The Watchdog

Keeping citizens in the loop

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT:’CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ (Department of Justice) in alleged fraud scheme’

CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud scheme

Jane Burgermeister | April 29, 2011 at 3:13 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL:

CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud scheme

Thursday, April 28, 2011
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of

(NaturalNews) CDC researcher Poul Thorsen, who famously headed up the “Denmark Study” that many claim disproved any link between autism and vaccines, has been indicted in Atlanta by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, money laundering and defrauding research institutions of grant money.

Poul Thorson is a scientist who formerly worked for the CDC, and over the last several years, he oversaw millions of dollars in grant money that was used to conduct research to “prove” that vaccines have no link to autism. Dr. Thorson’s research papers include the famous “Danish Study” entitled Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data. (…)

This paper concludes that thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines around the world, has no statistically significant link to autism. It is one of the key papers used by vaccination proponents who argue that thimerosal is safe to inject into young children. That Poul Thorson’s credibility is now being called into question by a federal indictment of fraud and money laundering will, of course, have ripple effects throughout both the vaccine industries and autism support groups (more about that below).

Be sure to see our “Web of Alleged Fraud” chart which accompanies this article:…

Learn more:

Add a comment to this post

April 30, 2011 Posted by | Internationally significant information, Jane Burgermeister Report | Leave a comment

WHISTLEBLOWER WARNING! ‘..The NZ POLICE are planning a raid on Te Whanau a Apanui.’

30 April 2011

Hi folks!

I have received this information from more than one source…….

Please pass it on!

Penny Bright


I received this tip off and wish for public intervention to ensure it does not happen. Your investigation and insistence to the NZ police may make the difference.


‎…The NZ POLICE are planning a raid on Te Whanau a Apanui.
The Police are currently recruiting as many Maori within the Police Force to ‘soften’ the impact of the raid on this small Maori community.
Make NO MISTAKE this is a REPEAT of the… brutal scare mongering tactics that were applied to the TUHOE raids October 2007 and REMEMBER the shambles of that operation? TAX PAYERS money has been spent and is still being spent on an unfounded and unjustified case that is yet to produce any hard evidence or results.

The proposed raids on Te Whanau a Apanui are a direct response to a community who are trying to stand up for their own rights. They oppose oil drilling off their coast and this is how they are being treated! Their concern is for ALL New Zealanders, they know if Petrobas is granted permission they are the first in a line of many who will ravage much more than the East Coast. We need to show our support.


Our source is very reliable as they were approached by the police force to join the mission but refused as they whakapapa to Te Whanau a Apanui. THIS IS SERIOUS.
All phones to the east coast community are tapped and people are being marked.
This is outrageous and unnecessary.

SEND THIS to EVERYONE you know. If you could get in touch with as many media, radio, paper, reporters as you can that would be great. The NZ Public deserve to know what is going on and we need to blow their covers before it happens.

For all further enquiries please contact:
Dayle 021378770

April 30, 2011 Posted by | Fighting corruption in NZ, Human rights, Internationally significant information | Leave a comment

The Law Of Mother Earth: Behind Bolivia’s Historic Bill – Written by Nick Buxton

The Law Of Mother Earth: Behind Bolivia’s Historic Bill

… this article showed what the real challenge is, changing the
extraction model to something else, the question is –  what is the else?

Written by Nick Buxton

Posted: 28 April 2011 10:59

A new law expected to pass in Bolivia mandates a fundamental ecological reorientation of the nation’s economy and society.

Indigenous and campesino (small-scale farmer) movements in the Andean nation of Bolivia are on the verge of pushing through one of the most radical environmental bills in global history. The “Mother Earth” law
under debate in Bolivia’s legislature will almost certainly be approved, as it has already been agreed to by the majority governing party, Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS).

The law draws deeply on indigenous concepts that view nature as a sacred home, the Pachamama (Mother Earth) on which we intimately depend. As the law states, “Mother Earth is a living dynamic system made up of the undivided community of all living beings, who are all interconnected, interdependent and complementary, sharing a common destiny.”

The law would give nature legal rights, specifically the rights to life and regeneration, biodiversity, water, clean air, balance, and restoration. Bolivia’s law mandates a fundamental ecological reorientation of Bolivia’s economy and society, requiring all existing and future laws to adapt to the Mother Earth law and accept the ecological limits set by nature. It calls for public policy to be guided by Sumaj Kawsay (an indigenous concept meaning “living well,”
or living in harmony with nature and people), rather than the current focus on producing more goods and stimulating consumption.

In practical terms, the law requires the government to transition from non-renewable to renewable energy; to develop new economic indicators that will assess the ecological impact of all economic activity; to carry out ecological audits of all private and state companies; to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; to develop policies of food and renewable energy sovereignty; to research and invest resources in energy efficiency, ecological practices, and organic agriculture; and to require all companies and individuals to be accountable for environmental contamination with a duty to restore damaged environments.

The law will be backed up by a new Ministry of Mother Earth, an inter- Ministry Advisory Council, and an Ombudsman. Undarico Pinto, leader of the 3.5 million-strong campesino movement CSUTCB, which helped draft
the law, believes this legislation represents a turning point in Bolivian law: “Existing laws are not strong enough. This will make industry more transparent. It will allow people to regulate industry at national, regional, and local levels.”

However, there is also strong awareness among Bolivia’s social movements-in particular for the Pacto de Unidad (Unity Pact), a coalition of the country’s five largest social movements and a key force behind the law-that the existence of a new law will not be enough to prompt real change in environmental practices.

A major obstacle is the fact that Bolivia is structurally dependent on extractive industries. Since the discovery of silver by the Spanish in the 16th Century, Bolivia’s history has been tied to ruthless exploitation of its people and its environment in order to transfer wealth to the richest countries; poet and historian Eduardo Galeano’s
famous book Open Veins draws largely on the brutal story of how Bolivia’s exploitation fuelled the industrial expansion of Europe. In 2010, 70 percent of Bolivia’s exports were still in the form of minerals, gas, and oil.        This structural dependence will be very difficult to unravel.

Moreover, there is a great deal of opposition from powerful sectors, particularly mining and agro-industrial enterprises, to any ecological laws that would threaten profits. The main organization of soya producers, which claimed that the law “will make the productive sector inviable,” is one of many powerful groups who have already come out against the law. Within the government, there are many ministries and officials that would also like the law to remain nothing more than a visionary but ultimately meaningless statement.

Raul Prada, one of the advisors to Pacto de Unidad, explained that the Mother Earth law was developed by Bolivia’s largest social movements in response to their perceived exclusion from policy-making by the MAS
government, led by indigenous President Evo Morales. They have generally supported MAS since its resounding election victory in 2005, but were frustrated by what they saw as a lack of progress. Rather than merely expressing their concern, these movements-comprised mainly of indigenous and farming communities-are pro-actively developing a series of new laws. Their first priority was the passage of the Mother Earth Law, based on a commitment made at the historic global Peoples Conference on Climate Change held in Bolivia in April 2010.     To some surprise, the diverse movements soon developed a consensual agreement that was supported by MAS legislators.

Raul Prada notes that, even with significant pressure from social movements, transitioning to an economy based on the concept Vivir Bien will not be easy. “It is going to be difficult to transit from an extractive economy. We clearly can’t close mines straight away, but we can develop a model where this economy has less and less weight. It
will need policies developed in participation with movements, particularly in areas such as food sovereignty. It will need redirection of investment and policies towards different ecological models of development. It will need the cooperation of the international community to develop regional economies that complement each other.”

Ultimately, though, this is a challenge far bigger than Bolivia, says Prada: “Our ecological and social crisis is not just a problem for Bolivia or Ecuador; it is a problem for all of us. We need to pull together peoples, researchers, and communities to develop real concrete alternatives so that the dominant systems of exploitation don’t just continue by default. This is not an easy task, but I believe with international solidarity, we can and must succeed.”

Nick Buxton wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. He spent four years in Bolivia learning from movements fighting for social and environmental justice.

April 30, 2011 Posted by | Internationally significant information, WORLD WATER WARRIORS | Leave a comment

‘Public Watchdog’ Howick by-election candidate Penny Bright has launched ‘partial rate$ revolt’ against Auckland $upercity planned 4.9% rate increase.

Penny Bright Independent Candidate Howick by-election:
POSTCARD campaign to National PM John Key  threatening a  ‘partial rate$ revolt’ against Auckland (Supercity) Council proposed 4.9% rate increase has begun.

National Prime Minister John Key supports ‘partial privatisation’ of state assets.

I support a partial ‘rate$ revolt.

Postcards addressed to National Prime Minister John Key, considering ‘not paying this proposed Auckland
Council 4.9% rate increase,were enthusiastically signed by some of the hundreds of attendees at today’s launch of the ‘Mana Party’.

The Auckland Council apparently has received only 1800 submissions to their Draft Annual Plan, where people had an opportunity to comment and make submissions – if they knew anything about it!

(Submissions closed on 1 April 2011).

Over  4000 ‘postcards’ have been printed – which people can sign and send (no stamp required)  are  going  like ‘hotcakes’ !

People are signing them and taking more postcards away for others to sign and send to Prime Minister John Key.

The wording of this ‘postcard’ is as follows:

“This new Auckland  (Supercity) Council is now proposing a 4.9% rates increase!

(While reducing most former Council’s prompt rates payment discounts.)

Where are the ‘economies of scale’ resulting from forcibly abolishing our  eight former councils and replacing them with this ‘corporate controlled  organisation’?

National promised to ‘consult with Aucklanders once the findings of the Royal Commission were known’:<>

You didn’t.   Citizens were denied our lawful right to a ‘binding poll’ and now Auckland is being run ‘like a BIG business, by BIG business , for BIG  business’.

Bigger contract$ for fewer but bigger contractors?   Serving whose  interests?

The ‘books’ are NOT open.
We don’t know the name of the consultants/contractors; the scope, term and  value of these contracts.


Where is the ‘due diligence’, ‘cost-benefit analysis’ and ‘transparency’?

CUT rates by cutting out contractors and bring core Council services back  ‘in-house’!

I pledge to consider not paying this proposed Auckland Council 4.9% rate increase.






(Please advise the Auckland Council forthwith – submissions closed on 1 April 2011)


I  intend to distribute these ‘postcards’ widely both in the Howick Ward, and at upcoming events where I believe there should be considerable interest, including the ‘March for Social Justice, which is being held this Sunday

1 May 2011, at 2pm, starting from opposite Britomart, Auckland City.

I am also  planning to work with others to distribute the above-mentioned postcards in the Epsom electorate, where I  believe those living in high-valued properties should  be suitably horrified with this proposed ‘$upercity’ rates increase – given that the public were led to believe that this forced amalgamation of eight Auckland councils was going to be somehow ‘better’ for ratepayers.

I  remember  how, on the recent Auckland Council Mayoral campaign trail,  former Auckland City Council Mayor John Banks, now National Party/ACT Party proposed Epsom candidate stated how he enthusiastically supported from ‘Day One’ – this Auckland ‘Supercity’.

What I want to know is why would (former?) National Party supporters would want to feed the mouth that bites them?

The answer is simple – cut rates by cutting out the consultants and private contractors and return core council services to ‘in-house’  council provision”

I now have evidence which shows that  the books are NOT open and how the contracting appears to be ‘out of control’. This is  in the form of a recent Local Government Official Information Act reply from the Auckland Council on this pivotal issue of private sector contracts.

Penny Bright
Judicially recognised ‘Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water and
Auckland regional governance matters.
‘World Water Warrior’ – NZ attendee at World Water Forum Kyoto 2003.

Auckland Mayoral candidate 2010.
Botany by-election candidate 2011
Howick by-election candidate 2011

‘Anti-corruption campaigner’
Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference (Brisbane) 2009
Attendee: Transparency International 14th Anti-Corruption Conference
(Bangkok) 2010

Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127



Auckland Council 4.9% Draft Annual Plan proposal.

‘Transition Rate

Amalgamates the different rates you previously paid in 2010/2011

including the Auckland Regional Council rate but excluding those for water
supply and wastewater.

Proposed increase from 2010/2011 4.9%

Wastewater rate

Applies to properties that had wastewater or sewerage rate for 2010/2011 and
are connected to Watercare Services Limited network.

Proposed increase from 2010/2011 4.5%

Penalties for late payments of rates are proposed to be 10%.

A discount of 1.5% will be offered for the full payment of rates by the
first installment date.

NBR 1 March 2011 article

Amount spent on consultants in 2008

$62 million

By Bernard Orsman<>
5:00 AM Monday May 26, 2008

Auckland City chief executive David Rankin and senior managers have bent the
rules to hand out millions of dollars in consultancy work to former staff,
official papers show.

Mr Rankin, first as finance director and then chief executive, has overseen
payment of $8.7 million over the past four years in consultancy fees to 29
former staff and companies linked to former staff.

The news follows revelations last week that council spending on consultants
is budgeted to soar to $62.2 million this year, up 9.6 per cent on the $56.7
million budgeted.

April 30, 2011 Posted by | Fighting corruption in NZ, Human rights, Transparency in Govt spending | Leave a comment