One wonders with the increasing hesitancy, if the wait time has, like the manufacture of this vaccine, been seriously shortened for this reason. And so ‘team 5 million’, as I hear the PM saying in her announcement today … help has arrived so to speak. Remember the drug companies bear no responsibility for any damages these vaccines may incur. Your governments have kindly absolved them. This should be telling you something. Remember also they are not mandatory. Be sure you are made aware of possible injuries (ask to see the fact sheets listing these), and for deaths and injuries to date in other countries (some of them at least) search ‘Covid Vaccine Deaths’ and ‘Covid Vaccine Reactions’ in ‘categories’ at the left of the News page. See particularly this article, and this one. And last but not least, check out Pfizer’s ‘squeaky clean’ record here, and here.
AS WORD OF Rawiri Waititi’s successful intervention in the Waikeria Prison stand-off spreads, the Maori Party’s mana will grow significantly. It is difficult to think of a better metaphor with which to illustrate the party’s political mission than its co-leader, under the disdainful gaze of the authorities, leading 16 parched, burned, bleeding but unbroken prisoners out of danger and into safety. Surely, somewhere in New Zealand, a young Maori musician is already composing a song to celebrate Waititi’s success. He’s earned one.
It is difficult to imagine anyone bothering to write a song for the Corrections Minister, Kelvin Davis. Throughout the six days of the crisis at Waikeria, the Minister maintained an obdurate silence. The resolution of this crisis, New Zealanders were given to understand, was an “operational matter” – something best left to the public servants and corrections officers on the spot. The very same public servants and corrections officers whose actions – and failure to take action – were responsible for sparking the uprising in the first place.
You have to wonder of course given we know the testing regime is not reliable. Are we warming up for the rumoured lockdown for Jan 15th (which logically will happen eventually anyway given the globalists’ clearly stated end game)?
New Zealand aims to begin vaccinating its entire population against Covid-19 in the second half of next year in its largest-ever immunization program, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said. The nation’s currency rose.
The government has secured two additional vaccines from pharmaceutical companies AstraZeneca Plc and Novavax Inc, and will have enough for all five million New Zealanders, Ardern said Thursday in Wellington. If proven to be safe and effective, immunization will begin with border workers and essential staff in the second quarter of 2021 followed by the general population in the second half, she said. The vaccines will be free to the public.
“This will be New Zealand’s largest immunization roll out ever,” Ardern said in a statement.
Mr Xi was the chairman of the New Zealand branch of the Federation for a Democratic China, Mr Wang belonged to the Independent Chinese PEN Centre and Mr Yu is Secretary-General of New Zealand Value Alliance.
They were heading to Wellington for a planned protest at Parliament the following day and to present politicians with a petition urging them to take Chinese political interference seriously.
The crash involved three cars and happened just after 1pm near Galaxy Road. Two others were injured.
Police say an initial assessment shows a north-bound vehicle crossed the centreline, glancing a south-bound vehicle before colliding head on with a third vehicle.
Today the justice select committee was sitting at Parliament to discuss the possibility of Chinese political interference in New Zealand. Canterbury University academic Anne Marie Brady, who specialises in Chinese politics, opened her submission with news of Tuesday’s tragic crash, saying it had “bearing” on the issues being discussed today.
She said the men’s petition detailed how unsafe they felt in New Zealand.
New Zealand has been named the country that most fits Islamic ideals for the second year in a row, but the area of everyday finance is still difficult for Muslims, says a financial commentator.
In the 2019 Islamicity index, released earlier this year, New Zealand is ranked first overall, followed by Sweden, Iceland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Denmark and Ireland. The top Muslim-majority country is United Arab Emirates (UAE) at 44.
New Zealand ranks 3rd in terms of its economy, 4th for legal and governance, 5th for human and political rights, and 8th for international relations.
Our Planet 675 subscribers This insightful interview of Dr Simon Thornley of Auckland University again shows that there are good reasons for us in this country to question authority and then furnished with new, rigorous evidence – chart our own course. During the COVID lockdown crises, NZ as a country hunkered down as a “Team of Five Million” as the Prime Minister called us. We essentially did what we thought was in the best interests for the nation as a whole. However, after a short time there came from the academic realm, another voice that said hold on a moment, the statistics coming in seem to be not telling the full story, so let’s take another look at what’s really happening? This voice was Dr Simon Thornley who courageously stated that the facts were indeed not clearly stated. He also noted that Professor John Ioannidis of the Department of Epidemiology from Stanford University in the US was finding the same slanted stats and later on – Prof Carl Heneghan of Oxford University, in the UK also noted this. When Simon looked at the early evidence at the first stages of the lockdown – of who were in hospital or were very unwell the statistics showed people dying who were actually expected to die in a short while anyway – as a result of old age or other comorbidities – such as heart problems, cancer and other ends of life ailments. The statistics that he was able to gather showed by far the majority of people who were dying were in the 80s to 90s. This was supported in a Sky News Broadcast on the 20th of September they said that …. Back in July a statistical anomaly was spotted which changed the way COVID 19 deaths were counted. Previously Public Health England included any death of a person who had previously had Covid 19 as a Corona virus fatality even if they had recovered from the virus and died of another cause – and the person who spotted that was professor Carl Hennigan from the University of Oxford – who has been quite critical of the UK lockdown, going a step further stating that the British PM was surrounded by mediocre advisors! In the interview, Simon lays out the anomalies and says that we in NZ need to be cautious, protect the elderly in particular and open up the country which means schools as well. There are a good number of profound points covered in this ranging interview and the big one is that this Covid is very much like a very severe flu. Saying that this virus is not as deadly as we had initially believed. The Interview: https://www.ourplanet.org/greenplanet…
New Zealand had an election in the weekend with predictable results, determined in my mind by fear, delusion and a hope for deliverance from a pandemic that has had minimal impact apart from destroying an economy that was already in deep trouble. I discuss the huge government debt and other issues which, taken together, indicate that New Zealanders are in for hard times ahead. For the first time since New Zealand introduced proportionalrepresentation we have a situation (for the first time since the mid-1990’s where a party can rule on its own – effectively, an elected dictatorship.
From eternalvigilance website, NZ. A few I note have been observing similar…
Very very suspect election results for the South Island.
Something fishy going on down in the Mainland with the election results! The Otargo Daily Times reports that Labour won the party vote *in all 17* South Island electorates! That is a high statistical improbability in it’s own right, yet the situation gets even more shady when you see how many Electorate seats National actually won down there.
A Christchurch man has received an easy vote card despite being dead for 16 years.
The card allows someone to turn up and vote and there are no ID checks at polling booths.
Jason Stagg shared the photo on Facebook of the mail addressed to Rosston Keith Harris, who he says is his step-grandfather, with the caption: “Dead men can vote now apparently, I wonder how many dead men will vote this election?”
Another photo shared by a friend of Stagg, Life Connection Baptist Fellowship pastor Carl Bromley, showed the easy vote card for Harris cut out.
Bromley asked “how many deceased people are getting voting cards and whose (sic) using them to vote for who?”
Stagg told Newstalk ZB his household received their voting packs before the easy vote card for Harris arrived – but Harris was the only person to get a easy vote card sent to the residence.
“I was really, really surprised because he [Harris] was the original owner of the property I’m living in. He built it in the 1960’s and he’s long dead.”
Stagg said he hadn’t contacted the Electoral Commission about the issue as he didn’t know where to go with it.
“I’m just wondering how many other dead people are getting these easy vote cards,” he said.
“How many dead people are going to vote in this election?”
Both Bromley and Stagg are proud supporters of the New Conservatives.
An Electoral Commission spokeswoman confirmed Harris is still on the electoral roll despite his death in 2004, and they are following the claim up with Births Deaths and Marriages.
She said they receive daily notifications from the government department and a case like this is extremely rare.
The commission often follows up when mail is sent back to them when someone is no longer living at a property.
The spokeswoman wouldn’t comment on whether or not they could tell if Harris’ vote card had been used to vote and wouldn’t be drawn on specifics due to privacy reasons.
“Did you know … that before 20 weeks you can now terminate a pregnancy for any reason – even if you were carrying a boy but wanted a girl? Did you know that you can get a termination right up to birth, as long as the provider thinks it’s “appropriate”? Or that if a baby is born alive during the attempted procedure, it can be left to die?”
“One man. One little pink casket. More than 500km. Peter van Zweeden is walking the 525km from Tauranga to Parliament, Wellington, with a little pink casket strapped to his back. The kind you’d see at an infant’s funeral. Why? To raise awareness about a major change in New Zealand’s healthcare law.
In March, just prior to Level 4 lockdown, the Government voted on an important piece of legislation. Most of us were understandably focused on other things at that time, and the new law passed largely unnoticed. But many people are surprised when they find out what it means. Did you know, for example, that before 20 weeks you can now terminate a pregnancy for any reason – even if you were carrying a boy but wanted a girl? Did you know that you can get a termination right up to birth, as long as the provider thinks it’s “appropriate”? Or that if a baby is born alive during the attempted procedure, it can be left to die? If this information interests or disturbs you, even a little bit, then follow us. Follow Peter’s journey – and join us in the hope for change.”
“According to the New York Times article, “public opinion surveys show that most New Zealanders” favored liberalizing their country’s abortion laws. However, independent polling shows that the vast majority oppose specific features in this law. For instance, just 2% of Kiwi women support abortion on-demand up to birth. 93% oppose sex-selective abortion, in which a child is killed for no other reason than his or her sex. And, 94% of women polled support longstanding legal standards for New Zealand’s abortion providers. In other words, they didn’t want them relaxed at all.”
bmw635 csi 6.42K subscribers You’d think that a global pandemic that’s killed hundreds of thousands would at least temper the advance of legal killing. It hasn’t. While headlines worldwide were praising New Zealand’s prime minister for her handling of COVID-19, she was working to pass what might be described as the most extreme abortion laws on the planet. LINK ==== https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2020/0…https://nzcatholic.org.nz/2020/03/23/… In late March, New Zealand’s parliament voted, in the words of the New York Times, to “loosen” the nation’s abortion laws, particularly in the latter half of pregnancy when babies become viable outside of the womb. “Loosen” may be the understatement of the decade. New Zealand’s “loosened” laws now allows abortion on-demand, up to the moment of birth, for essentially any reason. That means sex-selective and disability-selective abortions, including for conditions like cleft lip and Down syndrome. The “loosening” happened despite the protests of over 1,200 New Zealanders with Down syndrome and their families, who called on Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to keep her campaign promise not to allow this kind of deadly discrimination. Even more horrific still, New Zealand’s new law includes no requirement that babies born alive after botched abortions be given medical support. This was no accident. Prime Minister Ardern was herself among the loudest voices resisting any attempt to add protections for babies born alive. According to the New York Times article, “public opinion surveys show that most New Zealanders” favored liberalizing their country’s abortion laws. However, independent polling shows that the vast majority oppose specific features in this law. For instance, just 2% of Kiwi women support abortion on-demand up to birth. 93% oppose sex-selective abortion, in which a child is killed for no other reason than his or her sex. And, 94% of women polled support longstanding legal standards for New Zealand’s abortion providers. In other words, they didn’t want them relaxed at all. Perhaps the unpopularity of abortion-on-demand-for-any-reason-whatsoever is why pro-abortion politicians in New Zealand felt the need to rush through this legislation while everyone was distracted by a global pandemic. According to RightToLife.org, as the bill went through successive readings in Parliament, it lost support. In fact, the Abortion Legislation Committee heard from only 139 of the over 25,000 people who submitted public comments on the bill. For perspective, 1,500 people were allowed to speak on a recent climate change bill that received less than half as many submissions. By taking advantage of the few people paying attention and by ignoring those who were, New Zealand’s government has now enacted the most extreme abortion law in the democratic world. As a spokesperson for New Zealand’s Voice for Life described, “Our Parliament has a duty of care to consider the wellbeing and protection of all New Zealanders, including the vulnerable…they failed in that basic duty of care by passing this extreme Bill, but the hundreds of thousands of voters who opposed this Bill will not forget this failure when it is time to vote in the General Election in a few short months.” I hope this spokesperson is right. I know several prominent pro-life spokespersons in New Zealand who care deeply about the unborn, and who mourn this evil law. I also know how entrenched and relentless pro-abortion advocates can be, and how effective they are in passing increasingly extreme legislation. We’ve certainly witnessed as much in this country, most memorably in New York, where legislators applauded and lit the One World Trade Center in pink to celebrate. Bad laws are built on bad ideas, and bad ideas have victims. The precious and unique lives made in God’s image which will now be legally targeted is a stain on one of the world’s most naturally beautiful and culturally enjoyable nations. I join so many of my friends in New Zealand who hope and pray that this law will prove a step too far, betraying an abortion movement opposed not just by champions of life, but by growing scientific knowledge, by growing compassion for children with disabilities, by the amazing medical breakthroughs in life-saving technologies, and by the unshakeable truth that unborn persons are fully human and worthy of life.
“When I filed my claim, instead of compassion, validation & an apology, I received 9 gruelling years of emotional abuse and bullying from the Crown”
Crown set up secret Lake Alice meeting
Ex-Lake Alice chief psychiatrist flew from Australia for secret mediation meeting. David Williams reports
Crown lawyers were instrumental in organising – and hushing up – a meeting to settle a $1.5 million lawsuit which involved the secret return to New Zealand of the former head psychiatrist of a notorious children’s mental hospital.
In the 1970s, Dr Selwyn Leeks ran the Lake Alice child and adolescent unit, near Whanganui. Youngsters, many of them misdiagnosed and sent there wrongly, were routinely punished for minor infractions with electric shocks, without anaesthetic or muscle relaxants. After the practice was exposed, the unit was shut down and Leeks left for Australia.
Lake Alice is one of this country’s darkest chapters of child abuse in state care.
No one has ever been charged with criminal behaviour at Lake Alice, despite uncontested evidence of the abuse and torture of children. Last year, a United Nations committee found successive governments had violated the UN Convention against Torture for not properly investigating dozens of claims and holding anyone to account.
Yesterday, at an Abuse in Care Royal Commission hearing in Auckland, it was revealed Leeks secretly flew back to New Zealand in 1998, with the tacit knowledge and involvement of Crown lawyers, to try and settle a High Court claim by Auckland woman Leonie McInroe and another Lake Alice survivor. McInroe took civil action against the Crown and Leeks in 1994 over abuse at Lake Alice, seeking damages of $1.5 million.
Four years later, as the mediation meeting approached, McInroe was sworn to secrecy.
A letter from Crown Law’s Ian Carter, written to McInroe’s lawyer Philippa Cunningham, said it would “not be productive” for the mediation to become the subject of publicity “whether focused on Dr Leeks or otherwise”. “The mediation can only be held on the basis that the fact, time and place of the mediation will remain confidential.”
Carter’s letter, disclosed at yesterday’s hearing, said child advocate group Citizens Commission for Human Rights tried to tip off then Health Minister Bill English that Leeks was returning to the country, and asked “whether the Minister was intending to take any action”.
It’s not clear if the message got through.
Former prime minister English, who was since been knighted, told Newsroom he doesn’t comment publicly on anything. Newsroom asked Carter, who no longer works for Crown Law, given what Leeks was accused of why did the Crown allow Leeks back into the country without arranging a police interview. The barrister, who lists the McInroe v Leeks case on his website, referred our query to Crown Law.
Mike Ferriss, the New Zealand director of Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a group aligned with the Church of Scientology, didn’t know until yesterday Leeks had attended the 1998 meeting. It was his predecessor, Steve Green, who tried to warn English. “Nothing came of it and that’s the point,” Ferriss says.
McInroe revisited the darkest days of her life at the Royal Commission yesterday. She underlined her firm belief Leeks was protected by the Crown and the psychiatric profession. The Crown assumed the role of abuser and perpetrator, she said, despite having evidence Leeks gave her drugs and electric shock treatment without justification.
Earlier this week I looked on the NZ Green Party’s website for a statement on the Labour-led government’s Lake Onslow ‘pumped hydro’ project. I couldn’t find one. So I asked the retiring Green Party Energy and Resources Spokesperson, Gareth Hughes. I included a link to my earlier post:
I would like to decline the opportunity thank you. When your first line is “First we have a fake-left Prime Minister with a fake Covid19 narrative. Now her fake Labour Party (they’ve just destroyed thousands of workers jobs) is pushing a fake energy policy.” And you quote that thoroughly discredited Michael Moore documentary I don’t feel it would be a worthwhile conversation.
Interesting. I didn’t ask for a conversation. I asked for the Green Party’s position on the Lake Onslow proposal.
Note: this Bill of Rights has now been overridden by Adern’s new COVID-19 Bill. See below. Adern has promised children won’t be taken from their parents but I, like many Kiwis, am not holding my breath on that one. EWR
New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Part II of the Act covers a broad range of Civil and Political Rights. As part of the right to life and the security of the person, the Act guarantees everyone:
1 The right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice (Section 8)
2 The right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, degrading, or disproportionately severe treatment or punishment (Section 9)
3 The right not to be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation without consent (Section 10)
4 The right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment (Section 11)
Furthermore, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 guarantees everyone: Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion. This includes the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO ADOPT AND HOLD OPINIONS WITHOUT INTERFERENCE (Section 1)
Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.
By Kiwi4Justice These are unprecedented times in history around the world and in New Zealand right now. Deeply troubling things occurring that just make no rational sense. Is there something else going on behind the scenes with the global COVID-19 pandemic? It’s a very strong word to use, but is it treason? It’s a deadly serious question. Has the New Zealand Prime Minister been using COVID-19 to engage in a deliberate attack on New Zealand and the New Zealand people on behalf of powerful global interests? The evidence is unfortunately stacking up against her. As difficult as this concept is for us to accept, the actions are increasingly speaking for themselves and it is getting more and more difficult to find other reasoning for things.
The evidence is now showing us with greater certainty every day in many countries around the world, including New Zealand, that deceptive and deeply concerning agendas may be in play with COVID-19. Initially to substantially over inflate the severity of the threat, and then to deliberately and artificially maintain COVID-19 as an apparent ongoing severe threat to our population. A threat requiring ongoing substantial disruptions to our freedoms, our economy and livelihood, our basic way of life, and our NZ Bill of Rights.
Are there deliberate crimes against humanity being committed here by Jacinda Ardern and other national leaders? Look at what is also happening in Australia, in Germany, the UK, Ireland, and other places where historically enormous public protests have been taking place against this over the past few weeks. Over a million people marched through the streets of Berlin recently. A country that is very well aware of dangerous developments in government.
When considering this question of crimes being committed, we are not talking here about Jacinda Ardern receiving poor advice and incorrect information from the expert advisers, or making well-meaning errors of judgement, or failures of management down the chain of command. We are talking here about deliberately and wilfully blocking, banning, and removing the most vital tools and information available to New Zealand for combatting the alleged threat from COVID-19 which could restore normality to our now crippled nation. Why on earth would Jacinda Ardern and the New Zealand government do that to their own country and their own people?
Let’s not dwell too much here on the first part of the COVID response situation, which was the initial grossly over inflated severity of the risk. We can potentially give Jacinda Ardern the benefit of the doubt that she initially acted according to the information and advice being given to her by the ‘global experts’. The evidence is now well confirmed and acknowledged around the world that the initial doomsday estimates of the lethality of COVID-19 were hugely over-stated. Imperial College in London and the World Health Organisation initially had their computer model projections showing a mortality rate at a devastating 3.4%. This led to the initial pandemic response and worldwide lockdown, including New Zealand’s Level 4 lockdown. This has long since been shown by the real-life data from front-line doctors, scientists, and health organisations around the world to have been enormously overstated. The mortality rate of COVID-19 is now confirmed and acknowledged to be somewhere between 0.05% and 0.8% depending on how the data is interpreted. This puts it in the same mortality spectrum as normal seasonal flu, not a catastrophic global pandemic https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/05/fact-check-cdc-estimates-covid-19-death-rate-0-26/5269331002/.
This real-life data showing this true mortality rate should have been enough on its own to trigger a substantial shift in the government’s strategic policies towards the COVID response. Does it make any sense for New Zealand to continue to enforce severe restrictions on society and catastrophic damage to the economy for something now proven and acknowledged to have the same mortality rate as seasonal flu? No, not at all. So immediately that is a major red flag for Jacinda Ardern’s COVID response. We’ll come back to the current big issue of the exploding number of ‘positive cases’ in New Zealand, Victoria, and other places.
But let’s move on for now as we look at the second part of the COVID response situation, which is a lot more damning and inexcusable for Jacinda Ardern. This is where the issue really arises of potentially deliberate crimes against New Zealand and the question of treason. Why have the most important tools and information for New Zealand to combat the COVID-19 threat been deliberately banned and withheld by Jacinda Ardern and the New Zealand government? I am referring here to three main points, all of which would be enormously useful to our COVID fight; 1. Antibody/serology testing, 2. Proven treatments such as Hydroxychloroquine, which is now scientifically proven in dozens of peer reviewed scientific studies around the world to have a powerful effect on reducing deaths from COVID-19, and 3. The brazen censoring, banning, and ridiculing of any information and evidence that goes against their own COVID narrative, no matter how scientifically robust that information is, and no matter how professionally credible the source of the information is. Remember, Jacinda Ardern paid $50 million to our media. They now seem extremely compliant and supportive.
Let’s deal with Point 3 first. In Jacinda Ardern’s own words, she and the New Zealand government are now to be “the one source of truth about COVID-19”. Information from anywhere else should be ignored, dismissed, or removed https://youtu.be/ENEUktOrQV8 including information from renowned doctors, scientists, and world leading medical researchers. Those who disobey and go against Jacinda Ardern’s ‘one source of COVID truth’ will be severely fined, banned, and potentially even arrested. What sort of leader speaks and acts like that? A corrupt dictator with something serious to hide or cover up, that’s who.
Hence the introduction of Jacinda Ardern’s ‘Internet Filtering Bill’ to ensure that any ‘inappropriate’ information and evidence can be quickly removed to retain the desired COVID narrative. It will be introduced to New Zealand on October 1st and will allow Jacinda Ardern, as the self-appointed “one source of truth”, to remove from the internet or Facebook anything she feels is contrary to what she wants people to know. It’s a simple 3-step process for Jacinda’s modern day ‘book burning’ policy; 1. Warning, 2. Heavy fine, 3. Removal from the internet or Facebook. What’s next? Will we see Kiwis arrested and dragged out of their homes by the police for posting something critical of Jacinda on Facebook like the pregnant mother in Victoria, who simply posted on Facebook about a lockdown protest and was then arrested and marched out of her house in handcuffs, in her pyjamas, in front of her young children https://youtu.be/hn0wWVNXmks. As of October 1st, Jacinda Ardern’s Internet Filtering Bill allows her to do exactly the same thing to Kiwis. These are very major concerns for the New Zealand public which deserve the most serious examination.
Let’s now return to Point 1 of Jacinda Ardern’s alleged treason. In April 2020 Jacinda Ardern and the New Zealand government banned and withdrew COVID-19 antibody/serology testing in New Zealand. Why on earth would she do that? Antibody testing would provide New Zealand with the most scientifically robust method of understanding exactly what the overall COVID situation is in New Zealand. Simon Thornley, epidemiologist at Auckland University, has been very vocal in his criticism of antibody testing/serology being shut down as a critical tool to help track the current outbreak and assess its prevalence in the community. Thornley called for serology testing back in April, but by the end of that month, the Ministry of Health had specifically banned the importation and sale of serology tests. https://thebfd.co.nz/2020/08/21/serology-testing-essential-but-banned-in-nz/. Why on earth would they do that? Antibody testing would tell us what percentage of the overall population has already been exposed to the virus and now recovered. It would tell us if the virus had already swept through the population some months ago, done its thing (as contagious viruses do), it would tell us if the country had achieved ‘herd immunity’ (like Sweden now has), and that the virus had essentially now reached the end of its natural life cycle in New Zealand. Or it could tell us that this hadn’t yet happened and there was still an issue. If it showed us that the virus had indeed already swept through the population, then the issue of COVID-19 in New Zealand is finished. Done with. Like Sweden, we now get on with life as normal, like we do every year with the seasonal flu virus.
Instead of having that very clear picture from antibody testing, we instead have our daily mass hysteria on the mainstream news networks about the latest outbreak of the latest ‘positive cases’. Bombarding us daily with terrifying terminology like the danger of the latest new ‘sub cluster’. Those people that ‘test positive’ or have been in close contact with a positive test are locked into COVID detention centres under military guard. But what does a ‘positive case’ actually mean? It means absolutely nothing. The PCR test that is used for this is incapable of telling us whether or not a person has active and infectious COVID-19. Even the inventor of the PCR test told the world this fact. https://uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus/
There are around three dozen different types of Corona Virus, including COVID-19, the common cold, and others. All the PCR test might tell us is that a person at some point recently may have had, or has, one of those many different Corona Viruses. If you had a common cold several months ago but now recovered, then you might well test positive on the PCR test. If you had COVID-19 several months ago, didn’t realise it, or only had minor symptoms and now recovered, then you might test positive on the PCR test. So, are these new explosions of ‘positive cases’ in New Zealand, Victoria, and other places actually just people who have already had COVID-19 and are mostly now fine? Would that explain why virtually everyone who is now ‘testing positive’ are showing no symptoms (asymptomatic) and feel fine?
We now know that the mortality rate of COVID-19 is very low (similar to seasonal flu). We also know from figures around the world, that the numbers of death and severe illness from COVID-19 have plummeted over the last few months, and continue to plummet, despite the explosion of so called ‘positive cases’. Almost as if the virus is coming to a natural and normal end and the positive tests are mostly just picking up people who have previously been exposed to the virus but are mostly fine. The media and governments around the world, including New Zealand, now barely even mention the rather critical issues of how many people now are actually dying from COVID-19 or in critical condition. All the talk is now focussed on how many new ‘positive cases’ there are. Is New Zealand, and other countries, unnecessarily remaining in COVID catastrophe only because of a pandemic of arbitrary ‘positive cases’ from a test that is largely meaningless?
This brings us back to the point about antibody testing. If Jacinda Ardern had not banned and withdrawn antibody testing in New Zealand back in April then we could answer that question right now with great scientific certainty and quite possibly have returned and kept New Zealand in relative normality long ago, rather than now watching the destruction of our economy and the very fabric of our society being ripped up. So why on earth did Jacinda Ardern ban it and withdraw antibody testing? She specifically went out of her way to ban and withdraw such a powerful and useful tool, and shut down dissenting dialogue from experts about these things. This suggests a wilful agenda rather than incompetence and mismanagement. It suggests that she doesn’t actually want to be able draw the COVID catastrophe to a conclusion. That thought is rather disturbing.
What about Point 2 of Jacinda Ardern’s alleged treason. Why would she withdraw proven, effective, cheap and easy treatments for COVID-19? We’ve been told that vaccine trials are being rushed through as quickly as possible. Bill Gates has told us that because his vaccines are having to be rushed through the normal safety protocols that he will need to be legally indemnified against any negative effects on health from his vaccines. That doesn’t really inspire me to line up for his medicine. If something is robustly and properly tested as being safe and effective then that’s fine for people to have that option to choose to take a vaccine. However, through the New Zealand ‘Health Response Bill’ that Jacinda Ardern has just rushed through parliament without due process, the legal framework has now been created for potential mandatory vaccines in the future, as was outlined in parliament. If not technically mandatory for the general population, then at least making the vaccine a requirement for return to ‘normal’ society. The wording in one Ministry of Health COVID-19 document being “Immunisation status verification for return to work” – page 29 of the document in this linkhttps://www.privacy.org.nz/news-and-publications/statements-media-releases/privacy-commissioner-backs-nz-covid-tracer-app/. So the people of New Zealand could soon find themselves in a position whereby if they do not consent to taking a vaccine that has been rushed through the safety processes, then they cannot return to work or to normal society. A vaccine for which Bill Gates says he will have to have legal indemnity for any negative health impacts. These vaccines that will have been rushed through the safety testing processes, then being forced onto Kiwis, against their will for a great many, specifically against the New Zealand Bill of Rights which used to protect them from that. This is for a virus confirmed and acknowledged to have a natural recovery rate of 99.95% or higher without a vaccine. Does this make any rational sense at all?
Why would Jacinda Ardern enforce these types of extremely draconian breaches of our Bill of Rights when the recovery rate without a vaccine is already 99.95% or higher, and when there are numerous other safer, cheaper, and easier treatments? Why is Jacinda Ardern not having discussions with us about these other treatments and is instead shutting them down? There are numerous potential treatments that have been put forward by doctors and researchers around the world. We won’t go into all of them here, but one in particular seems to get extra special treatment from many western governments, including New Zealand, in terms of ensuring that it remains out of the conversation and remains off the table as a prevention and treatment option. That being Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which is an anti-malaria drug used extensively and safely around the world, and approved by the FDA for over 60 years. When it comes to HCQ, never in history has a proven safe drug been so demonised by politicians, media, and small elements of seemingly corrupted and politicised science. Why is that?
The official line is that there is contradictory evidence and that there are potential health side effects from HCQ. But all of these claims have been very quickly shown to have been rushed out by the media and politicians on the back of what can only be called corrupted ‘politicised science’, which has quickly been exposed as such. It has angered researchers into HCQ and other potential treatments. Associate Professor Justin Denholm from Australia’s Doherty Institute, who has been working with New Zealand researchers, said “I’m angry about the level of misinformation and mistrust that puts on the scientific community”. The clearest example of this with regards HCQ is the Lancet report. A quite staggering situation. The Lancet is one of the oldest and best known peer reviewed Medical Journals in the world. On May 22, right at the time when doctors around the world were pushing HCQ into the spotlight as an effective treatment for COVID-19, the Lancet published an article stating that HCQ did not help COVID-19 patients and might actually cause death. It was seized upon by the World Health Organisation, the media, and political leaders around the world to demonise and help shut down the conversation on HCQ. Incredibly, only 10 days later, after immediately being called out by the science and medical community, the Lancet was forced to retract the article along with an apology https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200605/lancet-retracts-hydroxychloroquine-study. A quite staggering occurrence that would never normally occur in the world of medical research with a publisher of the level of the Lancet. Why have certain elements of the political-medical axis been so hell bent on shutting down HCQ and other treatments? It’s a troubling question.
With nearly 100 studies, and real life doctors on the frontline of COVID-19 all over the world demonstrating and pushing the effectiveness of HCQ, why has Jacinda Ardern shut down further research on this treatment and prohibited its use in New Zealand? Why not give Kiwis the choice of Bill Gates’ rushed through vaccine, or other treatments such as HCQ? Flu vaccines have been around for 80 years and people are still getting the flu and are still dying from it with a similar mortality rate to what COVID-19 has without a vaccine. Yet Jacinda Ardern’s new rushed through health response policies suggest that once Bill Gates’ (or someone else’s) rushed through vaccine is available, she will make us unable to return to work until we have agreed to take it. Meanwhile HCQ is not allowed to be talked about or taken.
We have reached a level of insanity with all this that would be simply laughable if it were not so deadly serious and not so deeply concerning for the future of our country and our people. Jacinda Ardern has banned the one medical test that could be so useful to us understanding our COVID-19 situation in New Zealand, she has shut down any discussion or access to extremely positive and very cheap treatment options, and has instead pushed us towards mandatory vaccines that will have to be rushed through the health and safety controls, and she is now systematically shutting down our ability to question these things and to share information and research about these things. As she has told us herself, for the benefit of the country, she needs to be the “one source of truth”. This is precisely why more than a million people marched through Berlin several weeks ago, why 40,000 people just gathered in Trafalgar Square in London, and why thousands of people just marched down Queen Street in Auckland in the NZ Freedom March. Alongside all this, we have Sweden. Sweden is now rapidly becoming extremely problematic for all those countries like New Zealand who have gone into extreme COVID measures. No lockdowns in Sweden and COVID-19 is essentially no longer an issue there. It’s finished. Whereas in New Zealand, it seems very much like Jacinda Ardern and the New Zealand government are doing everything they can to keep it going. Why?
The impact that all of this is having on New Zealand simply can’t be stated in strong enough terms. It is literally destroying our country. Apart from crushing the nations psyche and emotional strength through the daily bombardment of terrifying updates about the latest ‘sub cluster’, we have debt levels that can never be repaid, small businesses crushed, unemployment set to go to levels beyond anything ever seen or imagined in New Zealand, and suicide rates going off the charts.
These are unprecedented scenes and unprecedented times in human history, and none of it makes any rational sense. Unless that is if there is something else going on that we aren’t supposed to know about. It is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid a conclusion that, somehow, there are some big global agendas involved here that wanted the initial global threat of COVID-19 to be substantially over inflated, and now for that threat and that danger to be artificially maintained. It sounds absolutely crazy. No question about that. But nothing we are seeing makes any rational sense for any kind of ‘normal’ situation.
On Monday I wrote an article on how we are being fed the big scary numbers, probably in an attempt to keep us all fearful and therefore compliant. I argued that the numbers involved, in New Zealand at least, are very small and that we really don’t need to be in level 2 let alone 3 or 4.
Well, funnily enough, a quick check of the Ministry of Health website on Thursday reveals a change in the way some of the various graphs are presented.
A person who was clearly stressed from the sudden ordeal of leaving the country to bury a deceased relative, then returning to a situation he describes as like a prison camp, expressed what he noted as inconsistencies in the rules. From hearing the description of this experience clearly some staff were less than helpful regarding the state of this person’s mental health however going by other people’s experiences this is not unusual. Below is a description of the day to day interaction with the authorities and staff at the quarantine facility supplied through a friend of the detainee. EWR
Timeline in Managed Isolation Experience
My friend had to go to the Netherlands due to his fathers sudden passing. He was the only one in the family that could go and take care of everything. Funeral, house, everything. So he did, and all by himself. His travel wasn’t for ‘fun’, but necessary.
He returned to New Zealand on Wednesday the 12th of August, Central European Time, Amsterdam. (All the dates and times are Central European Time, Amsterdam. Due to me living in the Netherlands). That was the plan, however he could not fly back through the US. The transit wasn’t allowed coming from the Netherlands. Although he did have his ticket pre-booked.
He had to buy a new ticket and fly via Zurich and Hong Kong which ended up to be a 39 hour trip, with all the waiting between flights as well.
August 14th, he arrived at the Auckland Airport. There was a line for supposedly a health check. The only thing that really got checked was his temperature using an infrared scanner. No information whatsoever had been provided. People were put on a bus and transported somewhere. At that moment, it was not clear where they would go. Nor what would happen. Turned out that he was moved to an isolation facility in South Auckland. He was assigned to a room and received an information package.
He also submitted an exemption request, to be allowed to do his isolation at home. The reason he applied is because he is going through a grieving process. After being in the Netherlands to bury his father, flying half way across the world, and then being ‘locked up’ does not have a positive effect on his grieving. And could cause major psychological issues.
August 15th, he got agitated and was rude to the staff. Not overly rude, or aggressive. But after what he had been through, not very patient. He yelled at them and got a warning for his behaviour. Due to this ‘incident’ the police, who are on site 24/7 repeatedly came to his door, wanting to talk. He refused. He told them he was very tired. He went outside into the parking area and at a safe distance (at least 3 meters) lay in the sun and put his mask over his eyes, just to relax a bit. Security came and told him that he had to wear the mask. He refused, because he wasn’t harming anyone at that moment.
The police officer came to his room again, and told him that he had been warned 2 times now, and the 3rd time would mean that he would be arrested. He told him to go away, he is tired and would speak to them the next day.
August 16th, He went outside again to have a coffee in the sun. Again, very safe distance (at least 3 meters) and the police came and told him to put the mask on. He refused. He was drinking and did not see the point in wearing the mask, when he wasn’t a threat to anyone else.
My friend decided to stay in his room after this ‘incident’.
When speaking to the nurse that day, he asked about his exemption application. She told him she would make sure to ‘fast track’ it. He asked when he would be tested because it was day 3. The information package stated that people would be tested ‘around’ day 3 and day 12. They told him, probably today, or tomorrow.
August 17th, He would be taken for a walk. Supposedly in a park. (There is a feed on Twitter that visualises the 14 days in a more then friendly manner) however, the walk in the park turned out to be a walk of 200 meters to the next carpark, where they where allowed to walk about for a bit.
And the nurses told him he would be tested today, or the day after. When walking downstairs to go and have his walk in the ‘park’ he was addressed quite aggressively by the staff. He supposedly was wearing his mask upside down, or inside out… he told the staff member that he felt like they were picking on him and the staff threatened him that he would not be allowed to go to the park. My friend decided to go back to his room. The staff kept on threatening him, and told him he could be removed from this facility and taken elsewhere, because he had already had 2 warnings (as in being arrested and detained).
Looking at the information package, and the instructions. He would not have been allowed to touch the mask in any way when out of his room…
Meanwhile, he took some pictures of staff not wearing masks in the carpark.
August 18th, conversation with the nurse. He will be tested later that day. He went downstairs to level 2 to get tested and was confronted with military staff being on that floor as well. Very intimidating. At that moment, there is security staff, police officers and the military.
He was told that the test results would take up to 72 hours. He asked about his exemption application. And was told that they had not yet heard back on this.
My friend’s girlfriend came to the facility to drop off some groceries. But initially was told to go back home. She did not have a receipt. She did not accept that and talked to the management. And after some time, they did accept the groceries.
August 19th, no news on the exemption application. Other than them receiving it (by this time I had been posting lots on Twitter, telling people about the ‘real’ isolation) and my friend got told that there would be huge fines for taking pictures and posting them on social media.
August 20th, nothing shocking.
August 21st, my friend asked the nurse about the exemption application again. She then called MIQ. The reply was that they had been swamped, and did not know when they would be able to get back to him.
August 22nd no results on his test yet. The nurses told him that this would probably mean that it is negative. However the information package states that you get a phone call or a text message with the results. My friend also asked about his exemption application. But they hadn’t heard back.
August 23rd, asked again on the exemption application. Nothing. And no test results.
August 24th, my friend talked to one of the nurses, the kind one. Asked about the test result. Nurse told him it was negative.
Here in the Netherlands it is still August 24th. And I am hoping to hear from my friend again by tonight. However, writing this timeline, breaks my heart again. It seems, and I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, that every time that I have tried to get out some information on reality in New Zealand, the media come up with a plausible explanation as to the failure of the NZ government.
He is a very dear friend. And it is wrong what they are doing.
In case you missed this as the last post on topic’s been blocked on FB more than once, please do examine the real statistics from the official horse’s mouth so to speak. NZ’s MOH no less. We are constantly hearing there were 22 deaths but this appears to be not so. We have two more now so officially it’s 19 not 24. Please read again and see the actual response from the MOH. I’m not making this up.
I’ll point you also to this post from an MD quote:
“As an NHS doctor, I’ve seen people die and be listed as a victim of coronavirus without ever being tested for it. But unless we have accurate data, we won’t know which has killed more: the disease or the lockdown?”
This is not the only MD who has blown the whistle. There are many more examples. This is simply not right and just in light of the mental health fall out we’ve observed now.
Remember this post about Westpac? Well, this communist Labour government that has ZERO experience on the land has made idiotic policy decisions and enacted another law which directly impacts farmers – you can see the Green Party’s hand in this one!!! (https://www.mfe.govt.nz/action-for-healthy-waterways).
To quote the farmer below:”We have a law coming in on the 1st of September that will tell us that we have to have our crops sown by a certain date 1st of November for Otago Southland irrespective of the weather. We will also have to get consent from most likely someone who has never been on the land to sow crops in order to feed the animals in the winter. We are also told that if the stock pug more than 50% of the paddock to 20cm or more then we will be breaking the law & subject to prosecution, this is regardless of the weather. If it’s a wet winter this is impossible & no farmer in the south will be able to achieve this. Why would anyone make a law knowing that the people it concerns have no way of complying with it.?”
Read the full postbelow:
“I have been stewing on this for some time but it’s finally got the better of me. Ive spent my whole life on the land & 45 years farming on my own account. My sons now farm the same land as myself & my father but for the first time in my life I’m struggling to understand what the politicians who make the laws are trying to do to the farmers & people of New Zealand. Why would we get laws that no one can make sense of? This is how communism was explained to me as a child. When a government tells you what to do & when to do it.
We have a law coming in on the 1st of September that will tell us that we have to have our crops sown by a certain date, 1st of November for Otago Southland irrespective of the weather. We will also have to get consent from most likely someone who has never been on the land to sow crops in order to feed the animals in the winter. We are also told that if the stock pug more than 50% of the paddock or any part of the paddock to 20 cm or more then we will be breaking the law & subject to prosecution, this is regardless of the weather. If it’s a wet winter this is impossible & no farmer in the south will be able to achieve this.
Why would anyone make a law knowing that the people it concerns have no way of complying with it?
As a member of the Pomahaka water care group I have already seen the massive amount of work & money farmers are pouring into improving water quality with very positive results. Would it not be more value to New Zealand if farmers put the cost of getting consents into building sediment traps and planting out critical source areas? Laws like this are not just a farmer’s problem, this should be of concern to all New Zealanders as this is simply an erosion of people’s freedoms and rights.
I don’t think we should sit back & accept this without some response. Why don’t we do what the farmers would do in France & drive our tractors in a relay starting in Bluff & Cape Reinga 80-100km legs to parliament in Wellington to show how we feel?
“Why is a government agency fronting a funding drive for Westpac Helicopter? Is this agency acting as a Trojan horse, to gather detailed food crop information, not just about stock but all food available on farms?”
By Hilary Butler
I have some SERIOUS questions, about the motives of the NZ government.
Various properties have received letters like this, asking for funding for Westpac helicopter rescue… each letter is individualized with colour google maps of their properties with the boundaries delineated…
BUT>>>> have a look at the envelope and the information asked for on the last page. The whole letter plus the envelope was scanned, anonymized, marked up and put below, for you to study. Look at it carefully. You might have to look at this on a computer NOT on the phone. (You can also download the pdf at this link)
Some farmers receiving these letters are gobsmacked. But how many farmers are acquiescing to this information request without even asking what is behind it? Why is a government agency fronting a funding drive for Westpac Helicopter? Is this agency acting as a Trojan horse, to gather detailed food crop information, not just about stock but all food available on farms? Why do they require this information now? They never had in the past.
So first up, LOOK at the sender. https://www.asurequality.com/about/who-we-are/ Asure quality – an organisation which supposedly “offer the broadest range of food assurance services in New Zealand” and “guardians of food” and “Owned by the New Zealand Government,” to “to help build and protect this enduring trust in food”.
Is the Government involved in some underhand information mining so that they know exactly where to land helicopters to unlawfully take farmers produce in the event of a “nationwide food shortage”? The other thing concerning farmers, which has another COVID parallel, is when you hear farmers talk about the shocking devastation created by MBIE in relation to mico bovis. The farmers I’ve talked to, liken this to COVID in a way, because mico bovis has very few symptoms in cattle, meat is fine, milk is fine etc but the government answer is to kill all the animals. The reality though, is that eventually all stock will get it, form antibodies to it, and no harm on the produce. Instead of recognizing the reality of mico bovis, the government on the one hand, wants to disembowel farmers’ stock, yet NOW wants to know from all farmers, exactly what food supply they have on their farms.
Don’t you think that this is all a bit …weird?
If you agree with the concerns on this post please, spread this far and wide.
53 subscribers Let’s look at what force the NZ military is authorised to use against the public particularly regarding arrest, stopping vehicles and entering homes. It’s important to understand this for our own protection against tirrannee. A country’s Defence Force is meant to protect the nation and their interests against foreign threats. They will also support the public in an emergency but aren’t meant to use force against their own population or act as a policing force. The Defence Act 1990 sought to control this but loop holes are now being exploited through other acts to use the military against the New Zealand public. 1. Arrest: a. Quarantine: Under the Health Act 1956 a medical officer of health can arrest people attempting to leave quarantine and any person (including the military) can be used to assist them. This is why you see military managing quarantine facilities and able to detain people there. However, the only people who can be arrested are those who have entered New Zealand within 14 days or are confirmed to have an infectious disease. It doesn’t apply to anyone else so can’t be used to enforce general lockdown restrictions. b. Police Support: Under Section 51 of the Policing Act 2008 any person (including the military) can be asked to assist a constable in apprehending or securing a person or conveying them to a police station or other place. This means the military can use force against the public if they are physically located with a constable. If there’s no constable there then no force can be used. This occurred on the cordon for the Christchurch Earthquake where soldiers manning the cordon would detain people if directed by the police constable with them. 2. Entering homes: Under the civil defence emergency management act 2002 if a state of emergency is declared then the military can enter on and if necessary, break into any premises. Currently there is no state of emergency so the military have no authority to do this. However, if a state of emergency is declared nationally or locally then the military are allowed to forcibly enter your home if they believe it is “necessary for permitting or facilitating the carrying out of any urgent measure for the relief of suffering or distress”. This is a very general statement and could arguably be used to justify Covid-19 related activity. 3. Road blocks: The authority for the military to block roads is based on the same Act. Basically, unless there’s a state of emergency, roadblocks must be lead by police and the military are only supporting. However in a state of emergency the military can man roadblocks without the need for police. 4. Covid-19 enforcement officers: Under the rushed through Covid-19 public health response act the military can be appointed as enforcement officers and this allows them to search cars and property (excluding dwellings) but does not allow them to use force to do this. As at the time of this video being made the NZDF are not authorised as Covid-19 enforcement officers but this could change in the future. 5. Other situations: There are also other powers that only apply in unique situations. These are the physical enforcement of public health orders against specific individuals, powers in response to domestic terror acts and powers on a military base. If you’re not on a military base, committing an act of terrorism or have a public health order made against you by the courts then you don’t need to worry about these. Martial Law: There is a lot of misunderstanding about the terms martial law, military law and what it means for a country to be in this state so let’s explain it. Martial Law is brought into act when the governments and court are unable to function and so a military commander takes action to regulate society. Martial law has often been declared in communist countries to allow military force against the people such as in the Tee anne a min Square Massacre in China. However this has never occurred in New Zealand in modern times. As long as the New Zealand courts are functioning New Zealand is not in a state of Martial Law and the military can only do what the law allows them to. However, this isn’t much of a reassurance as the law provides extensive powers on the pretext of an emergency or pandemic and allows the military to enforce these. Martial Law should not be confused with the term “Military Law” which is the law that the Defence Force applies to its own soldiers to maintain discipline. It is based on the Armed Forces Discipline Act and has no authority over the general public. Summary 1. NZ is not in a state of martial law. 2. NZ military can only arrest you if: ◦ You are trying to leave quarantine; or ◦ They are with a police officer. 3. NZ military can forcefully enter your home but only in a declared state of emergency. 4. NZ military can conduct roadblocks but only with police or in a declared state of emergency.
Since this topic has been uppermost in many minds of late, particularly that of the parents of young children I’m recapping here in light of this announcement yesterday. The article is from mainstream and brings reassurance that children testing positive will not be snatched by Oranga Tamariki (NZ’s child welfare services). I hope that this will be as stated. The public is slated in the headline for spreading false rumours … however, what else can they expect with the kinds of things that have been happening and the kinds of announcements that have been made of late.
Number one … during the last lockdown we had a Dr Michael Ryan, a leader of the WHO, saying, and I quote, ‘authorities may have to enter people’s homes and remove family members’. You can hear him below:
So, understandably this has set the scene, sowing fear in the minds of parents. “Remove them and isolate them” he says. There is no arguing with that even though the ever alert fact checkers have now denied what this sounds like, indeed the presenter himself interpreted it thus by adding “by force presumably”. You can read the fact checkers’ statements at this link. I certainly don’t see the fact check as allaying anybody’s fears however. He said what he said, and as a Doctor should have had sense enough to explain exactly what he meant if he had something else in mind. In my opinion the blame for rumours should be laid right at his door. And one would hope that the authorities including NZ’s have learned to be very specific about their intentions.
Number two … In NZ we have had the recent example of the family returning from Australia, a couple and their young children who were in fact told they would need to be separated in the quarantine facility. They declined. Then later on when their two year old was unwell, another try was made to separate that child from them in the facility. A two year old to a separate room? To be looked after by whom? Smart parents, they declined again, threatening legal action should they persist.
Number three … Bloomfield himself said families could be separated as in the video here from the MOH. At 25 mins 23 secs the question starts.
See the article below for other ‘reassuring’ statements made by Adern and Bloomfield and make up your own mind. I personally think they are not being specific and clear enough.
My conclusion from the evidence thus far is file away statements like this one by Hipkins, where it’s said no they will not take your children. Hold them to account should anybody come and seek to separate you from any of your children. Film everything.
Health Minister Chris Hipkins says the Government was leaving no stone unturned to track and trace any contact with positive Covid-19 cases, scouring credit card payments, CCTV, and even had the option to use facial recognition technology.
He believes there is still a low likelihood of community transmission, despite a woman who travelled from Auckland to Sydney on July 20 tested positive for coronavirus, the third such case in the past week.