Written by Steve Hewitt

March 14, 2017

Students from Université Laval in Quebec City, members of the Combined Universities Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CUCND), en route to Ottawa in October 1961 for an antinuclear demonstration. This photograph was taken by a fellow member and police informant.  The numbers were added by the police for identification purposes.

National Archives of Canada / C146273

It was a Thanksgiving full of youthful enthusiasm. Hundreds of university students from across Ontario and Quebec spent the October 1961 holiday weekend campaigning instead of resting.

All were members of the Combined Universities Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, or CUCND for short, an organization that had its birth in the late 1950s; they had gathered on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, literally under the shadows of the Canadian government whose policy they sought to change.

Among those lugging placards on the sunny fall day was a busload of students from Université Laval in Quebec City. One of the Laval group wore a Brownie camera around his neck, employing it frequently to capture images of several of the demonstrators, some of whom he knew and some of whom he didn’t.

Unlike with most shutterbugs, the final destination for his pictures was not an album of personal memories or a dresser drawer. He had not taken the photos for himself but for his secret employer, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, who believed the peace movement to be a threat to Canadian security.

When the bus full of students returned home, the photographer made his way to the local RCMP detachment, where he turned over the film, the names of the Laval students who had travelled to Ottawa, and CUCND pamphlets to his police “handler.” Later the student informant helped the police identify many of those featured in the pictures.

In the post-September 11 era, it is important to remember that concern over threats to domestic security is nothing new. What happened on the 1961 Thanksgiving weekend represented what it was that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, specifically the counter-subversion branch of its Security Service, did during the Cold War.

The 1960s are particularly instructive, because in that decade social forces arose which challenged the basis for the security work: Communist subversion, a nebulously defined notion at the best of times, represented the chief threat to Canada. Higher education, the centre of many of these social forces, was of particular interest to the Mounted Police—and it was here that the Mountie concept of a threat would expand.

What had not changed, however, was the idea of a threat. Security agencies cannot survive without the existence of a threat—it does not matter if the threat is real, exaggerated, or imagined—its existence is essential.

The history of these Cold War security activities is especially relevant to the post-September 11 period we now live in—a world where intelligence services created in the Cold War era continue their work to ensure our security, and where real, exaggerated, and imagined threats still coexist.

Part of the inspiration for a photo-taking informant lay only a short distance and sixteen years and a few days away from Parliament Hill. In September 1945, Igor Gouzenko, a twenty-six-year-old cipher clerk in the Soviet Union’s Canadian embassy, left work with top-secret documents concealed in his clothing.

After some initial difficulty in finding someone to listen to his story while avoiding the Soviets searching for him, Gouzenko, with his family, were finally taken in by the Canadian government.

Among his purloined booty were papers revealing the existence of a spy ring that involved not only those the government and the RCMP (because of ethnic and class prejudice) would have expected—workers and ethnic minorities—but those of the upper echelons of Canadian society: academics, scientists, and civil servants.

Gouzenko’s fateful decision to defect did not create a domestic spy agency for Canada. In its modern form, the RCMP’s intelligence role dated from the First World War. It reinforced the long-held view of communism as the main threat to Canadian security, and it expanded both the categories of people prone to the siren call of Red radicalism and the ranks of those whose task it was to investigate the evangelists of such an ideology.

Nor did the Mounties operate in a vacuum. Instead, they acted with the encouragement of the federal government and ordinary citizens. Gouzenko’s revelations that the Soviet Union had been, with the assistance of Canadian Communists, conducting espionage against its wartime ally Canada, fuelled a general sense of betrayal and restored to prominence the animosity many had fell toward communism before the war.

Moreover, with the encouragement of the federal government and many Canadians, Mounties set out to do something about the radical threat. No other approach was possible, since the RCMP, in a burst of Cold War dogmatism, warned in a 1949 pamphlet, “A convinced Communist is a man possessed. He is not amenable to argument or persuasion, or even coercion. Society must always be on guard against him, and each citizen must be prepared to combat his ideas wherever they crop up.”

As the RCMP’s security branch grew after 1945, so did its collection of files. With the Cold War increasing in ferocity as the 1940s tensed to a close, the security game was as much about capturing and protecting minds (fighting subversion) as it was about catching spies (combating espionage).

Not surprisingly, with such an atmosphere and approach, higher education seemed particularly vulnerable to attack. Here the young minds of tomorrow’s elite were being moulded. What if the craftsperson was a Communist? What if he or she was using the classroom to convert the captive audience of students to the cause of revolution or some equally nefarious belief?

Socrates had been convicted of corrupting youth in ancient Greece, and corruption seemed to be occurring again in the Canada of the twentieth century. That some of the individuals arrested because of Gouzenko’s evidence were McGill graduates seemed further evidence of the danger. One Quebec newspaper declared: “You send your boy to McGill a Canadian democrat and he graduates an international Communist.”

In the House of Commons the member for Peace River worried that so many Communists held jobs at Canadian universities where they could “undermine the faith of our young people in Canada, in true democracy, and in Christianity.”

On the ground in the early years of the Cold War, Mounties investigated the claims of Communist-ridden campuses. They recruited informants, collected materials, and in plainclothes sat in to hear the occasional lecture or guest speaker. Often the end results were decidedly mixed.

A policeman accompanied by a student informant attended a special lecture at Ottawa’s Carleton College in 1957. The talk that followed under the title “In Defence of Rationalism” was so unintelligible that the police officer, even after a translation from his secret helper, remained in a state of bewilderment. He informed his superiors that his attendance at future lectures in the series was pointless since his informant/interpreter refused to attend any more.

In the 1950s the police also sought communism in the world of student politics. Mock parliamentary elections were a campus tradition. The RCMP followed and reported to Ottawa the results as closely as media pundits on federal election night. The governing rationale was that student election results would provide an accurate indication of Communist support on campus, since those with hidden Red proclivities might be more inclined to reveal their affiliation in the anonymity of a campus ballot box.

That many students voted Communist as a joke did not escape the attention of the police. Thus headquarters dismissed as insignificant the forty-seven medical students who had voted Communist at the University of Alberta, but considered nine students in the conservative school of engineering casting their vote for the Reds worthy of further investigation.

These collective efforts had a more serious purpose: to ascertain the extent of the Communist threat, of subversion. Subversion was by definition a broad and ill-defined concept. To the Mounted Police the only proof necessary was that communism be involved, hence the search for Reds.

By 1959, the RCMP had compiled what it believed to he a comprehensive list of Communists, both open and hidden, working in the field of education. The figure for universities was ninety, which put it in second place behind the 166 Communists in the employ of Canada’s elementary and nursery schools, although a police officer admitted the latter group had little opportunity to inject Marxism into the classroom.

What the police lacked (and some admitted to this) was any evidence that Communists were using their positions to indoctrinate their students. With the Cold War in its full fury, most Canadian Communists would have tried to keep their beliefs to themselves, especially when stories abounded of U.S. teachers and academics being fired because of their political affiliation. Still, the Mounties could not ignore their security training, which, although limited, had repeatedly emphasized the danger communism posed to Canadian society.

One controversial area where higher education, the outside world, and communism seemed to intersect was within the peace movement. In the face of tensions between the two nuclear superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, many ordinary citizens were drawn to the peace movement in an effort to curtail the “mutually assured destruction” logic that fuelled the arms race.

To the Mounted Police the efforts of the peace movement (which included Communists) to influence government opinion represented a chance for the Soviet Union to drive a wedge between Canada and its main friend and ally.

The peace movement was also significant because it served as a bridge between the 1950s and the growing campus activism of the 1960s. Many who began with the CUCND migrated to the Student Union for Peace Action or other more radical associations.

Clean-cut Mounties, who had numerous restrictions on their personal appearance, made disparaging (and perhaps slightly envious) remarks about the growing numbers of “dirty and unshaven” “hippie types” and “beatniks” appearing at rallies and other protests.

As the sixties progressed, the level of campus discontent grew. People protested the Vietnam War; they criticized Canada’s relationship with the United States and worried about the Americanization of their country. Issues related to class, race, and gender inspired marches and sit-ins.

Finally, students and others demonstrated against the university itself—its lack of democracy and unresponsiveness to the changing world around it.

In understanding what was happening on campuses, Mountics were as bewildered as university administrators, or students’ parents. Instead of attempting to understand the social context fuelling radicalism, the Mounties blamed it all on communism, a position reinforced by their training and the Cold War.

If Communist involvement in student unrest could not be discovered, it was not because it did not exist but because the police had not delved deep enough to discover it. In taking this position, the RCMP differed in one significant respect from the U.S. intelligence agencies: the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation more quickly grasped that something new was afoot.

Under way was protest and discontent inspired not by foreign agitators, as the police asserted, but by social causes: the Vietnam War, the civil rights’ movement, fear of nuclear war, popular culture, demographics in the form of the Baby Boom generation, and a host of other causes.

Eventually even the Mounted Police could not ignore the evidence emerging from higher education. The police emphasis on the Communist threat to higher education shifted toward the “New Left” and violence in 1968.*

In April of that year, in an event that shocked many, students working under the banner of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) occupied the office of the president of Columbia University, taking time to puff on his cigars and sample his private liquor supply before being beaten and arrested by the police. One of the leaders of the occupation, Mark Rudd, turned up to speak at the University of British Columbia in October of the same year.

Shortly after, another prominent American radical, Jerry Rubin, of the famous “Chicago Eight” who disrupted the 1968 Democratic convention, also spoke at UBC, and in the aftermath of his talk led an occupation of the university’s faculty club. Among the occupying students was a police informant.

By themselves, these two events would not have held the attention of the police. But when on November 21 students at Simon Fraser University (SFU), a location that one Mountie labelled as the most “far out” university in Canada, occupied the administration building for two days, suddenly the police suspicions that had once been applied to communism now had a new home.

An occupation of the computer centre at Sir George Williams University the following January and February, an event that ended with acts of vandalism, only reinforced the Mounties’ conviction of a grand conspiracy: Canadian campus protests, not to mention other radical activity, were being either directed from the United States or coordinated with American activity.

An informant at Sir George Williams University decried the events at his or her university as “preplanned” and part of a movement “that will be more fascist than even that of the Nazi regime in Germany during World War II.”

Appearing before a House of Commons committee three months after the SGWU occupation, the RCMP’s assistant commissioner warned of linkages between American and Canadian radicals. But when pressed by a committee member for evidence, William Kelly replied that his concern had been based more on a “feeling” than on “proof.”

Although the old fear of subversion remained, the campus events of 1968 and 1969, particularly the trashing of the computer centre at Sir George Williams, now supplied the Mounted Police with a new justification for their domestic operations: the threat of violence.

In response, under increasing pressure from the federal government to investigate campus radicalism and separatism in Quebec, the RCMP launched a new effort on campus. One component was a recruitment campaign for informants at universities, because the RCMP had had little success in “penetrating” the student protest movement and because many of its former faculty informants had retired.

Whereas in an earlier time people had only been too happy to assist the police, the sixties were different. Instead, university students were more committed to embarrassing the Mounties by publicly exposing recruitment attempts or simply ridiculing the police as an institution.

The Mounties had difficulty acknowledging that Canadian youth, like others of their generation, were questioning authority, institutions, and the establishment in all their forms, and the primary roots of their unrest came not from without, but within their own societies.

As part of the late 1960s reforms, the RCMP expanded its files on higher education. Headquarters in Ottawa made it clear that radicals now came in a variety of ideological hues beyond the ones traditionally coloured Red: “CP of C member, suspected Trotskyist, self-admitted Marxist, black nationalist, student agitator, anarchist, red power advocate, or an associate of communists.”

Whereas at the end of the 1950s, the Mounties held files on ninety nonstudents at universities, for 1969 headquarters in Ottawa held 357 files on individuals employed in education in Ontario alone.

No scrap of information remained unexamined. The list of materials passed on to Ottawa in 1970 included an account of the appearance at the University of Alberta by American radical (and Chicago Eight member) Abbie Hoffman, an assessment of the Canadian University Press, a mention of a conference on Marxism at the University of Waterloo, a report about a SFU history-student organization, derisive comments from a student informant about an all-female student executive at Brandon University, and descriptions of the formation of a Jewish student group at SFU and a gay organization in Vancouver.

In September 1970, an undercover Mountie joining in a campus festival, “Day One of the New University of Toronto,” collected pamphlets from a wide variety of groups. Unclear as to the top threat to Canada, his collection included material from a gay-rights group, the Varsity Christian Fellowship, and the Campus Crusade for Christ.

The results of the investigations concerned the highest ranks of the RCMP. “The total of the activities of a subversive nature carried out in Canada by many different organizations is very worrying and clearly represents a serious threat to the unity of the country and to the preservation of law and order,” cautioned the director general of the RCMP Security Service, John Starnes, to the federal deputy minister of justice. “Moreover, all the indications are that the level of these kinds of activity across the land is likely to increase rather than to diminish in the next few years.”

The Mounted Police reiterated this message to Pierre Trudeau, his cabinet, and senior government bureaucrats, at a special security briefing in September 1971. Reacting as well to the 1970 October Crisis, the RCMP used a special slide show to paint a dire future for domestic stability in the 1970s. In short, argued Canadas intelligence service, the new decade would render the sixties calm in comparison.

Canada’s famous police force proved, in the end, more proficient at collecting information than using it as a basis for fortune-telling. The social factors of the 1960s that had fuelled campus protest dissipated in the 1970s, and the campuses quieted. Instead of universities experiencing turmoil, the RCMP Security Service did.

Pressured by the federal government to act against radicalism, it launched a campaign of illegal activities, later nick-named the “dirty tricks.” Out of this came a royal commission and the eventual decision to strip the Mounties of the primacy of their security role and create a new agency, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

Within CSIS, however, there was an element of continuity with the past. At its start most of its personnel were ex-Mounties and one of the primary justifications for its work, next to espionage, the threat of violence in the form of terrorism, had already been a growing concern in the old Security Service.

Within the continuity there is also relevance for the post-September 11 world. As in the Cold War, a real threat to domestic security exists. But, also as in the Cold War, the potential exists (and indeed has occurred in some cases) for imagined and exaggerated threats to take over, for scapegoating and infringements on civil liberties to occur, and for those who dissent to be discredited by being branded as terrorists in the same way that the label Communist or Red was applied in the Cold War.

It may indeed be a new world after September 11, but when it comes to domestic security agencies whose roots lie in the Cold War, fundamental change may be slow in coming.

* The New Left was a broad label applied to a diverse movement that emerged at the end of the 1950s in the 1960s. In general, its adherents, who found inspiration in the writings of theorists like C. Wright Mills. Herbert Marcuse, and even Karl Marx, rejected orthodoxy and authoritarianism of all kinds including that of the so called Old Left. A rejection of what amounted to Stalinism was not necessarily, however, a repudiation of Communist principles.

et cetera

Cold War Canada: The Making of a National Insecurity State, 1945-1957, by Reg Whitaker and Gary Marcuse. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1994.

Children of Privilege: Student Revolt in the Sixties, by Cyril Levitt. University of Toronto Press, 1984.

Occupation, a 1970 documentary film by Bill Reid about students occupying political science department offices at McGill University, is available through the National Film Board at www.nfb.ca.

Steve Hewitt teaches history at the University of Indianapolis and is a visiting scholar at Purdue University. His book, Spying 101: The RCMP’s Secret Activities at Canadian Universities, 1917–1997, from which this article is adapted, was published in 2002 by University of Toronto Press.

This article originally appeared in the August-September 2002 issue of The Beaver.

Mar 132017
 

QUESTION:   is something like this allowed, advisable, useable as a supporting document for Gerald Hawke’s Motion to Strike?

Form 13-31

(Rule 13-31)

 COURT FILE NUMBER 1730 – 2016
COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN
JUDICIAL CENTRE Saskatoon
PLAINTIFF(S) Ashu Solo
DEFENDANT(S) Robert Gerald Hawke et al.

 

  1. My name is Sandra Finley. Formerly of Saskatoon, SK, I currently reside on Vancouver Island.   I am 67 years old.  I was the leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan for a period of 1.5 years that included the 2007 Provincial Election.   I have run provincially and federally for the Green Parties (Canada and Saskatchewan) and acted in other capacities with the Federal Party.   I graduated from the University of Saskatchewan with a Bachelor of Commerce (honours, 1971) and last year (2016) completed two terms (6 years) as an elected member of University Senate.

00           I met Lois Mitchell a few years ago through the Green Party and through common interests in community work.   I consider Lois Mitchell a friend.  Lois Mitchell knows that Ashu Solo started a lawsuit against me, still on-going, for alleged defamation.   (QB File Number 500-2015.)

00           On December 24, 2016, Lois Mitchell emailed a draft affidavit by one James Hunter to me.   The affidavit is to be used in relation to Court File Number 1730-2016.  The Plaintiff is Ashu Solo, the Defendant is Robert Gerald Hawke.

00           Lois Mitchell explained the reason for James Hunter’s affidavit in her email (December 24, 2016):  James [Hunter] has taken this on out of a sense of duty. He is outraged by the scam that is behind it. . . .  Lois Mitchell was going to also submit an affidavit to tell her experience with Ashu Solo and thought I might want to submit one, too.  The phone number for Gerald Hawke was in the email.

00           On December 25, 2016  I replied to Lois Mitchell with an update on Ashu Solo v. Sandra Finley,  QB File Number 500-2015.   I told Lois Mitchell that the case had finally gotten as far as Mediation on November 22 (2016).

00           I told Lois Mitchell that the details of what happened in the Mediation of QB 500-2015 are confidential; the Mediator had brought mediation to an end before it was finished.  Shaken by what had transpired, I subsequently visited the Saskatoon Police Station.

00           I thanked Lois Mitchell for the information she sent and told her that I didn’t know Gerald Hawke, or his troubles with Ashu Solo, but I would contact Gerald Hawke.

  1. On December 27 or 28, 2016, I spoke with Gerald Hawke by phone. I determined that the complaint brought against him by Ashu Solo was the same as brought against me, Loosefoot Computing, and Fishnet Technologies (my service providers), a charge of Defamation.

00           [Out-of-sequence CORRECTION]   On February 6, 2017, while preparing this Affidavit, I did an electronic search on my files on the name “Hawke”.  As intended, I found the correspondence I had with Gerald Hawke following our phone conversations in the Christmas 2016 holiday period.

00           Unexpectedly, the February 6 search brought up correspondence predating December 24, 2016 that contained the name “Hawke”:   on October 20, 2016, the lawyer for Ashu Solo, Tyler Dahl, emailed my then-lawyer Samuel Edmondson.

00           In the correspondence from Tyler Dahl, October 20, Ashu Solo claimed that I had spoken with a journalist by the name of Gerald Hawke.  Ashu Solo claimed that in the alleged conversation I had described Ashu Solo as “plagiarist, con-artist, “legal terrorist”, anti-semite, bully, racist, and thief” with the intention that the statements would be published.

00           I dismissed Ashu Solo’s crazy claim and replied to my lawyer that I did not know what Ashu Solo was talking about, which I did not.   (I had not spoken with any journalist about Ashu Solo; I had never heard the name Gerald Hawke.  On top of that, the language used by Ashu Solo to describe what I was supposed to have said is not language I use.)

00           After replying to my lawyer about the October 20 claim, I forgot this particular allegation.  The claim in paragraph XY is just one of other claims Ashu Solo has made against me that he cannot substantiate because they are untrue.

Returning to chronological order:

00           In phone conversation, Christmas holidays 2016, I told Gerald Hawke what he could expect with regard to the Statement of Claim from Ashu Solo, using my case as example.   I thought the information might be helpful to Gerald Hawke, to help him prepare his own defence.

00           I gave Gerald Hawke the password to the documentation on my blog which details repeated emails and phone calls from my lawyer to Ashu Solo’s lawyer.    The documentation shows that it took 8 months to obtain anything from Ashu Solo that even remotely met the legal criteria for defamation, to support Ashu Solo’s Statement of Claim against me.

00           Gerald Hawke read in the documentation that in the beginning my lawyer pointed out that I was willing to make changes to blogged information, if it was defamatory, but I could not do that if Ashu Solo did not tell me what was defamatory.

00           After months and no results, it came down to:  I could not file a Statement of Defence until I had the specifics of what Ashu Solo claims are defamatory statements I have made.

00           Gerald Hawke asked questions.  I told Gerald Hawke that only after resorting to the filing of a document with the Court did I (through my lawyer) finally receive something I could at least work with.    I told Gerald Hawke I was aware of time limits stated in the QB Rules.  And of the steadily rising bills for legal services.

  1. In my phone conversations with Gerald Hawke during the Christmas holidays, 2016, I asked Gerald Hawke what was his experience with Ashu Solo? Did he know what he was getting into?  Might there be alternative courses of action for Gerald Hawke?
  2. I told Gerald Hawke that, in my experience, people became afraid of how far Ashu Solo might go; in some cases they were fearful for the safety of their family should they take steps to oppose Ashu Solo.
  3. I told Gerald Hawke that, in all my life, my phone number has been listed. Because of the actions of Ashu Solo against me, and other people, I felt it would be foolhardy not to get an unlisted phone number, which I did.
  4. I asked Gerald Hawke why he was standing up to Ashu Solo? At base I understood Gerald Hawke to say that caving in to the actions of Ashu Solo out of fear or inconvenience was not an option for Gerald Hawke.   Gerald Hawke’s answer to my question was calm, simple and succinct.  I am regrettably not able to remember Gerald Hawke’s exact words.
  5. I related to what Gerald Hawke said. In my case, Ashu Solo’s actions against a young woman, Tonia Zimmerman, who is a Green Party voter were wrong.  The actions of Ashu Solo against Tonia Zimmerman offended me.
  6. In the conversation, Gerald Hawke also talked about Tonia Zimmerman. I did not ask him how he came to know of the cyberbullying of Tonia Zimmerman by Ashu Solo.  We talked in greater detail about Ashu Solo’s role in the on-line entities WorldComp and Crocels.
  7. I determined that Gerald Hawke was representing himself with the help of his friend, James Hunter. I offered whatever assistance might be helpful.
  8. I gave the password to Gerald Hawke for documents I have posted on my blog related to Ashu Solo. Gerald Hawke reciprocated with documents that are additional to what I have collected.
  9. Information found independently on the internet by Gerald Hawke was pretty much the same as what I, and others similarly harassed by Ashu Solo, have found. The difference is that Gerald Hawke has gone deeper and has more recent information regarding WorldComp and Crocels.
  10. I told Gerald Hawke that I had collected background information on Ashu Solo in the summer of 2013, as part of a vetting process.   Ashu Solo wished to run as a candidate for the Green Party of Canada.   I had worked with (Name removed).   In the summer of 2013 (Name removed) and I were both officials for the Green Party in the Federal Electoral District of Saskatoon-Humboldt, as it was then named.
  11. I told Gerald Hawke that (Name removed) and I were greatly troubled by what we found about Ashu Solo through his on-line activities. Potential voters for the Green Party who did a background search on Ashu Solo as a candidate would find the same information.  It would not reflect well on the Green Party.  The information had largely to do with Crocels News and Worldcomp.
  12. I told Gerald Hawke that (Name removed) and I agreed to set the vetting of Ashu Solo aside temporarily while we each attended to family matters at the end of summer 2013.
  13. I pointed out to Gerald Hawke that the not-completed vetting of Ashu Solo as a candidate for public office occurred well before I received a complaint about Ashu Solo’s use of Green Party social media from Tonia Zimmerman in early December 2013. I knew Ashu Solo because he had become active in the Green Party.   I did not know Tonia Zimmerman.
  14. Gerald Hawke, through the password I gave him, has access to information posted on my blog, related to Ashu Solo’s actions vis-à-vis Tonia Zimmerman. Gerald Hawke could not find this information by an internet search.
  15. Gerald Hawke saw the postings of emails and cyberbullying by Ashu Solo of the young woman, Tonia Zimmerman, that began in early 2013, before I knew either Ashu Solo or Tonia Zimmerman.
  16. (IF THIS AFFIDAVIT IS SENT TO ASHU SOLO, PLEASE REDACT THIS ENTIRE PARAGRAPH) Gerald Hawke has access to  documentation about Ashu Solo’s attempts to get (Name removed) fired from her long-time employment with the Saskatoon Health District, to the point where (Name removed) went through a disciplinary hearing.  (Name removed) was exonerated; the Union Representative recommended to (Name removed) that she should file a complaint with the Saskatoon Police which (Name removed) did.  Management in the Health District suggested steps that (Name removed) should take to combat the threat that Ashu Solo posed to (Name removed).
  17. I gave Gerald Hawke access to emails that document serious attacks on Daeran Gall by Ashu Solo. And the efforts by Daeran Gall to be kind to Ashu Solo.  Ashu Solo met Daeran Gall through the Green Party.
  18. Through the collection of emails on my blog, Gerald Hawke knows that officials from the Green Party in Ottawa worked with the Saskatoon Police and local Green Party members in Saskatoon to stop Ashu Solo’s volleys of unending harassment and cyberbullying aimed at many Green Party workers and volunteers in the federal offices (Ottawa) of the Green Party.
  19. I did not join the Green Party of British Columbia when I moved B.C., so that Ashu Solo would not be able to run a harassment campaign as Ashu Solo has with the Federal Party, aimed at forcing the Federal Party to revoke my membership, to discredit me. Ashu Solo has claimed that the Federal Party revoked my membership which in fact they have never done.   I remain a member;  all I had to do was provide the documentation to show that the cause and effect relationship claimed by Ashu Solo against me was false;  the dates proved that the relationship did not exist.  The information had been manipulated.
  20. I told Gerald Hawke that Ashu Solo’s relentless harassment and bullying of me, which commenced almost a year after Ashu Solo started on Tonia Zimmerman, has been on-going for 3 years now; that I had been forced into the justice system (which I knew to avoid because of cost). A lawyer told me that I ran the risk of a default judgment against me if I didn’t file a Defence to Ashu Solo’s Claim of Defamation against me.
  21. I told Gerald Hawke that it had cost me about $25,000.00 to date in legal bills (my own, and under the terms of contract, the bills for my service provider). My service provider, Loosefoot Computing, is a co-defendant.  They agreed to my request that they not pay off Ashu Solo to settle, as their lawyer had recommended (the business decision).
  22. I told Gerald Hawke that I had confirmed the authenticity of an email thread between radio talk show host John Gormley and Ashu Solo in which John Gormley tells Ashu Solo he will take steps if Ashu Solo does not stop his actions against Tonia Zimmerman and two other young women. The email thread took place at the end of November, 2013.  John Gormley sent the email thread to Tonia Zimmerman to use against Ashu Solo if Ashu Solo should resume his cyberbullying of her.
  23. I told Gerald Hawke my strategy for dealing with Ashu Solo:  I did not reply to anything from Ashu Solo.  I saw my role as helping to keep people calm with reassurance that Ashu Solo would tire of his antics, sooner if he received no reactions.  I was wrong.
  24. Ashu Solo took complaints about me to the Saskatoon Police and to the Duncan BC RCMP where he thought I lived. I was also interviewed by the RCMP detachment near where I reside.  I have been interviewed by all three policing bodies; no fault on my part was found.
  25. I told Gerald Hawke that he is number seven on the list of people of whom I am aware that have brought complaints against Ashu Solo to Saskatoon City Police. (I am one of the seven.)
  26. I told Gerald Hawke that Ashu Solo tried to force my service provider (Loosefoot Communications) to take down my blog. The files for my blog were moved to a service provider in Russia (Fishnet Communications) and a warning message sent to Ashu Solo who had gone so far as to contact the parents of the co-owner of Loosefoot, after harassment of office staff and threats didn’t cause Loosefoot Communications to take down my blog.   Loosefoot Communications remains a co-defendant in QB500-2015.

00           In January 2015 I was contacted by my domain name registrar.  Ashu Solo was trying to force them to de-register my domain name, which would have effectively taken down my blog.

00           I told Gerald Hawke that Ashu Solo uses the same tactics over and over again:  threats to go to the Police, threats he will bring a lawsuit and get a judgment against you – the legal costs will bankrupt and cost you your home.   Ashu Solo threatened the employability of Tonia Zimmerman by creating blogs through which Ashu Solo appropriated Tonia Zimmerman’s name.   Tonia Zimmerman tried but was unable to get the blogs taken down without a court order, even though the blogs were under her name.

00           Once inside the justice system, Ashu Solo uses the knowledge that lawyers typically recommend to clients that they settle, even if they are innocent:  the legal bills will far outweigh the costs of a pay-off to the Plaintiff.  The lawyers tell you that if you get an award for costs, the amount awarded in defamation cases will be insignificant in comparison with the costs you will incur.   Ashu Solo made a formal offer to settle with Loosefoot Communications.  I told Gerald Hawke that Ashu Solo’s offers to settle for large amounts of money are, in my view, attempted extortion.

00           On March 10th, 2017, I received from Gerald Hawke excerpts from the “Demand for Particulars” sent to Gerald Hawke by Ashu Solo.   

00           I read in the March 10th email from Gerald Hawke:

  1. Solo sent me a Request for Particulars.  As silly as ever.

Solo is still panicked about you and Tonia so his request is cluttered with demands I tell him all the details about you and Tonia.  . . .

Ashu Solo demanded of Gerald Hawke, among other things, that Gerald Hawke send communications to Ashu Solo with: 

().  The dates, times, locations, of each particular act of criminality alleged to have been carried out by the Plaintiff against Sandra Finley.

(). The sources of information, means of communication of this information, and content of these communications for each particular act of criminality alleged to have been carried out by the Plaintiff against Sandra Finley.

().  The sources of information, means of communication of this information, and content of these communications for each particular threat alleged to have been made by the Plaintiff against Sandra Finley.

  • On March 11 and 12, 2017,  I emailed Gerald Hawke copy of the same “Demand” made on other people. I wrote to Gerald Hawke: 

As I see it, there are two aspects to Solo’s “Demand for Particulars” from you.  You identified the first one.

  1. You said:  None of these requests have anything to do with his claim against me.  And he knows it.  My opinion is that Solo is worried about his claim against you (Sandra Finley) so he is desperate to scavenge any information that may help him.   

No argument from me!   Experience leads me to the same conclusion as you.  I have emails in which Ashu, in communications with other people, accuses me of harassing him, telling lies about him, and so on.  But those statements are not true.   And he has zero evidence in support of his claims about me.   So he goes on fishing trips, demanding “communications” in which I’ve made defamatory statements about him.  He doesn’t seem to realize that other people might have a code of conduct different from his.  

I had a good laugh (thanks!) over  “the Saskatoon Police Service found that “Tonia Zimmerman” is a fake name used by someone with a fake profile.”   Ashu should have fun producing for Disclosure of Documents,  a copy of that statement by the Police!    He gets himself confused with his targets.   HE is the one who uses the fake names and profiles – – but you know that better than I know it.  (Ashu Solo gave an email to Saskatoon City Police when bringing a complaint against Gerald Hawke, using an email sent by Gerald Hawke to Ashu Solo as evidence.   When the Police Officer asked why the email was sent to “Sam Weston”, Ashu Solo told the Police Officer that Sam Weston was actually Ashu Solo.   When the Officer contacted Gerald Hawke to advise him that Ashu Solo had brought a complaint against Gerald Hawke, the Officer told Gerald Hawke that the Police would not be taking actions based on Ashu Solo’s claim.  The Officer also told Gerald Hawke that Ashu Solo had told her that Sam Weston is Ashu Solo.)

  1. Ashu also served a Demand for Particulars on me. To me (this is the second aspect)  it was not part of trying to resolve an issue between parties;  it was an exercise to elevate my frustration (having to respond to bullshit stuff) and to drive up my legal costs.  Drag out the time.   Effectively silence me.  Leaving something in place to keep me silenced:   the unspoken threat that if I remove password protection from the information about him, lord knows what he will do next.   The Demand for Particulars is part of his attempt to wear you down, as I see it.

I believe this to be a representative account of what I told Gerald Hawke of my experience with Ashu Solo and what to expect in the lawsuit brought against him by Ashu Solo.

Mar 132017
 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cra-internet-vulnerability-government-1.4022591

Federal officials say no personal information leaked in ‘credible’ software security threat

The Canada Revenue Agency shut down secure portals of its website for two days after a software vulnerability was detected. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Federal government officials say no personal information was compromised by a software security risk that prompted a two-day shutdown of Canada Revenue Agency’s online tax services.

The issue with the open source software called Apache Struts 2, which is used widely around the world in the public and private sector, prompted the CRA filing portals to go offline Friday. Services were restored late Sunday afternoon.

During a briefing with reporters in Ottawa Monday, officials also revealed that Statistics Canada’s website was hacked, but said only data that was already publicly available was accessed from what they called a “soft target.”

Jennifer Dawson, deputy chief information officer for the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, said IT security disabled affected servers and patched the cracks before returning digital services back to normal.

“Due to our quick and proactive approach, we’re confident that we’ve prevented government information, including the personal information of Canadians, from being breached,” she said. “We’ve seen no evidence of this information being compromised.”

Affected services included My Account, My Business Account, Represent a Client, the MyCRA mobile application, the MyBenefits mobile application, Netfile, EFILE and Auto-Fill My Return.

Officials said no tax file processing delays are expected as a result of the service disruption, and confirmed that no filing extensions will be granted as there are still seven weeks left before the May 1 filing deadline.

The security threat was first detected late Wednesday night. Statistics Canada’s site was taken offline Thursday a few hours after the security breach, while the CRA site was temporarily suspended Thursday, brought back online and then shut down Friday.

Officials said the delay to shut down the systems was to properly assess the scope of the threat.

Specific, credible threat

John Glowacki, chief operating officer of Shared Services Canada, said the Apache Struts 2 software vulnerability is a world-wide problem that posed a “specific and credible threat” to certain government IT systems.

Canada was well-positioned to respond in a quick and co-ordinated way because federal IT services are managed as a central enterprise rather than in silos, he said.

Politics News
Canada Revenue Agency website shutdown was precautionary

John Glowacki, Chief Operating Officer for Shared Services Canada says that the shutdown of the Canadian Revenue Agency and Stas Canada websites was precautionary after a credible threat was discovered. 0:59

“The enterprise approach gives Canada a fairly unique approach in the world,” he said. “In talking with colleagues from other countries, we are actually the envy of Five Eyes countries and others because Shared Services Canada exists.”

Glowacki said some other countries are having greater difficulties with the vulnerability, but he would not say which ones.

Cyber-security expert Daniel Tobok said he has confidence in Canada’s efforts to protect data and infrastructure, but warned that no country is immune from breaches and hacking. Any government department is a potential target, but CRA is considered a “glory of gold” because of the amount of sensitive information it retains on Canadians.

“It’s very tempting for organized crime to try and intercept or expose any vulnerability so they can get access to data,” he told CBC News.

The CRA said all of its online services were back to normal late Sunday afternoon after being offline since Friday afternoon. (CRA)

Mar 092017
 

Subject:     The 9:04 pm message that kept me up all night

 

Hi Sandra!

It started like this…

“Dr. Gentempo; I have two adorable grandchildren 1 and 3 years old. Their parents feel guilty for already vaccinating them, and are wondering what they can do now… after the fact?”

My heart sank. And then I got angry.

How many more times are parents going to have to feel guilty for doing “what the doctor ordered”? The most devastating feeling in the world is to watch your children hurt – to see them in pain – to have to witness their suffering.

Look, we live in a world where there are far too many people who believe vaccines are perfectly safe. That injecting detergents, foreign DNA, live and mutated viruses, mercury and aluminum is totally harmless.

It’s these same people that seem to think that natural medicine (which has been around since the beginning of time) and the bodies ability to heal itself is bunk.

This is the reason I choose to do what I do – why we created Vaccines Revealed.

Look, vaccines are inflammatory – they are meant to be inflammatory and cause a response in the body. – That’s how they work.

Let me explain: One of the primary ingredients in vaccines is an “adjuvant”. An adjuvant is a substance whose role is to enhance the body’s immune response. This immune response is hard on the body and causes inflammation.

The next problem we face is that the thimerosal (mercury) and aluminum used as preservatives and adjuvants are toxic and accumulate in the body.

So – If you have a child who has been vaccinated, suffered an adverse reaction, has a chronic health condition, or if you want to prevent one that could occur in the future as a result of being vaccinated in the past …

The very best medicine is prevention – and next best is to decrease or stop the cumulative effects of the toxins on their bodies.

You may want to consider taking steps to detox. Accumulated toxins contribute to health conditions and that’s why we address the burden vaccines placed on your child and the toxins stored in their body as a result.

It’s really quite simple: In natural medicine, “dis-ease” has one of two underlying causes: toxicity and nutritional deficiency. Detoxing attempts to restore balance by supporting the body’s elimination channels and by binding to metals, chemicals, and toxins so they can be safely removed from the body. Vaccinations are certainly toxic.

First of all…

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT! There’s a misconception that detoxing is harsh or can only be done via chelating and fasting.

With children, it is extremely important that detoxing be done in a slow, gentle manner, and in the safest way possible.

Mar 082017
 

The 8,761 documents published by WikiLeaks focus mainly on techniques for hacking and surveillance

(Below:  a copy of  the Guardian article )

 

US consulate in Frankfurt, Germany.

US consulate in Frankfurt, Germany is home to a ‘sensitive compartmentalised information facility’, according to the leaked documents. Photograph: Boris Roessler/AP

 

The US intelligence agencies are facing fresh embarrassment after WikiLeaks published what it described as the biggest ever leak of confidential documents from the CIA detailing the tools it uses to break into phones, communication apps and other electronic devices.

The thousands of leaked documents focus mainly on techniques for hacking and reveal how the CIA cooperated with British intelligence to engineer a way to compromise smart televisions and turn them into improvised surveillance devices.

The leak, named “Vault 7” by WikiLeaks, will once again raise questions about the inability of US spy agencies to protect secret documents in the digital age. It follows disclosures about Afghanistan and Iraq by army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2010 and about the National Security Agency and Britain’s GCHQ by Edward Snowden in 2013.

The new documents appear to be from the CIA’s 200-strong Center for Cyber Intelligence and show in detail how the agency’s digital specialists engage in hacking. Monday’s leak of about 9,000 secret files, which WikiLeaks said was only the first tranche of documents it had obtained, were all relatively recent, running from 2013 to 2016.

The revelations in the documents include:

CIA hackers targeted smartphones and computers.

The Center for Cyber Intelligence, based at the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, has a second covert base in the US consulate in Frankfurt which covers Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

A programme called Weeping Angel describes how to attack a Samsung F8000 TV set so that it appears to be off but can still be used for monitoring.

The CIA declined to comment on the leak beyond the agency’s now-stock refusal to verify the content. “We do not comment on the authenticity or content of purported intelligence documents,” wrote CIA spokesperson Heather Fritz Horniak. But it is understood the documents are genuine and a hunt is under way for the leakers or hackers responsible for the leak.

WikiLeaks, in a statement, was vague about its source. “The archive appears to have been circulated among former US government hackers and contractors in an unauthorised manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive,” the organisation said.

The leak feeds into the present feverish controversy in Washington over alleged links between Donald Trump’s team and Russia. US officials have claimed WikiLeaks acts as a conduit for Russian intelligence and Trump sided with the website during the White House election campaign, praising the organisation for publishing leaked Hillary Clinton emails.

Asked about the claims regarding vulnerabilities in consumer products, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said: “I’m not going to comment on that. Obviously that’s something that’s not been fully evaluated.”

Asked about Trump’s praise for WikiLeaks during last year’s election, when it published emails hacked from Clinton’s campaign chairman, Spicer told the Guardian: “The president said there’s a difference between Gmail accounts and classified information. The president made that distinction a couple of weeks ago.”

Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks editor-in-chief, said the disclosures were “exceptional from a political, legal and forensic perspective”. WikiLeaks has been criticised in the past for dumping documents on the internet unredacted and this time the names of officials and other information have been blacked out.

WikiLeaks shared the information in advance with Der Spiegel in Germany and La Repubblica in Italy.

Edward Snowden, who is in exile in Russia, said in a series of tweets the documents seemed genuine and that only an insider could know this kind of detail. He tweeted:

 INSERT:   I can’t copy the tweets.  Go to

the Guardian article

to read a small number of them.   From there I accidentally arrived on Snowden’s answers to questions related to what in the leaked information he uses to determine that the info is legitimate.   He also interprets information.   USG is his shorthand for United States Government.

The document dealing with Samsung televisions carries the CIA logo and is described as secret. It adds “USA/UK”. It says: “Accomplishments during joint workshop with MI5/BTSS (British Security Service) (week of June 16, 2014).”

It details how to fake it so that the television appears to be off but in reality can be used to monitor targets. It describes the television as being in “Fake Off” mode. Referring to UK involvement, it says: “Received sanitized source code from UK with comms and encryption removed.”

 

WikiLeaks, in a press release heralding the leak, said: “The attack against Samsung smart TVs was developed in cooperation with the United Kingdom’s MI5/BTSS. After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake Off’ mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In ‘Fake Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the internet to a covert CIA server.”

 

The role of MI5, the domestic intelligence service, is mainly to track terrorists and foreign intelligence agencies and monitoring along the lines revealed in the CIA documents would require a warrant.

 

The Snowden revelations created tension between the intelligence agencies and the major IT companies upset that the extent of their cooperation with the NSA had been exposed. But the companies were primarily angered over the revelation the agencies were privately working on ways to hack into their products. The CIA revelations risk renewing the friction with the private sector.

 

The initial reaction of members of the intelligence community was to question whether the latest revelations were in the public interest.

A source familiar with the CIA’s information security capabilities took issue with WikiLeaks’s comment that the leaker wanted “to initiate a public debate about cyberweapons”. But the source said this was akin to claiming to be worried about nuclear proliferation and then offering up the launch codes for just one country’s nuclear weapons at the moment when a war seemed most likely to begin.

Monday’s leaks also reveal that CIA hackers operating out of the Frankfurt consulate are given diplomatic (“black”) passports and US State Department cover. The documents include instructions for incoming CIA hackers that make Germany’s counter-intelligence efforts appear inconsequential.

 

The document reads:

“Breeze through German customs because you have your cover-for-action story down pat, and all they did was stamp your passport.

 

Your cover story (for this trip):

Q: Why are you here?

A: Supporting technical consultations at the consulate.”

 

The leaks also reveal a number of the CIA’s electronic attack methods are designed for physical proximity. These attack methods are able to penetrate high-security networks that are disconnected from the internet, such as police record databases. In these cases, a CIA officer, agent or allied intelligence officer acting under instructions, physically infiltrates the targeted workplace. The attacker is provided with a USB stick containing malware developed for the CIA for this purpose, which is inserted into the targeted computer. The attacker then infects and extracts data.

 

A CIA attack system called Fine Dining provides 24 decoy applications for CIA spies to use. To witnesses, the spy appears to be running a programme showing videos, presenting slides, playing a computer game, or even running a fake virus scanner. But while the decoy application is on the screen, the system is automatically infected and ransacked.

 

The documents also provide travel advice for hackers heading to Frankfurt: “Flying Lufthansa: Booze is free so enjoy (within reason).”

 

The rights group Privacy International, in a statement, said it had long warned about government hacking powers. “Insufficient security protections in the growing amount of devices connected to the internet or so-called ‘smart’ devices, such as Samsung smart TVs, only compound the problem, giving governments easier access to our private lives,” the group said.

 

Mar 072017
 

Hi,

Earlier, I could not find any reports in Canadian national media on the fraud at the Centre for Disease Control (CDC in Atlanta).  To my mind,  the consequences of the fraud are terrible beyond belief.  Can’t believe that human beings would do this to each other.

Yesterday I listened to an interview on CBC Radio,  How the race for rubella vaccine can be instrumental in conquering Zika virus.   I am cynical.  Which led to

 

Reply to CBC:   But it requires media cooperation for Big Pharma to accomplish the silencing of the CDC Whistle blower.   

 

And wouldn’t you know it, this arrived:

2017-03-06  Vaccines Syndrome. Helpful footage on youtube, Bob Lee. (Anthrax vaccination)

 

Which caused some updates to:

2011-11-30   It’s the biggest medical scandal in U.S. history and it hasn’t even happened yet!  

(I am still dumbfounded that, by 2000 “they” knew what anthrax vaccine was doing to tens of thousands of adults, killing and maiming them for life. AND YET, in 2011 a Plan was concocted to vaccinate American kids with anthrax vaccine.  There is a phrase in the Washington Post article about the Plan that shows how the public is fed “sketchy” information.

 

Which led to a new, damning-as-hell posting (just in case everything else is not enough),

2016-10-19   CDC Blocks Testimony by Vaccine Whistleblower in Medical Malpractice Case.

A little Reinforcement would be great!   . . .  My email to the CBC won’t be enough.   Will some of you make a statement to the CBC?   How the race for rubella vaccine can be instrumental in conquering Zika virus    is one-sided and promotional.

Contact The Current – –     http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/contact

See    Reply to CBC:   But it requires media cooperation for Big Pharma to accomplish the silencing of the CDC Whistle blower.    

Context:  mandatory vaccination is being fought in the U.S. and in Australia, two of our sister countries in FVEY.

The Corporate agenda is the same in the U.S., Australia, the U.K., New Zealand and Canada.   We will be fighting the same battle, mandatory vaccination here, if we don’t stay on top of it now.

Vaccination is not the only path for dealing with disease outbreaks.

In the case of just one of the vaccines (anthrax)  American Government agencies have stock-piled more than a billion dollars worth of the vaccine.

The needles are itching for arms to inject.   It’s about money and stupidity, not public health.

 

Mar 072017
 

http://www.ecowatch.com/cdc-vaccines-autism-2051536402.html

Thomas Frieden, the director of the Center for Disease Control (CDC), has blocked CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, from testifying on scientific fraud and destruction of evidence by senior CDC officials in critical vaccine safety studies regarding the causative relationship between childhood vaccines and autism.

Attorneys Bryan Smith and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of Morgan & Morgan, have been seeking to have Dr. Thompson testify in a medical malpractice case to explain how the CDC committed scientific fraud in a series of studies, which found no link between vaccines and autism.

In denying the request, Dr. Frieden said, “Dr. William Thompson’s deposition testimony would not substantially promote the objectives of CDC or HHS [Health and Human Services].”

Dr. Thompson, a 19-year veteran at the CDC and former senior vaccine safety scientist at the agency’s Immunology Safety Office, is the co-author of four key studies that the CDC widely touts to exonerate the MMR vaccine and vaccines containing the mercury-based preservative thimerosal, from being linked to autism. Thompson is currently employed at the CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.

. . .   More  – – go to the link at top.