All posts by Pam Vernon

I'm for justice and equity for all peoples everywhere. I am also for exposing lies and corruption, particularly the lies of the corporations that have a tight grip on humanity, all for profit and control. A grip that has been instrumental in the rape and pillage of indigenous peoples planet wide, for centuries.

Two scientists who reviewed more than 100 of DoC’s scientific papers say: “There’s no credible scientific evidence showing any species of native bird benefits from 1080 drops”

Time for a repost of this article from 2007, as the drops continue, in spite of the clear scientific evidence it is not beneficial to our ecosystem.


“We have audited Department of Conservation scientific research and produced an 88-page monograph reviewing more than 100 scientific papers.

The results are startling and belie most of the department’s claims.

  • First, there is no credible scientific evidence showing that any species of native bird benefits from the dropping of tonnes of 1080 into our forest ecosystems
  • Second, considerable evidence exists that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm“Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe

Read the Whiting-O’Keefe report HERE


Scientists, Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe: “Poison facts belie the claims”

routeburn4.jpg
NZ drops into its forests about  4,000 KG of pure 1080 per year, enough to kill 20 million people [Photo: Clyde Graf, from a 1080 drop at Makarora]
There is now a familiar litany of scientifically insupportable claims about what great things aerial 1080, a universal poison, is doing for our forest ecosystems. The people of New Zealand have a right to know the truth about what the scientific evidence shows.

We have audited Department of Conservation scientific research and produced an 88-page monograph reviewing more than 100 scientific papers.

The results are startling and belie most of the department’s claims.

Copy of kepler track.jpg
The oxymoron that DOC’s signage is

First, there is no credible scientific evidence showing that any species of native bird benefits from the dropping of tonnes of 1080 into our forest ecosystems, as claimed by the department and Kevin Hackwell. There is certainly no evidence of net ecosystem benefit.

fwdfwdockills7outof9kea7
1080 is killing large numbers of native species

We have repeatedly challenged DoC and Mr Hackwell, a representative of the Forest and Bird Society, to come forward with the hard scientific evidence for their “dead forest” claims. They have not.

Second, considerable evidence exists that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm, as one would expect, given that 1080 is toxic to all animals. It kills large numbers of native species of birds, invertebrates and bats.

Moreover, most native species are completely unstudied. In addition considerable evidence shows there are chronic and sublethal effects to vertebrate endocrine and reproductive systems, possibly including those of humans.

clydes mt pukaha dead kiwi vid

kahurangi nat park jim hilton.jpg

Considerable evidence demonstrates that DoC’s aerial 1080 operations are doing serious harm.  Photos: Upper (Tomtit in hand) by Clyde Graf
Lower (multiple dead birds) by Jim Hilton:
Dead birds found over a few acres, after 270,000 hectare aerial 1080 poison drop, Kahurangi National Park, 2014. This was the first year of DoC’s “Battle for our Birds” drops.


Third, DoC claims that one can drop food laced with 1080, a universal poison (World Health Organisation classification “1A extremely hazardous”) indiscriminately into a semi-tropical forest ecosystem and only negatively affect one or two target “pest” species. That is counterintuitive and scientifically improbable.

Fourth, as far as we can determine no other country in the world is doing (or has ever done) anything remotely similar – mass poisoning of a semi-tropical ecosystem on the scale that the department is now doing to ours.

Fifth, and perhaps most disturbing, is that what the department-sponsored research shows has been habitually misrepresented – entirely unjustifiable assertions regarding 1080’s benefits and lack of harm.

Statements like those of Mr Hackwell that the forests will be “dead” without poisoning them with 1080, and from John McLennan (Landcare Research) and Al Morrison (then Director General of DoC) that 1080 is existentially necessary to Kiwis is pure demagoguery and scientific nonsense.

What is at risk by continuation of this extraordinary practice – and it is unique in the world – is the ecological integrity of our forest ecosystems, our reputation as an environmentally sane and responsible country, and our existence as a society in which reason and rationality can triumph over bureaucratic prerogative and budgetary gain.

Since Galileo Galilee first discovered the moons of Jupiter in the 17th century, the way to resolve this kind of disagreement has been to do the experiment and examine the evidence, and that is precisely what we urge everyone to do.

Don’t believe DoC. Don’t believe Mr Hackwell. Don’t believe us – believe the evidence. To that end we will provide a copy of our report and the source scientific research papers to all who would like to read them.

* Quinn and Patricia Whiting-O’Keefe are retired scientists.

Header Photo: Robin, TV-Wild

ARTICLE SOURCE:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10448063

Read the Whiting-O’Keefe report HERE

If you have difficulty with the link to the report go to our Resources page & see it there.


Copy of kea article

 

keadeaths1080


RELATED:

PUKAHA MT BRUCE, 49 DEAD KIWI SINCE 2013 – ONLY ONE EVER TESTED FOR POISONING – FROM DOC’S OWN RECORDS

OIA REQUEST REVEALS 89 DEAD KIWI IN 1080 TREATED TONGARIRO FOREST – AND NOT ONE WAS TESTED BY DOC FOR 1080 POISONING – PRESS RELEASE FROM GRAF BROTHERS


See the TheGrafBoys YT channel and website for more videos. Educate yourself on 1080 poisoning. See also http://1080science.co.nz/

And our 1080 pages for info & links, &/or search ‘categories’ drop down box for further related articles (at left of any page).

EnviroWatchNZ

 

Rentokil Initial Takes Over the Aerial Poisoning of New Zealand

From Ursula Edgington PhD @ substack

I was only talking to Ben Rubin the other day about the international successful brand awareness of Initial. We see that logo in every public loo in the world. I’m not sure when Rentokil and Initial become one and the same (?) But perhaps the covid era theatre of extreme-hygiene was made specially for/by this chemical marriage.

Pests and viruses – same thing. Both presented by the media as ugly, hated and needing to be endlessly ‘eradicated’.

Surely everyone needs Rentokil Initial’s innovative ‘virus-killing-automatic-air-sanitiser’ for example. Wow! Profits have soared. So much so, expansion to New Zealand has meant Rentokil’s acquisition of that special ‘boys-club’ that forms the 1080 aerial-poisoning NZ Government sub/contractors. But do Kiwis know about Rentokil’s dark secret in its home country of England, involving a very similar toxin from over sixty years ago?

Screenshot from Rentokil Initial’s recent Annual Report detailing their ‘new investment’ into New Zealand’s Military Industrial Conservation Complex

I’ve written before about what we can now confidently term “The Military Industrial Conservation Complex”. This War on Nature is a complex story of NZ Gov psyops and corruption, which for over 70 years has proven to be too much for many activists to bear. Academics like me who have dared questioned this type of ‘Turtles all the Way Down’ propaganda become victims of the Corporate Playbook, as I have published about on

here. Like the hideous Agent Orange, toxic 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate) keeps raining down on us, apparently to kill the ‘pests’, in a physical and psychological attack. In a blatant contradiction to the Manufacturers Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) the colourful, glossy propaganda still (unbelievably) insists this lethal, indiscriminate poison, with no antidote, is ‘natural’, ‘biodegrades’ and of course, is totally ‘safe and effective’.

Example from the [now deregistered] Pest Control Education Trust, which distributes the propaganda that claims to be valid ‘public consultation documents’ to residents and landowners of land & water about to be aerially poisoned with 1080

In case anyone is still doubtful about the lies evident in the above example of NZ Dept of Conservation propaganda, let’s look briefly at how synthetic 1080 is manufactured, before it’s added to the green-coloured, sugar-laden, cereal food-baits and then distributed in tonnes by helicopters over our land and water. Ethyl fluoroacetate, sodium hydroxide and ethanol are mixed together. These chemicals are so lethal, with sub-lethal consequences completely untested and unknown and the process so specialized, that up until now, there appears only one company in the world using it – Tull Chemical Co, Oxford, Alabama (conveniently, it recently burned down, but more on that rabbit hole another day). By examining the Manufacturer’s Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) of ethyl fluoroacetate alone, this provides an insight into the known unknowns of the impact of being in contact with this chemical:

Material is extremely destructive to tissue of the mucous membranes and upper respiratory tract, eyes, and skin., Cough, Shortness of breath, Headache, Nausea, To the best of our knowledge, the chemical, physical, and toxicological properties have not been thoroughly investigated.”

[Ref Merck SDS from which those are quoted from]

Here’s an extract from the toxicity section of the MSDS for the 1080 poisoned-food cereal baits, confirming the unknown risks:

There is no antidote. This poison should never be released from the sky and spread indiscriminately. The CDC webpage on 1080 poisoning symptoms seems to have been removed recently, but here is the WayBack Machine’s capture from a few months ago which clearly states the dangers from the ‘unlikely’ inhalation. Apart from it’s not ‘unlikely’ if, against the manufacturer’s instructions, it’s dropped from the sky! As Aly Cook sang a few years back (in another unsuccessful attempt to halt an operation): “Stop the drop of the poison rain; how can mankind be so insane?”:

 

Toxic historical context

 

For everyday Kiwi’s stories of the harms caused by aerial 1080 and brodifacoum operations over the 70+ years of Government-sponsored poisoning, please see the Peoples Inquiry 2020 that recorded hundreds of public submissions from personal lived experiences. Details are found in my post here:

Impacts of Toxic Chemicals & Poisons Across New Zealand are Overwhelming and Disturbing

·
11 April 2024
Impacts of Toxic Chemicals & Poisons Across New Zealand are Overwhelming and Disturbing

The volunteer committee of the citizen-led New Zealand People’s Inquiry (of which I’m a member) have this week publicly released the collection of written submissions into the impacts and effects of toxic chemicals and poisons on the people, wildlife and environment of Aotearoa, New Zealand.

Government contractors were understandably labelled ‘cowboys’ by a Chief Medical Officer of Health in a past meeting I attended. That’s because evidence from EPA annual reports and other outcomes shows these companies often have no regard for valid risk assessments, health and safety policies or public consultation processes. For a shocking example of the latter, you can see this evidence from Dr Wendy Pond during the Peoples Inquiry 2020 where a ‘sign off’ approving an aerial poisoning operation was forged, because the tribal elder named, had already passed away. Where is the accountability?

But where was the accountability for Rentokil after the Smarden Affair? Back in 1963, a poison closely related to 1080, fluoroacetamide, was deliberately dumped into a ditch serving a farming community in Kent, UK. This BBC archive summarises the tragic story (2.5 mins). Decades pass. Regardless, the propaganda of BigChem continues. That UK poisoning led to pyres that burned the contaminated herds. Sound familiar?

These memories resurfaced when in 1985 farmers at Smarden discovered the first case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Kent and a number of further cases followed. Twelve years later, a perceived cluster of cases of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) in the Smarden area led to speculation that this human form of BSE was caused by excessive exposure to pesticides. Reports in the press suggested that the residents of Smarden suspected the incident had been some sort of government-controlled experiment and subsequent cover-up which had produced BSE.

Wrote John Clark, Senior Lecturer in History, University of St Andrews back in 2017. [Must be a conspiracy theorist, eh?].

In this latest Annual Report, Rentokil Initial boast about the ‘respectful engagement with communities’ (communities that they are about to poison?) by ‘building strong local knowledge’ and ‘lasting relationships’. (maybe with NDAs?) The report goes on to list the four NZ contractors swallowed-up by BigChem Rentokil:

Extract from Rentokil Initial’s Annual Report

It is EcoFX listed above which repeatedly undertook the aerial poisoning of Pirongia mountain. The drinking-water catchment is located there, serving the local communities, including the schools and the in-bed-with-Government milk-processing plant, Fonterra. Evidence shows that the aerial poisoning with 1080 over Mt Pirongia (like similar operations) includes distributing the poison over the water at the same rate as the land (this saves the ‘cowboys’ money in helicopter fuel and labour hours and therefore maximises profits). Here’s an example of that crime from ten years ago (10 mins):

 

The latest 1080 poison operation has been announced for nearby Mt Moehau for July this year. The last operation was only three years ago (usually it is every 4-7 years). The frequency and intensity and toxicity of these 1080 aerial poisonings are increasing nationwide. On the residents’ communication for Mt Moehau, no mention of Rentokil Initial, only of EcoFX in the pseudo-consultation invitation:

On EcoFX website, they claim to be ‘part of the Rentokil Initial Group’, as if that is something to be proud of:

 

It’s interesting to note that EcoFX isn’t a registered NZ Company. The ceased Director is listed as Director/Shareholder of One Degree Ltd and One Foot Investments (unknown entities). Rentokil Initial NZ (strangely, 100% shareholders are Rentokil Spain, not UK) are using the old contractors as ‘trading names’. This could be confusing for anyone trying to engage with the Government or contractor about the consultation process or the inevitable lethal consequences that come with indiscriminate aerial poisoning. And believe me, they are inevitable.

“Safe and effective?” Yeah, nah.

We’ve learnt from the last five years that nothing is quite what it seems. That media mantra ‘Clean, Green, 100% Pure New Zealand’ is another myth. It’s time people woke up to the BigChem capture of our so-called Environmental Protection Authority alongside our healthcare systems. These entities only seek to perpetuate our sickness.

Thanks for reading Informed Heart! This post is public so feel free to share it.

SOURCE

Note: envirowatchnz has a trove of info on 1080 if you check out the main menu & subtabs. Also search 1080 in the categories drop down box. The 1080  industry is huge & rife with corruption and lies. Hopefully folk will believe that now after the ‘safe and effective’ scam fed us by Big Pharma & Co for the past 5 years.

Get Rid Of Your LEDs

Two videos on light bulbs. The LEDs as some will know are seriously bad for the eyes. Info in the first video.

Also read The Light Bulb Mafia, and the update here.

The second video speaks of Trump’s Exec Order and the return of the incandescent. These have never been completely discontinued in NZ, however for the past 10 years I’ve noticed their price escalate and choices have diminished. Plus, frequently they blow. More hypocrisy & lies from the ‘sustainable’ hoaxters.

Get Rid Of Your LEDs

Incandescent are back

Image by HSLABS from Pixabay

First mention of the Atlas Network in NZ Parliament (think Seymour)

From The Daily Blog

Remember Seymour in an interview denied any connection to Atlas which is not true. He called it conspiracyEWNZ


The Article 2/2/25:
By Martyn Bradbury

 

Last night [1 Feb] during the reading of ACTs Bill to dump the Productivity Commission, Labour mentioned the Atlas Network for the first time in Parliament…

Whose interests are ACT actually serving here by silencing the Productivity Commission?

The Atlas Network is an international far right think tank whose extreme policy platform seeks to attack public servants, push for radical privatization, dismantle regulation protecting workers and the environment and champions Landlords over renters.

That sounds remarkably similar to this Government. Who is behind the ACT Party and their policy? The Atlas Network sounds exactly like the policy platform of this new Government and the ACT Party, the Taxpayers’ Union and The NZ Initiative all have links to the Atlas Network so I ask , who is really pulling the strings here?

…the Atlas Network are an international far right think tank and George Monbiot has done an expose on how the Atlas Network influences UK politics and TDB has highlighted the links between them and NZ politics.

Look at the Atlas International play book and ask yourself if it sounds familiar…

A crash programme of massive cuts; demolishing public services; privatising public assets; centralising political power; sacking civil servants; sweeping away constraints on corporations and oligarchs; destroying regulations that protect workers, vulnerable people and the living world; supporting landlords against tenants; criminalising peaceful protest; restricting the right to strike.

…watch how each of these extremist free market agendas are being slowly and quietly implemented. The new draconian gang powers

Atlas Network also gets mentioned by the Public Health Communication Centre who note the connections between Tobacco Lobbyists and the Atlas Network…

Tobacco Company Political connections Evidence of industry links
British American Tobacco Casey Costello (NZ First Party) formerly Chair and member of Tax Payers’ Union Board. Now Minister with responsibility for the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 1990; vaping; smokeless tobacco; oral nicotine.1 Guardian investigation reported TPU received funding from British American Tobacco

 

TPU has links with the Atlas Network, which has received tobacco industry funding.

 

In 2023, a TPU staff member received an Atlas Network competition prize. TPU was described as an Atlas Network partner.

…it also notes that Nicola Willis is a former Nazgul at the NZ Initiative…

     
     
British American Tobacco

Imperial Brands Australasia

Nicola Willis, Deputy leader National Party, formerly Board Director New Zealand Initiative NZI list tobacco companies British American Tobacco and Imperial Brands Australasia as members.

…at some point the mainstream media are going to have two investigate the influence of the Atlas Network over the Political Right in NZ.

It’s good that Labour has started that questioning.

Where are the Greens and the Māori Party?

Atlas Network

SOURCE

Photo credits: The Daily Blog

 

 

What if your body knows how to heal, but the system doesn’t want you to trust it? (The White Coat deception)

From Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • In my interview with Dr. Patrick Gentempo, we discussed how true health care involves developing self-trust and personal judgment rather than blindly following medical authorities. Understanding your body’s natural healing abilities helps make informed decisions about treatments and interventions
  • While emergency medical care is vital for acute conditions, the current health care system often emphasizes crisis management and quick fixes rather than promoting everyday wellness and prevention
  • Fear disrupts self-trust and decision-making in health care choices. Developing a personal health philosophy helps you evaluate treatments based on evidence and individual experience rather than external pressure
  • Your body’s cellular energy production, particularly through mitochondrial health, plays a key role in overall wellness. Avoiding toxins and making lifestyle changes significantly improves natural healing capacity
  • Making health decisions should combine logical analysis of scientific evidence with intuitive understanding of your body. Small, consistent changes in daily habits often lead to significant health improvements

Download interview transcript | Download my FREE podcast

In my recent interview with Dr. Patrick Gentempo, a longtime friend and respected chiropractor, we discussed the importance of knowing your own health philosophy. We explored topics such as self-trust, fear and the role of curiosity in guiding you toward good decisions. Our conversation highlighted how easy it is to get swept up in a system that emphasizes quick fixes instead of true healing.

You might think a prescribed drug or an invasive procedure is the only answer because that is the message coming from some powerful voices. Yet, genuine “health care” is not just a set of steps or pills. It involves your choices, your beliefs and your willingness to understand what your body truly needs. Gentempo described his early days in chiropractic care, where he frequently encountered patients who assumed that a doctor always knew best.

Those same individuals often had no real sense of their own ability to heal. In many cases, they simply replaced their inner wisdom with a blind trust in practitioners wearing white coats. Gentempo’s point is one I have voiced time and again — each of you should take a more active role in your own health. Part of that means understanding that most so-called “health care” is actually designed to handle crises and emergencies, rather than promote day-to-day well-being.

There is certainly a place for emergency interventions. If you experience a broken bone or life-threatening infection, going to a hospital is clearly the right move. But as you will see, making wise decisions in everyday life often prevents these problems or at least lessens their severity.

 

Throughout my professional journey, I have found that the best outcomes happen when you trust your own judgment enough to consider alternative approaches. Gentempo agrees. He shared a story of being nearly pushed into knee surgery, only to pause and remember his core belief that the body is self-healing and self-regulating. This pause gave him room to explore a natural path — one that ultimately led to a full recovery without surgery.

Embracing Self-Trust and Personal Choice

During our conversation, we also focused on how fear disrupts your ability to trust yourself. I have often seen people become so caught up in what they are told by experts that they lose sight of their own experiences and gut feelings. Gentempo explained that, without a personal philosophy, you naturally adopt someone else’s. That point deserves your attention. It means your choices come not from a place of conviction but from pressure or habit.

When you decide to live by your own philosophy, you begin to ask questions. You might wonder: Does a proposed treatment align with how you view health, or does it only address a symptom? Have you looked for credible data and then checked how it resonates with your experiences?

This shift might involve saying “no” to a recommendation or stepping away from a risky drug. It often feels unusual, especially if you are used to following directions without challenging them. Yet, in the long run, this approach could save you from unneeded therapies and help you find better solutions.

During our discussion, Gentempo recalled times in his practice when he saw the direct power of self-healing. He watched patients who tried conservative, noninvasive options before resorting to surgery. Many of them improved. This reminded me of a key study in the New England Journal of Medicine showing that certain knee surgeries were no better than sham procedures.1

It underscores how assumptions about standard care don’t always hold up. You deserve to know such information to avoid getting swept into fear-based decisions. The moment you break free from that cycle of dread, you become much better equipped to evaluate the merits of any treatment. You move from being told what to do to deciding what to do. That is the essence of real self-trust.

 

Questioning the ‘Health Care’ Label

A large part of my conversation with Gentempo centered on the way our society approaches health. We both find it troubling that so much money and energy goes into a system better described as “sick care.” Despite massive health care spending, many people remain unwell or become sicker as they age.

You look around and see countless advertisements for drugs, along with stories from neighbors and friends who juggle multiple prescriptions. That seems perfectly normal in our current age, but it does not reflect what true health looks like. In a genuine health care system, the priority would be to help you stay healthy in the first place. Rather than constantly placing you in a reactive stance, it would center on prevention and healthy lifestyle habits.

Gentempo pointed out that medication-based care does not automatically become “bad.” If you encounter an acute crisis, pharmaceutical or surgical interventions are often lifesaving. The issue arises when prescriptions and procedures are used for mild or chronic conditions without considering simpler, safer solutions. This over-reliance on medicine leads to a cycle where people keep adding more drugs to handle side effects, and no one ever addresses the root cause.

I have spent many years showing readers how to handle common health concerns through smart, natural methods. Whether it is taking steps to optimize your vitamin D levels or learning how to manage stress before it spirals, you have options beyond the standard sick-care path. I urge you to remain curious and look for ways to maintain vitality. Do not wait for permission to try something as basic as healthy eating, proper sleep or a thoughtful supplement routine.

Save This Article for Later – Get the PDF Now
Download PDF

Crafting a Health Philosophy That Fits You

As Gentempo explains, forming a personal health philosophy means taking the time to decide what you believe about the nature of your body and how it heals. Some of you likely feel quite certain that the human body, given proper support, is incredibly resilient. You believe your energy and overall function improves with simple steps like removing toxins, eating real foods and staying active.

Others still cling to the assumption that a doctor’s prescription or a scalpel is always required to correct any health issue. Gentempo and I suggest you consider how your current beliefs were formed. Did you develop them through your own experience and valid research, or have you absorbed them from the environment around you? If you learn to “audit” your beliefs, you keep the good ones and discard those that do not serve you anymore.

In our interview, we also discussed how people feel lost when they have no guiding philosophy at all. That leaves you vulnerable to picking up any passing idea or commercial message that seems official.

When you have a clear sense of what health means to you — when you know how you think your body should be cared for — other people’s claims become easier to evaluate. You may say, “That lines up with my philosophy,” or “This goes against how I understand health,” and proceed from there.

Deciding on your own philosophy does not mean you go it alone and never accept outside help. Rather, you become the ultimate judge. You gather insights from various sources, verify the evidence, then see if it resonates with your view of reality. If it does, you might adopt it. If not, you discard it without feeling guilty. A personal philosophy is not a set of unchanging rules; it shifts as new knowledge emerges.

Old Assumptions and New Insights

We talked about how easy it is to repeat old assumptions without checking if they are still correct. Maybe you have believed something like “saturated fats are harmful” or “any government-approved drug must be 100% safe.” As Gentempo and I noted, you then look back and find that many modern ideas turned out to be mistaken. Studies challenging long-held beliefs pop up regularly, yet people keep following the same paths out of habit or fear.

An example is the use of seed oils, which contain linoleic acid. You’ve likely seen repeated claims that these are “heart-healthy” alternatives, when in reality they’re mitochondrial poisons. You might have grown up with the notion that vegetable oils in processed foods were better for you, only to learn now that butter, ghee and coconut oil are healthier options.

In my conversation with Gentempo, I pointed out that changing your perspective does not make you weak or indecisive. It means you are growing and staying open to the idea that new information should replace outdated ideas. Science itself evolves, and so do you. The important thing is to stay active in the process, so you are not letting others make choices for you while you remain on the sidelines.

Mitochondria and the Role of Energy

One of the standout parts of our interview was discussing how health is tied to energy production within your cells. I have written extensively about mitochondria, the tiny power plants that convert nutrients into usable fuel, including in my book “Your Guide to Cellular Health: Unlocking the Science of Longevity and Joy.” As Gentempo and I both noted, many everyday toxins weaken this energy process, leaving you feeling drained or vulnerable to illness.

We also discussed the importance of removing known mitochondrial toxins. It is not enough to merely add good things, such as better foods and more movement, if you are still bombarding your cells with harmful substances.

That is like trying to sail a boat with an anchor dragging along the ocean floor. By freeing yourself from that anchor — say, by cutting out seed oils and reducing your exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals — you allow your body to generate energy more efficiently.

Gentempo’s philosophy rests on the idea that your body has an innate capacity for self-healing. I share that view. Through the years, many of the successes I have witnessed happened when patients embraced their responsibility to nurture their body’s innate wisdom. That meant exercising, eating foods free of damaging additives and learning how to lower stress. It also meant staying curious instead of simply following the loudest or most “official” voice.

We recognize that tension often arises when you decide to break from the crowd. For example, during COVID-19 mandates, many people were torn between what made sense to them and what was required by policy. It was not our role in that discussion to dictate what is right for you. Rather, we suggest making decisions that are consistent with your core beliefs and the data you have gathered. That way, you avoid letting outside pressures force you into unwise or harmful choices.

Carrying the Lessons Forward

For me, interviewing Gentempo served as a reminder that the pursuit of health is not just about strict rules or scientific papers. It is about learning how to align what you know logically with what you feel intuitively. Studies and data hold great value, and I often cite them to support various points. Yet, you are the only one living in your body, experiencing your daily routine and coping with your unique challenges.

Gentempo explained that your mindset, emotions and choices build your energetic field. And that, in turn, influences your physical reality. I support this view, especially after working with tens of thousands of individuals over the years who drastically improved their health by shifting daily habits — often starting with small, seemingly simple changes. They began by choosing to think differently about what health really means.

Our conversation finished on a hopeful note. Both of us see a massive need for a more authentic view of health, one driven by self-trust and curiosity rather than fear. This is your opportunity to make decisions that line up with what works for your body and your circumstances. As you do, you might spark curiosity in friends, family or even strangers who see you living with more freedom and vitality.

Expanding Your Creative, Joyful Self

At the heart of everything we discussed is the idea that your life is meant to be creative, joyful and free from unnecessary fear. I shared how your energy levels affect not only your physical strength but also your spirit. When you connect to that source of energy — whether you call it your spirit, soul or simply your vital spark — you find that making the right health choices becomes easier.

Gentempo and I agree that real joy comes from living in alignment with your deepest truths. If you ever doubt whether your life can improve, I encourage you to consider the rapid transformations I have seen. Some people overcame serious health problems simply by questioning old assumptions and trusting themselves enough to try a different path. They created a ripple effect — changing not just their own health story, but also influencing others who noticed their results.

My hope is that you recognize how important it is to keep learning and growing. Stay curious about new findings in health, but always run them through your personal filter. Rely on your philosophy of wellness, continue refining your choices and remain open to future discoveries. Let that process fill you with the energy and clarity needed to embrace a life of true health and joy.

Moving Forward with Confidence and Vitality

As we wrapped up our interview, Gentempo shared the importance of embracing your own judgment and not being afraid to refine it as you learn. You are not stuck with a single belief system forever; you are free to change it when new evidence or personal experiences point you toward a better route.

You have a chance, right now, to take your health into your own hands by reflecting on the discussion I had with Gentempo. We covered everything from the power of your personal philosophy to the practical considerations of living in a system that often treats medicine as a universal cure-all. The message is not that you should reject every medical intervention, but that you need to see yourself as the central figure in your health journey.

I am thankful for the time I got to spend with Gentempo, as it reinforced the core principles I have championed for decades: Focus on prevention, respect your body’s natural intelligence and do not let fear drive you. Instead, examine studies, seek expert opinions and, if you come to a different conclusion than the mainstream, realize that might be the best choice you ever make.

Elevating Your Health with Purpose

As my conversation with Gentempo explains, your health is best served by your own wisdom, guided by solid facts and a willingness to adapt. Neither of us suggests living in a bubble or ignoring doctors. Instead, we want to encourage you to become a partner in your own care — one who weighs information carefully and doesn’t forget the power you hold over your daily habits.

Through this collaboration between your knowledge and your intuition, you tap into a higher level of healing and growth. Recognize that “health care” should not be limited to an endless series of prescriptions. Rather, it is a dynamic, ongoing practice of fueling your body well, giving it enough rest and choosing safe, evidence-based interventions when necessary.

I invite you to read more about the ideas we touched on. Explore Gentempo’s website, gentempo.com.2 Look up peer-reviewed studies on subjects that interest you. Pay attention to experts you trust, but always match their advice to your own situation. If something feels off or leads to negative outcomes for people you care about, dig deeper. Ask questions. Adjust your approach. That is how true learning happens.

I hope you use these insights to push past fear or confusion and step boldly into a life driven by your own inner compass. Like Gentempo, I believe you will find that once you tune in to your body’s capabilities — you unlock not just a healthier version of yourself but also a more joyful and meaningful life overall.

– Sources and References
 

SOURCE

Photo credit: pixabay.com

 

Pfizer knew there’s an 80% miscarriage rate

From Exposing the Darkness @ substack

“There’s a section in the Pfizer documents where there’s an 80% miscarriage rate…”

“…Pfizer knew that babies in utero were being exposed to the vaccine. In their words the babies were dying through “transplacental exposure.”

“…They knew that they were poisoning breast milk, and that the lipid nanoparticles, the mRNA, and presumably the spike was getting onto the breast milk, and causing convulsions, and deaths.”

“ They knew that newborns would have (some of them) air sacs between their tiny lungs and their tiny chest walls. And this would cause respiratory distress. They knew it. It’s in the Pfizer documents.”

SHORT (or longer) VIDEO AT THE LINK

SOURCE

Two Bills that Signify a Profound New Direction for NZ

“They propose comprehensively changing the nation’s legislative and political environment by embedding rigid legal frameworks that prioritise individual and property rights, constrain regulatory powers, and reduce the government’s ability to implement environmental protections, social safeguards, and Tiriti-based initiatives.”


Note this article is from December 2024 … submissions for both Bills are now closed.
It’s been said that the Principles Bill is dead in the water (so why have they allowed it in the first place? Inciting division and wasting money?) However my concern is, as highlighted in the article, that it will (among other things) affect our ability to protect the environment. The environment has been a big issue for NZ given 60+ years of poisoning with 1080, and the possible agenda behind that. All the while trumpeting to the world we are clean and green! All info to be mindful of anyway going forwards. EWNZ


From E_TANGATA

New Zealand stands at a pivotal moment in its constitutional development. Not one but two key bills, both driven by the Act Party, signify a profound new direction for the country, writes Melanie Nelson.

Much has been said about the significant impacts of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill.

Meanwhile, its long-standing companion, the Regulatory Standards Bill, is advancing quietly through government processes, with limited public awareness, minimal media coverage, and little parliamentary debate.

Consultation on the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill opened on November 19, the day the hīkoi arrived at parliament. The consultation period ends the week after submissions close on the Treaty principles bill.

Both bills, if progressed, will result in significant constitutional reforms with profound implications for New Zealand.

They propose comprehensively changing the nation’s legislative and political environment by embedding rigid legal frameworks that prioritise individual and property rights, constrain regulatory powers, and reduce the government’s ability to implement environmental protections, social safeguards, and Tiriti-based initiatives.

Restricting legislative freedom: A legal straitjacket in the making?

The focus on the Treaty principles bill has overshadowed its dull but dangerous regulatory cousin.

The Regulatory Standards Bill is the brainchild of the Business Roundtable (now the New Zealand Initiative). The Act Party has tried three times, since 2006, to introduce a version of this bill — failing each time it was put under scrutiny, as its dangerous consequences became clear.

Yet, this latest attempt seems to be sailing through with little to no scrutiny so far.

Emeritus Professor Jane Kelsey, reflecting on these previous attempts, said that “if the Business Roundtable and Act had their way, these directives and guidelines would have become a legal straitjacket.”

She described the proposals as “meta-regulation”, intended to govern how legislation is created.

The Roundtable’s 2001 report, Constraining Government Regulation, included the first draft of that meta-regulation, called the Regulatory Responsibility Bill.

Act adopted the bill, and in 2006 it was drawn from the ballot in the name of Roger Douglas. This is the same year that Act first introduced a version of its Treaty principles bill. The Regulatory Responsibility Bill was blocked by Labour, then subsequently revived in 2009 by Act’s Rodney Hide and National’s Bill English, through a Regulatory Responsibility Taskforce.

Reintroduced as the Regulatory Standards Bill in 2011, it failed to pass amid opposition from the Legislative Advisory Committee, Treasury, and others, who criticised its focus on property rights, the expansion of judicial roles, and its proposed creation of a set of constitutional rights that conflicted with the New Zealand Bill of Rights.

Then, with National’s support, David Seymour reintroduced the bill in 2021 but, again, ultimately failed. MPs condemned it as “a dangerous constitutional shift,” undermining public and collective rights and threatening parliamentary sovereignty.

They highlighted its “political choices”, which enshrined Act’s ideology in place of alternative principles such as Te Tiriti o Waitangi, international obligations, community wellbeing, or climate and environmental protection.

Nonetheless, Act is finally poised to achieve its goal. The bill is included in the Act-National coalition agreement, as a bill to be passed.

The coalition government’s bill is based, with some proposed changes, on the Regulatory Standards Bill 2021. It outlines how all new legislation and regulation — and after 10 years all existing legislation (excluding Treaty settlements) — should adhere to a specific set of libertarian principles.

These principles include selected elements of the rule of law, equality before the law, individual freedoms, property rights, restrictions on government, and constraints on taxes and charges.

Preliminary advice (available here) on the Regulatory Standards Bill has been provided by the Ministry for Regulation, David Seymour’s newly established ministry, set up this year as part of the coalition agreement. The advice notes:

“Of significance is that the proposals do not include a principle related to the Treaty/te Tiriti and its role as part of good law-making, meaning that the Bill is effectively silent about how the Crown will meet its duties under the Treaty/te Tiriti in this space.”

The regulatory bill also proposes to establish a Regulatory Standards Board. The Board would consider complaints from the public about existing regulation (including legislation) which is inconsistent with one or more of the bill’s principles.

This could include complaints about laws, or their implementation through regulatory systems. That might mean complaints about laws that recognise collective Māori rights, on the basis that they are inconsistent with individualistic rights and equality before the law. Or complaints about environmental protections, on the basis that they are inconsistent with unrestricted property rights. Or complaints about social safeguards, on the basis they are inconsistent with equality before the law and the principles on imposition of taxes and levies.

The Board could also initiate its own reviews, or at the direction of the Minister for Regulation. It would provide non-binding recommendations to Ministers who would then be required to publicly justify any departures from the principles.

Overall, the regulatory bill’s principles are very similar to the distinctive libertarian interpretations of the terms contained in the Treaty principles bill — interpretations that differ significantly from common usage.

Together, these bills propose embedding Act’s ideological worldview in the heart of New Zealand’s constitutional framework, limiting legislative flexibility, executive decision-making, and judicial interpretation.

Constitutional collisions ahead?

While distinct in focus, the two constitutional bills have the potential to significantly intersect. The Regulatory Standards Bill shapes how legislation and regulation are developed and implemented, and it determines the foundational values these are based on. It potentially also influences how laws are interpreted by the courts.

Meanwhile, the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill is concerned with how legislation is interpreted.

Individually or together, these bills would entrench libertarian preferences in New Zealand’s constitutional framework. They would also obstruct the consideration of Te Tiriti in future lawmaking, interpretation and the delivery of public services.

Should only the Regulatory Standards Bill be enacted, common law might still mandate consideration of the current Treaty principles in legislative interpretation unless explicitly excluded. This would create constitutional tensions, as the regulatory bill’s individualistic, property-focused framework conflicts with the collective rights and interests of iwi and hapū upheld by Te Tiriti and its common law principles.

It may have been this conflict that prompted efforts to redefine the Treaty principles in legislation, to make them run parallel to the libertarian rights outlined in the Regulatory Standards Bill.

As a nation, we are now being asked to submit feedback on both sets of sweeping constitutional changes without fully grasping the impact of these extensive proposals on our lives and the country.

New Zealanders must ask themselves whether they want a minor party’s libertarian ideology to shape the boundaries of legislation, government action, and judicial interpretation, even after Act is no longer in power.

The Regulatory Standards Bill and the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, individually or together, would fundamentally reshape New Zealand’s economic, social, environmental, and political landscapes.

Written submissions on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill are now closed. No special expertise is required to make a submission on either bill.

Melanie Nelson (Pākehā) is a consultant, educator, writer and podcaster on cross-cultural issues, and a licensed Māori language translator and interpreter. She is a graduate of Te Panekiretanga o te Reo Māori / Institute of Excellence in the Māori Language and holds a master’s degree in Māori Language Excellence — Te Tohu Paerua o te Reo Kairangi.

E-Tangata, 2024

They propose comprehensively changing the nation’s legislative and political environment by embedding rigid legal frameworks that prioritise individual and property rights, constrain regulatory powers, and reduce the government’s ability to implement environmental protections, social safeguards, and Tiriti-based initiatives.

SOURCE

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Bill Gates: ‘We Will Not Need Humans for Most Things’ … Does This Mean He Isn’t Human?

From slaynews.com
via Exposing the Darkness @ substack

Some will be needed for entertainment purposes however … sounding a bit like the gladiator days isn’t it?  And assuming he is planning on staying, is he admitting he isn’t human? … EWNZ

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has gloated that “we” will soon have little use for human beings thanks to advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

According to Gates, humans will soon not be “needed” for “most things.”

Gates made gloating remarks while grinning from ear to ear and rubbing his hands together during an interview on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon.”

While Gates appeared to revel in the idea of humans being replaced by machines, he admitted that people may still be required for entertainment purposes such as sports.

“We won’t wanna watch computers play baseball,” Gates noted.

Fallon had asked Gates whether AI was going to “take over” and what the downsides and benefits of it were.

Gates explained that “intelligence is rare,” but that artificial intelligence will start to replace great teachers and doctors over the course of the next decade.

He went on to suggest that many types of jobs will be replaced and that people could only end up working two or three days a week.

“This is a bit scary, it’s completely new territory,” he added.

“Will we still need humans?” asked Fallon.

“Not for most things,” responded Gates, prompting Fallon to hold his hands over his mouth in shock.

After Fallon suggested humans would still be needed for entertainment purposes, like hosting a talk show, Gates concurred.

“Well, we’ll decide. You know, like baseball.

“We won’t want to watch computers play baseball.

“So there’ll be some things that we reserve for ourselves.”

According to Gates, allowing humans to grow food and contribute to society by making things is a “problem” that needs to be “solved.”

“But in terms of making things and moving things and growing food, over time, those will be basically solved problems,” Gates asserted.

WATCH AT THE LINK 

Meanwhile, Gates has been busy sounding the alarm over the “next pandemic” and calling for “preparedness.”

The billionaire said the chance of another pandemic in the next four years is a source of great concern, as Slay News reported.

Concerns about the next pandemic, and how prepared the world is for it, have been rife since COVID-19 plunged the world into economic and healthcare turmoil amid the unprecedented breakout in 2020.

Gates, who has long been vocal about the threats of outbreaks of disease, is a major player in global health policies and initiatives.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Gates said he believes there is a 10-15 percent chance of a “natural pandemic” hitting in the next four years.

Gates doubled down on this warning during a Tuesday appearance on the ABC News propaganda show “The View.”

Again rubbing his hands together, Gates told the audience that “[the Covid pandemic] killed millions, it was awful, we got the vaccine.”

“The next [pandemic] could be far more severe,” he added.

“There’s even some pathogens out there that we’re watching over right now.

“So maybe a 10% chance in the next four years.”

WATCH AT THE LINK

Elsewhere during his appearance on “The View,” Gates expressed panic over efforts by President Donald Trump’s administration to scale back the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

The Trump administration has placed Secretary of State Marco Rubio in control of USAID following investigations by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

DOGE uncovered alarming levels of corruption of misuse of taxpayer money at USAID, prompting Trump to order the State Department to absorb the agency.

Among other bombshells, Musk revealed that USAID used tax dollars to fund the bioweapons research that developed the COVID-19 virus in a biolab in China.

However, despite the emerging controversies and scandals related to USAID, Gates said he’s “worried” about the agency being scaled back.

USAID heavily funds several of Gates’s “philanthropy” endeavors, including “vaccine” experiments on third-world citizens.

Gates told “The View” that cutting back on USAID’s powers could result in “literally millions of deaths.”

He specifically took aim at Elon Musk, who is leading DOGE’s investigations into USAID.

“Well, Elon, his private sector work, you know, has been very innovative, really fantastic,” Gates said.

“A lot of private sector people, when they get into government they don’t take the time necessarily to see what the good work is or why it’s structured the way it is, so I’m a little worried, particularly with this USAID stuff.”

Gates responded to a question from co-host Sara Haines about Musk’s role in the U.S. government.

Musk had described USAID as a “viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists who hate America.”

He argues that the agency is like a “ball of worms” that needs to be “shut down.”

“My foundation partners with USAID on nutrition and getting vaccines out and, you know, there’s incredible people,” Gates said.

“You know, they’re not actually worms that work there.

“So, you know, hopefully, we’ll get some of that work back in shape.

In fact, if we don’t, you know, you could have literally millions of deaths.”

“So, with aid, people think, you know, wow, how much do we give to these countries, as you said, it’s less than a percent,” he added.

“People think it’s 5%, and it should be 2%, but it’s actually under 1%.”

WATCH AT THE LINK

 

SOURCE

 

Townsville Next Up for Land Grabs?

The above video from Rob Deutsche posted 9 days ago. Watch his 4 videos since (links below, latest at the top):

If you’re not up with the rainmaking play, see our Geoengineering pages at main menu. And the subpages for NZ. There are links to the other larger sites on topic there.

Scroll down these links for NZ’s Gabrielle event that led eventually to: WEF is recommending ‘Managed Retreat’ for Hawke’s Bay

Read Elana Freeland’s many expert texts on geoengineering also:

https://www.amazon.com/Books-Elana-Freeland/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AElana%2BFreeland

Elana has a website but I cannot find it!

Many video interviews with her at this link

 

Seymour gets a clear message from Ngāpuhi at Waitangi: Mics snatched, backs turned

Turning their backs, a clear message it’s said, to stop talking and sit down. “We’ve always heard sentiments from our elders to be mindful and to be careful of the messages our children hear. Our tamariki were there, and they were watching.”

Stuff reports that there was hui by Ngāpuhi up to even the night before Seymour’s party arrival. They resorted at the very last minute to the lesser option for the reception given. Plan one had been to march them onto the marae, then march them straight back off without letting them speak at all.

Much criticism and talk around this silencing of Seymour, however, think about your opportunities given by them for speaking at their various venues and ‘consultations’. At local council it is a mere few minutes, and time up is time up with little if any feedback as to whether your concerns are taken on board. Same when making submissions. The entire system is not geared for dialogue. Your voice is very very limited.


From Stuff, NZ’s MSM

“We were expecting fireworks around Waitangi commemorations, and indeed they came. David Seymour, the man behind the Treaty Principles Bill, made his way onto the Treaty Grounds on Wednesday, where he was heckled, had his microphone taken away and had hosts literally turn their backs on him. Senior political correspondent Jenna Lynch was there. “| Subscribe: https://bit.ly/2JPg8oB Read more: For full coverage visit http://www.Stuff.co.nz Subscribe to our channel: https://bit.ly/2JPg8oB

 

 

The day the Treaty was first signed at Waitangi: exploring the differences in the English & te reo Māori versions (Claudia Orange)

For the info of international readers… today is Waitangi Day in NZ, the anniversary of the signing in 1840 of the Treaty of Waitangi, now a public holiday here. There’s much controversy currently  going on nation wide regarding the absence of PM Luxon at Waitangi this week (hmmm)… although denying it, it’s likely due to the Treaty Principles Bill currently before Parliament. Says he won’t approve it but allowed its introduction? And we have David Seymour present who is currently trying to change the said Treaty with his Bill, without any input from or consultation with the Crown’s signatories/partners … Māori. Smell a rat? I personally am with the deductions made by Australia’s Dr Jeremy Walker regarding Seymour’s connections to the Atlas Network.

And his proposed bill, it’s all having the desired effect, inciting racial division which, after all, has always been the ace card of empires.

He’s not being well received and IMHO rightly so. Plenty of coverage of the day on Youtube anyway if you’re curious to learn more, here’s one … and Claudia Orange here in her book excerpt explains the Treaty versions in both languages.  EWNZ


From 2021, by Newsroom
Featuring an excerpt from Claudia Orange’s book The Treaty of Waitangi / Te Tiriti o Waitangi: An Illustrated History

Governor William Hobson was caught by surprise. Summoned ashore late in the morning of February 6, he arrived in plain clothes but having snatched up his plumed hat. Several hundred Māori were waiting for him in the marquee, and several hundred others stood around outside. Many had arrived since the meeting the previous day, including some high-ranking women. Only James Busby and about a dozen Europeans had turned up, among them the Catholic Bishop Pompallier. Hobson, nervous and uneasy, more than once expressed concern that the meeting could not be considered a “regular public meeting” since the proper notice had not been given. He would not allow discussion, but would be prepared to take signatures.

On the table lay a tidily written treaty in te reo Māori – Te Tiriti o Waitangi – copied overnight on parchment by one of the missionaries, Richard Taylor. Rangatira were invited to come forward and sign. Just as Hone Heke was about to do so, William Colenso asked Hobson if he thought that the chiefs really understood what they were signing. “If the Native chiefs do not know the contents of this treaty it is no fault of mine,” replied Hobson. “I have done all that I could . . . They have heard the treaty read by Mr. Williams.”

Colenso agreed, but pointed out that it had not been explained adequately; he was afraid that they had not been made fully aware of the situation in which they would by their so signing be placed. Later the chiefs would hold the missionaries accountable, whereas their agreement needed to be “their very own act and deed”. Impatiently, Hobson brushed the protest aside, saying, “I think that the people under your care will be peaceable enough: I’m sure you will endeavour to make them so.”

The signing went ahead, while two rangatira kept up a running challenge in the traditional manner. Busby called each rangatira by name, probably from a list of those who had signed the 1835 Declaration of Independence. When each had signed, Hobson shook his hand, saying “He iwi tahi tātou.” According to Colenso this meant “We are [now] one people”, but Felton Mathew thought it meant “We are brethren and countrymen.” The expression greatly pleased the rangatira, who also shook hands with each of the official party; it was probably either Williams or Busby who told Hobson to express himself in this way. Both men must have known that the words would have a special meaning, especially for those who were Christian: Māori and British would be linked, under the guardianship of the Queen and as followers of Christ.

That afternoon, over 40 rangatira put their names or their moko on the parchment, affirming the agreement known as the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As the signing was drawing to an end, someone gave a signal for three thundering cheers for the Governor and Queen Wikitoria (Victoria). Patuone presented Hobson with a greenstone mere “expressly” for the Queen, and the meeting closed with Hobson retiring to the Herald, taking Patuone with him to dine. Colenso was left to distribute gifts – two blankets and some tobacco – to each person who had signed.

Several hundred New Zealand Company settlers had arrived in the Cook Strait region in January and February 1840. In March they had set up a form of government at Port Nicholson (Wellington) which, they claimed, derived its legality from authority granted by the local “sovereign chiefs”. The flag of an independent New Zealand, made on the company’s ship Tory, flew above the settlement, and a provisional constitution had been drawn up.

The chiefs at the left of this lithograph from the 1840s are Mananui Te Heuheu and his brother Iwikau. Mananui objected to Iwikau’s signing the Treaty. To the right is Apihai Te Kawau, who invited Hobson to set up his capital in Auckland. The image is taken from the Illustrated History by Claudia Orange.

Hearing of these moves, Hobson reasoned that the settlers were assuming powers of government that were the prerogative of the Crown. On May 21, he proclaimed sovereignty over the whole of the country: over the North Island on the basis of cession by chiefs who had signed the Treaty of Waitangi, and over the South Island and Stewart Island on the basis that Cook had “discovered” them. At this stage, Hobson held only the copy of Te Tiriti signed in the north, and one signed at Waikato Heads and Manukau Harbour. As for the South Island, he doubted that its “uncivilised” Māori were capable of signing any treaty. He had taken measures he deemed necessary under the circumstances, using Cook’s “discovery”, which his instructions had allowed him to use, if necessary.

Unaware of Hobson’s actions, Bunbury also proclaimed sovereignty: on June 5 at Stewart Island, by right of Cook’s discovery; and on June 17 at Cloudy Bay, by right of cession of the South Island by several ‘independent’ chiefs. The Colonial Office approved Hobson’s proclamations, which were published in the London Gazette on October 2, 1840. This was the only requirement at the time to validate sovereignty being acquired. Treaty meetings had continued after the proclamations; on September 3, the last signature was put on a copy of Te Tiriti, somewhere near Kāwhia, the copy not arriving back to Hobson until April 1841. 542 rangatira, among them 12 or more women of rank, had signed at about 50 meetings.

The differences between the two texts were crucial to a full Māori understanding – or the lack of it

Hobson had kept British officials informed throughout the signing process and had sent them copies of the Treaty. In October, he dispatched a final report, together with ‘certified’ copies of Te Tiriti and one English Treaty copy which was headed ‘translation’. He said nothing about any variations between the two texts, although it had already become apparent in April that there were differences in meaning, and therefore in Māori understanding of what they had agreed to. Hobson was aware of this.

The differences that affected the meaning were important:

ARTICLE 1
By the Treaty in English, Māori leaders gave the Queen “absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty which the said Confederation or Individual Chiefs respectively exercise or possess . . . over their respective Territories as the sole sovereigns thereof.”

By Te Tiriti in te reo, they gave the Queen “te Kawanatanga katoa o ratou wenua” – the governance or government of their land.

ARTICLE 2
By the Treaty in English, Māori leaders and people, collectively and individually, were confirmed in and guaranteed “the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates, Forests, Fisheries, and other properties . . . so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession.”

By Te Tiriti in te reo, they were confirmed and guaranteed “te tino Rangatiratanga o o ratou wenua o ratou kainga me o ratou taonga katoa” – the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship – over their lands, settlements, and all their valued possessions.

ARTICLE 3
The Treaty in English extended to Māori the Queen’s “royal protection and imparts to them all the Rights and Privileges of British Subjects.”

By Te Tiriti in te reo, in consideration of the agreement to the government of the Queen, the rights and privileges of British subjects – “nga tikanga katoa rite tahi ki ana mea ki nga tangata o Ingarani” – were extended to all the Māori of New Zealand.

The differences between the two texts were crucial to a full Māori understanding – or the lack of it. Only 39  chiefs signed a copy of the Treaty in English, which almost certainly had a copy of the printed Tiriti in te reo with it to enable the missionary at Waikato Heads to read it to Māori. Apart from that, all Māori leaders signed a copy of the Māori language Tiriti, which did not convey the full meaning of the English text, especially the extent of sovereign powers. Only some would have been able to read Te Tiriti, even if they had been given the chance. Explanations at meetings with potential signatories might have helped, given that discussion was essential to Māori in the customary building of relationships; but the records that exist show negotiators did not comment on differences in meaning. Their aim was to secure rangatira agreement. The complexities of sovereignty, as they were increasingly being recognised under international law, were not brought up.

Thus the differences between the Māori and English texts laid the basis for different British (and later colonial) and Māori understandings of the agreement, and for the debate over interpretation that was to continue.

This is an edited extract from the newly published The Treaty of Waitangi / Te Tiriti o Waitangi: An Illustrated History by Claudia Orange (Bridget Williams Books, $39.99 ) available in bookstores nationwide.

SOURCE


RELATED:

Remembering why empires make treaties

Seymour’s principles of privatisation

The Atlas Network: Big oil, climate disinformation and constitutional democracy (includes Dr Jeremy Walker) From Central News UTS

Header Image by Bruno from Pixabay

“The Great Poisoning”: Catherine Austin Fitts Describes the Intentional Poisoning of the US “of Which Vaccines are a Part”.. (it’s Global)

I contest, and few awake folk will deny, that we have all been submitted to poisoning … globally … our food, air (here also), water, our entire environment in fact… for a very long time. Aside from spraying our food with pesticides, the soil’s been poisoned, consequently our food. NZ in particular has been subjected to an incredibly intense and vast 60+ years long exposure to deadly 1080 poisoning, described by our official environmental agency DoC as harmless when broken down in water.  Add to that all the poisoning Austin Fitts describes. It’s everywhere… and those ‘in charge’ ensure you cannot successfully oppose it (It’s the same here).  EWNZ

RELATED: ‘Let Us Spray’ – Censored from NZ Television – See what Your Govt Allowed Kiwis


Article from Exposing the Darkness @ substack

Catherine Austin Fitts: “America Has Been in a Process That I Call the Great Poisoning, of Which Vaccines Are a Part…it’s Intentional”

“America has been in a process that I call the Great Poisoning, of which vaccines are a part…it’s intentional [because] it’s the only way you can balance [Social Security]…people who try [to] correct it lose their jobs. They get fired…They get assassinated.”

Investment banker, former HUD official, and founder of the Solari Report Catherine Austin Fitts describes for Steve Kirsch on a recent episode of VSRF Live how America has been suffering through an intentional “Great Poisoning” being conducted by the Deep State. Fitts notes that this Great Poisoning is executed via means including “vaccines” and is being implemented in order to balance retirement savings and the actuarial books. The former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development notes that those who attempt to “course correct” the Great Poisoning get fired, shot, or assassinated.

“I started to talk about this in the late ’90s. America has been in a process that I call the Great Poisoning, of which vaccines are a part, but they’re only a part,” Fitts says. “And…the goal of poisoning the population is intentional. And one of the reasons it’s intentional is it’s the only way you can balance the retirement savings in the actuarial books that I know of.”

“I’ve spent a lot of time basically talking and educating people about the government’s refusal to obey the financial management laws and the fact that large amounts of money are disappearing from the federal government,” Fitts adds. “And I teamed up with Dr. Mark Skidmore in 2017 to help me document all the money that’s missing. And at one point, Mark kept saying, ‘How come you don’t give up on this? How come you keep bringing this up?’ And I said, ‘You don’t understand. If we don’t deal with the financial problem, the only way they can balance the books is to lower life expectancy. That’s the only thing that will balance Social Security and the different retirement systems.'”

Fitts goes on to say:

“And so, when the financial coup started, they started to bring down life expectancy. And it wasn’t just one thing. It was opioids. It was fentanyl. They approved OxyContin. After the budget deal in 1995 busted, literally the next month…they approved OxyContin and the pill mills started and the mortgage fraud and predatory lending. All of that targeting poor neighborhoods along with an increase in narcotics trafficking. And that was bringing the life expectancy down in the lower income groups.

“Now if you look at COVID, it just accelerated that dramatically in the middle-income groups. So, I’m sure the Great Poisoning is a plan. And the proof of the plan, and to me it’s proven, is the refusal to course correct. And that’s why I think [RFK Jr.] going in as head of HHS is gonna be very interesting because he’s gonna try and course correct…[and] I think you have a lot of people in the American population who don’t want to face the fact of what happened with the COVID injections.

“But the reason you haven’t course corrected the Great Poisoning for 20 years is because the people who try and course correct it lose their jobs. They get fired. They get shot. They get assassinated. One congressman just said the other day [that they could] commit suicide by shooting themselves in the back of the head 5 times. Do you know what I mean? So if you look at the evil and the covert operations and the financial carrots and sticks and the control files and dirty tricks that have been used to keep this Great Poisoning going, no, this is not well intended people just not facing facts…There is a significant amount of money and physical violence and control techniques used to keep it going. And it’s taken…a remarkable and very inspiring and beautiful effort, you know, grassroots bottom up, to force us to the point where [RFK Jr.] could have such a dramatic impact on the election and find himself nominated at HHS.

“That is a groundswell, and the system cannot afford to push that groundswell aside. Otherwise, they’re going to destroy the credibility of the whole system. And so they need to reaffirm their credibility. And you’ll see this in Washington, where the pendulum will swing back and forth, where, you know, they will have a sweeping reform and recalibrate because they can’t afford to lose credibility. I mean…if you look at who’s really suffering from that now, it’s the Big Media. They are literally losing their channel. And part of the reason is this.”

(for the video click on the link ‘Full Interview’ below)

Catherine Austin Fitts and Steve Kirsch video image discuss poisoning

Full Interview

SOURCE

Deaths Among Young Americans Skyrocket, ‘Experts’ Baffled

It’s happening globally in fact.

Still, they’re baffled? Those ‘educated’ professionals who for years we’ve all been seduced into trusting implicitly? They simply can’t fathom it. Or don’t want to look would be more to the point.

I’m over politely tiptoeing around the white coats’ obvious compliance with big pharm’a’s bribery and corruption. I hear it begins right from year one in med school. Jabbing our healthy newborns with all manner of poisons while telling us it’s good for their health. Read The History of the Pharma Cartel and How Modern Medicine Became a Monopoly.

Any truly educated person would reflect of course on when this spike in deaths began and what changed right then.  To make such an investigation seems to be beyond their skill set. And big pharma has had no liability for damage since the law suits against them began in the ’80s.

So here, a world-renowned data expert has just issued a red alert after uncovering evidence revealing that excess deaths are continuing to skyrocket in children who received the ‘safe and effective’. (Video link at the end). Kiwis, remember (or did you know?) what happened to our government data analyst Barry Young.  He also raised the alarm on the rising number of deaths of our young.

If you doubt what I am saying, sub to Prof Mark Crispin Miller’s substack. (The deaths section is free). He has been documenting the mysterious death stats since they all began. There are posts on the deaths of celebrities, both sporting and Hollywood, and of civilians. Recently each report contains long lists of infant deaths. Heartbreaking. EWNZ


This article below is from slaynews.com
via Exposing the Darkness @ substack

Deaths Among Young Americans Skyrocket, ‘Experts’ Baffled

Deaths among young adult Americans have surged to historic highs, with so-called “experts” supposedly baffled by the root cause of skyrocketing mortality rates.

Deaths among young adult Americans have surged to historic highs, with so-called “experts” supposedly baffled by the root cause of skyrocketing mortality rates.

According to an alarming new study, deaths of Americans aged 25-44 spiked to 70 percent above the expected rate in 2023.

The researchers behind the study suggest that deaths caused by drug overdoses, suicides, and alcohol-related issues may be responsible for the rise.

However, the researchers, led by Elizabeth Wrigley-Field, associate professor of sociology and associate director at Minnesota Population Center, are apparently stumped by what other mysterious causes could be killing so many healthy young people.

The peer-reviewed study, published in JAMA Network Open, examined over 3.3 million deaths of Americans aged 25–44 between 1999 and 2023.

There were two distinct trends in rise in mortality.

Deaths increased steadily from 2011 to 2019 and then skyrocketed between 2020 and 2023.

Deaths of young adults in 2023 were 70% higher than they would have been if trends from 2011 to 2019 had continued.

Unnatural causes of death, like drug poisoning, were the leading cause of death in young adults, constituting a third of all deaths in 2023.

Drug poisoning has been the leading cause of death among young adults since 2014, with a sharp rise in 2020 and a stable excess death rate since.

The researchers did not offer an explanation of how drug poisoning contributed to these deaths.

Except for COVID-19, most of the leading causes of death in young adults were not health-related.

“One surprising thing about the increases in these causes of death is that these are causes of death that primarily kill people at much older ages,” Professor Wrigley-Field, the study author.

The contribution of cardio-metabolic conditions, including conditions related to heart and hormone function, as well as nutrition, was also substantial.

Compared to trends before 2011, deaths from most causes were significantly higher in 2023 than would be expected.

Excess mortality was 35% greater in 2019, in the years following the pandemic.

Despite the pandemic being long over, deaths have still not returned to pre-Covid levels, the researchers note.

“The fact that we saw a real growth in mortality at these relatively young ages is very worrying because it suggests that many more deaths may come in the future as these cohorts age into midlife and beyond, if these trends aren’t reversed before then,” Wrigley-Field added.

The pandemic is suggested as one reason for the spike in excess mortality.

However, longer-term causes, such as the dislocations caused by the economic crash of 2008, are also suggested.

So-called “deaths from despair”—deaths resulting, directly or indirectly, from feelings of hopelessness and despair, brought on by hardship, isolation, and lack of opportunities—are identified as a possible key factor in explaining the alarming rise in mortality among young adults.

“As a group, [young adults] have experienced expensive housing markets and a work context in which work hours have grown in many occupations, both of which can make it more difficult to lead healthy lifestyles,” Wrigley-Field said.

Because young people increasingly find themselves forced to work long hours to afford housing, they have less time, money, or resources to look after themselves.

As a result, they fall victim to physical and mental conditions that worsen their health and make it more likely they’ll die an early death.

Although the researchers note that the study does not explain the increase in excess mortality—they plan to look at explanation in detail next—the presence of so many different causes suggests the need to look at “big, systemic factors” in order to understand what’s happening.

However, the results of the study have provoked a backlash among many in the scientific community.

Some experts argue that the researchers have ignored the elephant in the room regarding excess deaths.

Dr. Pierre Kory slammed the study’s paper for not mentioning the likely impact of Covid mRNA “vaccines.”

Kory has written several op-eds calling attention to the explosions in excess mortality and their temporal associations with the vaccine rollout.

“To read papers like this where the possible impact of the vaccines are not (and cannot) be mentioned makes it anti-science and essentially uninterpretable because one of the likely major variables can never be examined or discussed,” he said.

“To wit, in the conclusion there is no mention of the mRNA campaign’s potential influence,” he said.

All-cause mortality researcher Denis Rancourt, Ph.D. said research like this also fails to even question the fundamental causes of death.

Rancourt has extensively analyzed the links between pandemic countermeasures and all-cause mortality

Articles like these, Rancourt said, are “purposefully not saying the important things.”

“It’s horrendously dishonest that these are the kinds of articles that get published in the opinion-leading journals,” Rancourt added.

“It’s just completely dishonest that we’re going to be polite and diplomatic and just not really talk about what’s going on here.”

Kory highlights other data such as the deaths reported to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

He also noted “the inexplicable and unprecedented rises in group term life insurance claims among young people 25-44, which occurred suddenly in the 3rd quarter of 2021 when mandates were all the rage.”

Kory argues that these datasets raise important questions about the temporal relationship between “vaccine” rollouts and excess mortality that weren’t addressed in the paper.

Rancourt said the paper’s methodology was deeply flawed and “the article would not have passed my peer review in its present state.”

“Their method of obtaining excess deaths by cause using trends from the baseline years 1999-2010, extrapolated to 2023, is dubious and unjustified,” he said.

“They also fail to examine and report the degree to which the age structure within their age 25-44 year cohort changes throughout the baseline (1999-2010) and extrapolation (2011-2023) periods, which is a pivotal determinant of mortality trends.”

Rancourt said the authors covered the fact that they used different methods for all causes of death other than COVID-19.

Unlike the other causes, where they extrapolated excess death from an estimated baseline, for COVID-19 they simply used the number of reported COVID-19 assigned deaths.

They are essentially “comparing apples and oranges,” he said.

Rancourt also said it was egregious that the authors didn’t investigate questions about the fundamental causes driving the excess deaths.

He added that by looking at a younger population, rather than an older population that is even more vulnerable to deaths from things like medical error and vaccine toxicity, the authors could more easily sidestep addressing those key pandemic-related issues.

Meanwhile, experts are warning that deaths are still surging among those who received the Covid mRNA injections.

In December, a world-renowned data expert has just issued a red alert after uncovering evidence that reveals excess deaths are continuing to skyrocket in children who received Covid mRNA “vaccines.”

According to an alarming warning from leading Wall Street data analyst Ed Dowd, excess child deaths are still accelerating and show no sign of slowing down.

Dowd is a former executive at the world’s largest investment firm BlackRock and is considered one of America’s leading data experts.

Through his expert analysis of insurance industry data, Dowd has become a prominent figure in investigations into the impact of the global Covid vaccination campaign.

Dowd made the discovery while analyzing the official data from the UK government’s Office for National Statistics (ONS).

“The UK has a problem,” Down warned during an interview on “The Jimmy Dore Show.”

However, while the deaths were identified in UK data, the trend is most likely reflected in other nations with a similar mass vaccination protocol, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and much of Europe.

Dowd’s data shows that excess deaths for children aged one to fourteen have surged higher each year since the Covid mRNA “vaccines” were rolled out in 2021.

According to Dowd, excess deaths for children in this age group spiked by a staggering 22% in 2023 – the last full year of data.

Dowd notes that this trend didn’t start until “the magic juice started to be issued to children later in 2021.”

The data shows that deaths were actually lower than expected in 2020 but started surging in 2021.

According to Dowd’s findings, each year’s data shows:

  • 2020: 9 percent fewer deaths than expected

  • 2021: 7 percent fewer deaths than expected

  • 2022: 16 percent MORE deaths than expected

  • 2023: 22 percent MORE deaths than expected

As Down notes, while the “vaccines” were rolled out for public use in early 2021, they were authorized for children later in the year.

Although the data for 2024 isn’t yet complete, Dowd reveals that, so far, the official figures show that the surging death trend has continued through this year.

“Figures from the Office for National Statistics show about 10% more deaths (across all age groups) than expected since April this year,” Down adds.

Yet, despite the clear correlation with the mass vaccination campaign, UK health officials insist that “circulatory diseases and diabetes are … behind the increase.”

VIDEO at THE LINK

Red Alert Issued as Excess Deaths Skyrocket in Covid-Vaxxed Children

 

SOURCE

 

 

 

Create problems, then offer solutions (how they rule over you)

Sounding familiar? Trump’s solving the last batch right now. If you’re feeling disinclined to read this, skip to para 5 or 6 especially. Dean’s been writing on topic for a long time sharing valuable insight on the workings of those who wish to maintain rule over us. Witness his many books listed below… EWNZ

From Dean Henderson @ Substack

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

(Excerpted from Chapter 10: The Iran/Iraq War: Big Oil & Their Bankers…by Dean Henderson)

In 1979, as Iranian revolutionaries were taking charge in Tehran, Carter National Security Adviser, Afghan Frankenstein godfather and Trilateral Commission co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski was in Kuwait City meeting with Kuwaiti Emir Sheik Jaber Ahmed al Sabah, House of Saud envoys and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. The group decided that Saddam’s Republican Guard would seize the oil-rich Iranian province of Khuzistan.

In 1980 Iraq invaded Iran. That same year Kuwait’s Ambassador to the United Nations shed light on the forces which had used Brzezinski to goad Hussein into his attempt to partition Iran’s oil fields. He informed the UN General Assembly of, “a cabal which controls and manipulates and exploits the rest of humanity by controlling the money and wealth of the world”.

The cabal which Kuwait’s UN Ambassador was referring to controls the JASON Society which, according to author William Cooper’s book Behold a Pale Horse, emerged from a 1952 alliance between Europe’s Black Nobility, the Illuminati and the Vatican. The JASON Society is also known as The Order of the Quest, the exact name of the Afghan Roshaniya “all-seeing ones”. The power structure for JASON is recruited from Skull & Bones, Scroll & Key, Britain’s Group of Oxford and the German Thule Society. JASON has close ties to the Trilateral Commission and the CFR. Its name comes from the story of Jason and the Golden Fleece, which denotes a search for truth.

President Eisenhower commissioned JASON to investigate the UFO question. Many of the group’s top scientists came from the Manhattan Project which developed the atomic bomb. The group was behind the advent of submarine warfare and President Reagan’s Star Wars initiative. JASON is the driving force behind secret US military technology being developed at places like Area 51 near Groom Lake, Nevada.

Cooper, a former Naval Intelligence officer, states that JASON scientists have come to the conclusion that the greenhouse effect may actually lead to a new Ice Age. The Pentagon Papers revealed that JASON was behind an electromagnetic barrier placed over the DMZ (demilitarized zone) during the Vietnam War. JASON, through the Black Nobility, serves the Bilderberger Group, whose Policy Committee, at its first known meeting in 1954, endorsed a JASON document titled, Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars. Research for the document was done at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Harvard Economic Research Project. What follows are excerpts of the document, which Cooper claims to have had in his possession:

“This publication marks the 25th anniversary of the Third World War, called the ‘Quiet War’, being conducted using subjective biological warfare…implying extensive objectives of social control and destruction of human life, i.e., slavery and genocide…dominance revolved around the subject of energy sciences…bookkeeping can be made king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology…it was agreed that a nation or world of people who will not use their intelligence are no better than animals…Such people are beasts of burden and steaks on the table by choice and consent…consequently …it was decided to privately wage a quiet war…shifting the natural and social energy of the undisciplined and irresponsible many into the hands of the self-disciplined, responsible and worthy few.

In order to achieve a totally predictable economy, the low-class elements of the society must be brought under total control, i.e., must be housebroken, trained and assigned a yoke…the lower class family unit must be disintegrated by the process of increasing preoccupation of the parents…The quality of education given to the lower class must be of the poorest sort…with such an initial handicap, even the bright lower class individuals have little hope of extricating themselves from their assigned lot in life. This form of slavery is essential to maintaining some measure of social order, peace and tranquility for the ruling upper class.

The public cannot comprehend this weapon, and therefore cannot believe they are being attacked and subdued. The general public…has become a herd of proliferating barbarians…a blight upon the face of the earth…it is possible to program computers…(to) bring about the complete control and subjugation of the public…the simplest form of economic amplifier is advertising. If a person is spoken to by a TV advertiser as if he were a 12-year-old, then…he will reach into his economic reservoir to buy that product…achieved by disengaging their minds…engaging their emotions…the more confusion, the more profit. Create problems, then offer solutions…keep the public entertainment below the 6th grade level…keep the public busy…back on the farm with the other animals…silent weapons technology is an outgrowth of a simple idea discovered, succinctly expressed and effectively applied by…

Mr. Mayer Amschel Rothschild…Rothschild discovered the missing passive component of economic theory known as economic inductance…That principle is ‘when you assume the appearance of power, people soon give it to you’…Rothschild discovered that currency or deposit loan accounts had the required appearance of power that could be used to induce people into surrendering their real wealth in exchange for a loan of promissory notes (paper money).

Mr. Rothschild loaned his promissory notes to individuals and governments. Then he would make money scarce, tighten control of the system, and collect collateral through the obligation of contracts (debt)…The pressures could be used to ignite war. Then he would control the availability of currency to determine who would win the war. That government which gave him control of its economic system got his support…balanced by the negation of population (genocide)…war is therefore the balancing of the system by killing the true creditors…the politicians are publicly hired hit men that justify the act (of war)…take control of the world by the use of economic silent weapons in the form of ‘quiet warfare’ and reduce economic inductance of the world to a safe level by the process of benevolent slavery and genocide…if the lower classes can be postponed long enough, the elite can achieve energy dominance… the ‘Presidential’ level of commander-in-chief is shared by the international bankers.”

Dean Henderson is the author of seven books, including, Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf, Illuminati Agenda 21, Nephilim Crown 5G Apocalypse and Royal Bloodline Wetiko & The Great Remembering.
Subscribe free to his Left Hook column at deanhenderson.substack.com

SOURCE

Note: you can find William Cooper’s Behold a Pale Horse in our resources page, free pdf download.

Deborah Tavares features regularly, Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars. You can find her website here.

Image by Annette from Pixabay

 

Exposing Those Man Made Disasters

Several links on the weaponization topic from Deborah Tavares and Mark Steele (weapons expert) here.
Be sure to watch Deb Tavares’ one titled Mass Slaughter. Crucial info.

Photo Credit: pixabay.com

ULTRASOUND: A century of forgotten research shows clear damage to fetal tissues

Analysis by A Midwestern Doctor
Via Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • The medical field has historically exposed mothers to harmful treatments for infants. After efforts to stop routine fetal X-rays, prenatal ultrasound (US) was introduced as a “safe” alternative
  • While ultrasound is considered safe, a century of forgotten research shows it can harm tissues
  • Evidence shows early fetuses are especially vulnerable to ultrasound, with trials in China that gave ultrasound before abortions revealing clear damage to fetal tissues
  • US harms are dose-dependent. In 1992, despite safety concerns, the FDA raised permissible US levels 8-fold, which may have contributed to the rise of chronic childhood illnesses
  • The benefits of prenatal US are often exaggerated, leading to unnecessary treatments that harm both mothers and infants

The earlier in life an input enters a human being’s system, the more of a profound impact it has. For example, abuse, neglect, or trauma early in childhood often pattern individuals for their entire lives (and in many cases their descendants as well).1

Similarly, it’s well recognized that toxin exposure during pregnancy (especially in the first two months of life2) can create lifelong issues. Sadly, this principle is frequently neglected when convenient (e.g., by pushing the COVID-19 vaccine on pregnant mothers).

Video Link

‘Safe and Effective’

One of the core beliefs medical students are taught from the very start is that vaccines are “safe and effective.” As such, they become unable to see the obvious dangers of vaccines (e.g., the century of evidence linking vaccines to “unexplained” sudden infant deaths — which coincidentally occur at the same time the early childhood vaccines are given).

A similar situation with ultrasound exists, as all doctors are taught that, unlike other imaging modalities, ultrasound is completely harmless. Rather, ultrasound’s only downside is that the image quality is operator dependent — even though many medical devices use high-powered ultrasound to destroy human tissues.

In truth, like vaccines, initially the medical profession was quite skeptical of ultrasound (as there was a great deal of evidence suggesting harm). However, as the decades passed and its ever increasing use was normalized, those concerns were forgotten entirely. For example, in 1983, CNN aired a program on the dangers of ultrasound (where the FDA acknowledged these dangers) almost no one knows about.

Video Link

The Medicalization of Childbirth

 

Initially, doctors had no interest in childbirth. However, this changed in 1820 after a prestigious Harvard Doctor pointed out it could create lifelong customers due to the mother’s gratitude towards their doctor for helping her at her most vulnerable time.3

In turn, a variety of ploys were used to turn what had been a natural process into a medical intervention requiring a costly array of (often harmful) medical interventions.

Note: Despite those interventions making America by far the most expensive place to give birth to a child4 (besides Japan), 0.56% of American infants do not survive childbirth5 (the highest death rate amongst the affluent nations6) and the US ranks 65th in its maternal death rate.7 This indicates America’s approach to birth may be misguided.

After the idea of X-raying a fetus throughout pregnancy was proposed in 1923, it was quickly taken up by the medical profession.8 Before long, evidence accumulated that this was very dangerous, but it was not until 1975 that the obstetric field shifted away from it — a shift that largely occurred because an alternative way was found to conduct those routine exams.

Fortunately, at the time, many doctors, including one of the leading reformers of the era, Robert S. Mendelsohn, were aware of the dozens of studies showing ultrasound was not safe and recognized the same mistake was being repeated:

Video Link

Note: The developing fetus is very sensitive to external energy inputs (e.g., studies have linked prenatal EMF exposure to obesity, neurological impairment and autism).

 

Save This Article for Later – Get the PDF Now

Download PDF
 

‘Safe’ Levels of Ultrasound

Almost all of the ultrasound research showed its toxicity was dose-dependent. By the late 1970s, leading ultrasound researchers were explicitly warning against giving US to fetuses and that it was imperative to be very cautious of the dose.

Note: Much of this was based on the recognition that ultrasound could heat tissues (especially those close to dense bones like the brain) to levels known to be harmful to fetuses. This heating (along with the cavitation bubbles and mechanical stress ultrasound causes) is thought to be the primary mechanism of harm, although other explanations have also been proposed (e.g., ultrasound permanently muting many of the core frequencies of the body9).

Unfortunately, as the technology evolved, higher doses were needed to get the higher quality images customers wanted, so in 1992, the FDA made the controversial decision to raise the permitted ultrasound limits massively.

fda maximum allowed machine intensity per year

This limit (720 mW/cm2), however this vastly exceeded the standard accepted ultrasound dose10 which had already been demonstrated to damage tissues (and sadly, due to poor FDA oversight, many machines often use far higher intensities).

seconds to bioeffects

At the time, the change was justified by better training in ultrasound operators being a viable way to prevent fetal damage, but unfortunately, this never happened. Rather, ultrasound became declared “safe and effective,” the existing research was forgotten, funding for future safety research was blocked, medical guidelines gradually eliminated their cautions on ultrasound, and ultrasound operators lost almost any awareness they needed to be concerned about fetal safety.

Most importantly, this 1992 change coincided with the explosion of chronic illnesses that emerged in our children.11

autism vs machine intensity

While the proliferation of vaccines is the most likely explanation for this epidemic, one study found12 ultrasound increased the risk of autism in genetically susceptible children, suggesting ultrasound may have served a contributing role (which may relate13 to its ability to potentiate the cytotoxicity of antibiotics and other pharmaceutical drugs).

Likewise, many others found14 prenatal ultrasound significantly reduced fetal growth, impaired neuronal migration, and in children, increased:

Dyslexia

Delayed speech

Left-handedness

Schizophrenia

Poor academic and physical education performance

Passivity and tiredness

Note: We also periodically come across cases of parents who used home ultrasound throughout their pregnancy to observe their developing child (e.g., Tom Cruise attracted national controversy for this15) and noticed that their babies tended to be smaller and more sickly.

Fetal Reactivity

One of the first things that made me suspicious of ultrasound was noticing that once ultrasound was applied, fetuses would react to it, and often seem as though they were trying to get away from it as the probe was directed towards them — which suggested, contrary to what we were told, ultrasound was not inert. After some digging, I discovered:

  • Most midwives (and a few physicians) I’d spoken to had made similar observations and also hence questioned its safety.
  • Scientific research showed that ultrasound caused increased fetal movement.16
  • A hydrophone inside the uterus17 determined that ultrasound registers at 100 to 12018 decibels there (which is equivalent to a subway entering a train station19) — whereas OSHA limits workplace ultrasound exposure to between 105 to 115 decibels.20

Fetal Demise

Another pivotal moment came when I saw a despondent mother in the emergency room having a miscarriage who kept saying, “I don’t understand what happened. We saw our gynecologist earlier today, she looked at my baby, and said he was in great health.” As I looked into this, I began to find many similar reports like this one (which includes many other instances she came across):

Video Link

Likewise, numerous large studies have shown ultrasound can cause miscarriages or premature labor,21,22,23,24 and since I began this series, many readers have shared similar tragic experiences.

Evidence of Harm

Over the last century, hundreds of studies have demonstrated the dangers of ultrasound, over 200 of which I summarized here. Collectively they all show dose-dependent biological damage occurs (at levels that were frequently less than 1% of the FDA’s 720 mW/cm2 limit). In cell studies, ultrasound has been repeatedly observed to:

Cause genetic damage similar to that induced by X-rays

Make susceptible cells become cancerous

Damage cellular structures (e.g., microtubules, mitochondria, the nucleus, and the endoplasmic reticulum)

Create damaging free radicals

Create abnormal cell motility

Initiate cell death

In animal studies, ultrasound has been shown to:

Cause the same damage observed in those cellular studies

Significantly impair mice and monkey behaviors (e.g., learning, memory, activity, and sociability)

Impair cardiac function

Inhibit embryonic growth or kill developing embryos

Damage nerves and create motor paralysis

Decrease white blood cell counts

Cause hemorrhages in the lungs and bones

Create a wide range of congenital malformations (e.g., in the heart, head, and spine)

Note: Many of these defects, particularly those of the heart increased in tandem with the widespread adoption of ultrasound.

congenital heart defects by year

For ethical reasons, similar studies cannot be conducted in humans. However, in the early 1980s, dozens of studies (e.g., I summarized 41 of them here) were conducted in China on pregnant women immediately prior to abortion, with half of them receiving abortions and the fetuses then being dissected (some of which can be found in PubMed). Collectively, they observed similar damage in each organ that was examined and that ultrasound caused:

The cell death process to initiate — something many Chinese investigators found extremely concerning given that small changes in the initial embryonic cells can be immensely consequential for the rest of life

An increase of the proteins associated with cell death

Mutagenic changes and cancerous transformations

DNA damage

Increased levels of malondialdehyde (a highly reactive molecule), TNF-α, and lipid peroxidation (a sign of oxidative damage)

Decreased activity of many antioxidant enzymes and nitric oxide

Cellular damage (e.g., swelling, degeneration, disintegration, disorganization, karyolysis, and necrosis)

Damage to many cellular structures (e.g., pyknosis, rarefaction, vacuolization, disintegration), particularly within the mitochondria

Depleted glycogen levels

Additionally, they found specific damage to the placenta, pituitary gland, eyes, immune system, kidneys, liver, ovaries, testicles (and sperm), and the brain’s neurons and glial cells.

Note: Ultrasound has been extensively explored as a male birth control method25 and has been found to induce premature ovulation.26 Additionally, a large 2012 study found that 1.25% of children who had an ultrasound as a fetus had urologic disorders (e.g., a urinary obstruction), whereas in those who did not get a prenatal ultrasound, only 0.66% did.27

A few large randomized control trials (RCTs) published in premier medical journals have also demonstrated dangers with ultrasound:

A 1990 RCT28 gave 4691 women ultrasound. They experienced 20 miscarriages and 11 elective abortions (due to diagnosed birth defects), whereas zero of either occurred in the control group. Additionally, it was determined that of the 250 placenta previas diagnosed by ultrasound (a key reason for prenatal ultrasounds), only 4 were present at birth.

Note: Placenta previa typically resolves later in the pregnancy.

A 1990 RCT compared 57 patients being surveilled for preterm labor who received weekly pelvic exams or cervical ultrasound. Premature labor occurred in 52% of those receiving US, and 25% of those receiving pelvic exams. Those receiving US were more likely to receive tocolytic (labor inducing) agents (55% vs. 21%) and did not see any benefits from ultrasound.29

A 1992 RCT published gave regular Doppler examinations (a stronger form of ultrasound) to 1,246 women.30 Compared to controls, the perinatal death rate increased 2.4 times, the total pregnancy loss by 1.67 times, the emergency C-section rate by 17%, and the need for resuscitations at birth by 6% (along with a significant decrease in Apgar scores).

A 1993 RCT gave 1,415 women regular Doppler examinations. Compared to those who only received standard ultrasound, they were 35% more likely to have an intrauterine growth restriction and 65% more likely to have a low birth weight.31

Sadly, rather than changing the standard of care, each of these were ignored.

Is Ultrasound Effective?

Numerous studies show ultrasound provides minimal overall benefit, especially if used early in pregnancy when the fetus is most vulnerable to its damaging effect. For example:

A 2010 Cochrane review (the gold standard for evaluating medical evidence) of 11 trials comprising 37,505 women found early pregnancy ultrasound provided minimal benefit (there were no reductions in adverse outcomes for babies or in health service use by mothers and babies).32

A 2005 RCT of 4,187 pregnant women found that umbilical Doppler monitoring led to a significant increase in the number of ultrasonographic and Doppler examinations but had no effects on the outcome of the pregnancy.33

A 1993 meta-analysis found no improvement in birth outcomes or perinatal mortality from ultrasound, but noted it incorrectly diagnosed fetal malformations.34

A 1993 RCT35 of 15,151 low-risk pregnancies found that routine ultrasound provided no benefit.

Note: Another use of ultrasound is to monitor a fetus’s heart rate continually through the labor process. Unfortunately, there is no evidence this practice improves neonatal outcomes. Rather it just increases the rate of C-sections (e.g., in 1970 when it began, 5.5% of deliveries were C-sections,36 while in 2023, 32.3% of them were37).

This lack of efficacy is largely because the primary “benefit” of ultrasound is that it can inform the parents if the baby has a severe defect and hence should be aborted. This is problematic as:

Many parents would not agree to prenatal ultrasounds if they knew it would force them to make that choice.

Ultrasounds frequently have ambiguous results which then require extensive evaluations throughout the pregnancy (or invasive tests like amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling which carry many severe risks including birth defects, a 0.5% to 1% chance of causing miscarriages,38 and decreasing the likelihood of a successful pregnancy by 4.6%39).

Most frequently, that ambiguity creates significant anxiety, depression, and hostility for the mother40 (which is not good for the infant).

Parents who abort “defective” children are wracked with guilt over the choice for years, whereas they quickly find peace with miscarriages (a common outcome for non-viable pregnancies) and stillbirths.

Studies have shown a significant number of “defects” were erroneous diagnoses, and many well-publicized stories exist of completely healthy babies being born whose parents had been repeatedly pressured to abort them (likewise this happened to a few friends of mine).

Many of the other benefits of ultrasound are either unnecessary (e.g., getting a picture of their face), possible to determine with other methods (e.g., their age, if there are twins, or if they have a genetic defect), or possible to determine around the time of labor (e.g., if a C-section is necessary).

Rather, the primary benefit is to inform you if the baby has a high-risk condition that requires intrauterine surgery (which applies to roughly 1 in 2000 pregnancies)41 or requires specialized surgical care immediately following childbirth (which can typically be determined with a physical examination).

Note: A 1997 study of 36 children with congenital defects only detected 19% to 36% of them. In those whose defects were detected (and the management of their labor was thus altered), 77% survived, whereas for those whose defects were missed, 96% survived (and had better Apgar scores and birth weights and spent less time on the ventilator). Additionally, while it took 3 times as long for those who needed surgeries to get one, no difference in mortality resulted.42

As such, I believe rather than being routine, prenatal ultrasounds should only be done when there is a specific medical necessity for them (e.g., in high-risk pregnancies where the results of the scan would change its management following unexplained bleeding or to clarify uncertainties during labor), and that when done, care should be taken to minimize fetal ultrasound exposure.

Conclusion

For medical specialties to be financially viable, they need to routinely perform profitable procedures on the patients they see (which are often referred to as the specialty’s “bread and butter” and are funded as a result of aggressive lobbying by the American Medical Association).43

Unfortunately, many of these procedures provide minimal value to the patients and, in many cases, are actually harmful (e.g., pediatricians depend upon vaccine sales to keep their practices afloat). Sadder still, in many cases, the doctors don’t even understand the evidence for or against the practice (e.g., I’ve found this is the case for pediatricians who routinely perform circumcisions).

In my eyes, one of the greatest upsides to the tragedy of COVID-19 is that it’s made it possible to expose the abhorrent tactics the medical industry has used for decades to exploit us for profit. As such, the public is beginning to question many of the longstanding medical practices they’ve reflexively trusted, and similarly, leaders like RFK Jr. have begun proposing removing the AMA’s ability to set the exorbitant reimbursement rates for medical procedures.44

As children are both the most vulnerable to medical injury and cannot speak out for themselves when these injuries occur (although as any judicious observer can tell you — they do try to tell us), it is my sincere hope the new era we are walking into will at last allow us to protect them from these predatory medical practices. Our children are our future and it is vital that we protect them.

Author’s note: This is an abridged version of a longer article that goes into much greater detail on the data mention here, safe alternatives to ultrasound, effective strategies we’ve found for preventing miscarriages and having a happy, healthy and alert child, and methods to prevent common complications of pregnancy (e.g., back pain, preeclampsia, edema). That article and its additional references can be read here.

A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack or follow AMD on Twitter (𝕏).

Catherine Austin Fitts: Stargate Is Operation Warp Speed 2.0

“”Stargate” AI project proposed by the Trump administration is “Operation Warp Speed 2.0″ and will ultimately be funded by American taxpayers…”

From RealWorldNewsChannel
via Exposing the Darkness @ substack

Source: RealWorldNewsChannel

“Trump funded Operation Warp Speed one…He put $18 billion behind it…if you have been supporting Trump on the theory that he’s gonna help Americans end the great poisoning, it’s sure to say you are sadly disappointed.”

Investment banker, former HUD official, and founder of the Solari Report Catherine Austin Fitts describes on a recent episode of the CHD series Financial Rebellion how the newly proposed “Stargate” AI project proposed by the Trump administration is “Operation Warp Speed 2.0” and will ultimately be funded by American taxpayers despite claims that it’ll be privately funded.

Full Video

 

Photo Credit: screenshot

 

The AI Cult: Hear Jeff Rense & Dean Henderson

A discussion about the AI cult, from Jeff Rense & Dean Henderson. What ‘they’ have in store for you.

LISTEN HERE

 

Image  from Pixabay

Two Days in Trump Throws His Weight Behind New Generation of mRNA Gene-Therapy Injections

I don’t agree with 100% of every author I share from … Icke included, but I do agree with Icke’s summary of the (diabolical) plan being unleashed upon us. Two days in and yes, the mRNA is going to save us all from cancer apparently (that their juice has caused a huge uptick in in the first place). They’ve been censoring cancer cures for decades.

I’ve collected many links supporting the persuasion that really Trump’s just part of the billionaire club that you’re not in… and any ideas that he will make anything at all great again are just IMO delusions. He is furthering the globalist agenda.

Knowing folk are skeptical on Icke’s thinking I expect some will just, like the rude Finnish gentleman recently, unsub. Or my personal self appointed US ‘fact checker’ who told me I’m stupid and a nitwit.  Well I don’t mind, it’s not a popularity contest. Before long, Billy Gates who recently dined and talked three hours with Trump, will have truth tellers blocked from posting anything at all particularly about vaccines, so our days are numbered anyway. (Have you figured out yet that they want you dead? Did you know that this past week 58 babies died in America and 14 Doctors died in Italy?) Kiwis, consider what happened to our own jab-deaths whistleblower, Barry Young (see here also). In this article a tweet from DT claims he created Operation Warp Speed. And yes he has always promoted the CV jab.

So I’m adding a link primarily to Icke’s current and very comprehensive summary of events with a few notes on that. (If short for time, start at 1 min). Then I’m adding just some of the many other links I’ve referred to above. A prior post regarding Trump’s nephew Fred who has a severely disabled son whom Trump reckons should (along with all other disabled people) ‘just die’, certainly adds food for (alarming) thought.

Icke covers:

  • Trump’s offsiders (front man Musk, Thiel and so on) who are neck deep in advancing the globalist AI agenda
  • AI and surveillance & what to expect
  • AI and its fusion with humans (Transhumanism)
  • AI & self replicating nano tech in the CV juice
  • Britain to be the test bed for enforcement of AI
  • AI control of government
  • Stargate, (Musk’s) Starlink, Starshield
  • Takeover of the alternative media
  • Digital currency & its role
  • Use of mRNA jabs in cancer detection & ‘treatment’
  • DT’s apparent Christian conversion (so why no hand on the Bible)
  • Christianity’s (some) part in promoting the DT delusion
  • Technocracy in which non elected engineers, bureaucrats,  & technocrats control the government
  • The DOGE agenda
  • Musk’s tweet that the matrix will be reprogrammed note, not dismantled
  • Russell Brand from his new found Christian faith advising us we should embrace AI tech or it will be taken over by Lucifer (Icke responds ..  the Luciferian use of AI  is what we are seeing unfold before our eyes)

Two Days In… The Agenda I Predicted Has Begun – David Icke Dot-Connector Videocast

Bill Gates Had ‘Quite Intriguing’ Dinner With Trump Discussing Vaccines, As Pfizer CEO Cozies Up To Trump And Has Built ‘Good Relation’ With RFK Jr. Operation Warp Speed 2.0.

President Donald Trump’s Davos address in full

Trump Surrounding Himself with Operation Warp Speed Accomplices

Trump Dismisses COVID-19 Vax Safety Claims, Says He Saved 100 Million Lives

Photo credit: AP News screenshot, Davos 2035

A “Nation united, fair, safe, and prosperous” – but not for the disabled


“The ultimate moral test of any government is the way it treats three groups of its citizens. First, those in the dawn of life — our children. Second, those in the shadows of life — our needy, our sick, our handicapped. Third, those in the twilight of life — our elderly.”
Former US, VP Hubert Humphrey (1965-69)

“…policies that will make our Nation united, fair, safe, and prosperous again” ?

Fair and safe for some, but not it would appear,  the disabled.

Interesting info from Fred Trump, the nephew of Donald Trump. He is the father of a severely disabled adult son, and was advised by his uncle Donald to let him die and move on. Isn’t wishing disabled people dead and not cared for & helped, the marks of a eugenicist?

Indisputably … yes.

This is definitely WEF, UN, WHO thinking. Right now we are witnessing Canada aspiring to bump off the disabled. Well actually they’re not aspiring to, they are already.

Sixty Minutes interviewed Trump’s nephew in the middle of last year. Here is the shorter clip.

And below the longer one:

 

Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay

Harvard Professor Exposes Google & Facebook & NZ Police Trialled Facial Recognition Tech Without Clearance

Excellent informative article from wakeupkiwi.com. I’ve added a PS regarding a short online class for this Thursday 23 January about protecting yourself. It arrived in my inbox today… EWNZ

From WakeUpKiwi

In recent years, a number of brave individuals have alerted us to the fact that we’re all being monitored and manipulated by big data gatherers such as Google and Facebook, and shed light on the depth and breadth of this ongoing surveillance.

Among them is social psychologist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff.

Related: The CIA’s Complicity in Recent Global Atrocities Revealed

Her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” is one of the best books I have read in the last few years. It’s an absolute must-read if you have any interest in this topic and want to understand how Google and Facebook have obtained such massive control of your life.

In recent years, a number of brave individuals have alerted us to the fact that we’re all being monitored and manipulated by big data gatherers such as Google and Facebook, and shed light on the depth and breadth of this ongoing surveillance.

Related: New Zealand: Citizens Receiving Home Visits From ‘Political Police’

Among them is social psychologist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff.

READ AT THE LINK

 


POSTSCRIPT:

This came in my email today and because it relates to this post, I’m adding it in the event folk may wish to register and learn. Here is the intro & a link (from Glen Meder) :

We as a species have reached an important crossroads:

Are we going to use modern technology to…

  1. Enslave and control humans in ways never before imaginable…

    OR
  2. Become the most powerful, and free, decentralized society ever…

It sounds like a silly question, I mean, I bet I could already guess what you would choose.

But unfortunately, most people do not realize that they are making this choice every day! (And even worse, they are making the WRONG choice every day.)

You see, the power-seekers are placing us in a walled garden of surveillance technology.

Your new smartphone? Your work laptop? Your smart tv? They are all spying on you.

Sometimes people are shocked when I tell them that Facebook, Google, and other Big Tech companies are spying on them. This shows me that a lot of people are still completely unaware of what’s really going on…

In the Totalitarian Surveillance State, there are 4 Stages of Control…

1. AI Algorithms, Censorship, and Propaganda

  • Google, Facebook, and almost every Big Tech company censors information. Even worse than that, they spread state-approved propaganda through their platforms. It’s like going to a library that only allows information on one-side of an opinion. But what’s worse is that this library knows everything about you, including your hot buttons and how to manipulate you.

2. Digital IDs

  • Digital IDs will completely eliminate online privacy. With Digital IDs in place, we will be forced to identify ourselves before using anything that is connected to the internet. It would be similar to having an account to an online service, like Netflix. To access the internet, you would have to verify that it is actually you using the internet, and not someone else.

3. Central Bank Digital Currencies

  • With a Central Bank Digital Currency in place, there would be no financial privacy. Every transaction you make would be tracked. CBDCs are much more than financial tracking tools though, they are specifically designed to punish and control any “opposition”. This was proven when Justin Trudeau froze the bank accounts of peaceful protesters in 2022. With a CBDC, the Government could “seize” all of your assets with the click of a button.

4. Social Credit Systems

  • Finally, a Social Credit System is the fourth stage of control. Every action you take will be judged and determined as good or bad. Who defines good or bad? The person who controls the social credit system. Any opposition will be punished to the fullest extent. If you fall far enough on a social credit system, then you will be blacklisted. This punishment can extend to house arrest. As well as social, geographical, and financial isolation.

As you read this message, the pieces of this system are being put in place.

But… I don’t want you to be scared. My mission is not to scare people, or fearmonger, instead, I want you to be aware of what is going on that way you have the right to consent.

The right to stand up and say that you will not accept this future, and the right to protect your privacy and freedom for our future generations to come.

I am holding a class, this Thursday at 11am CT (12pm ET / 10am MT / 9am PT) titled “The End of Privacy? Understanding the Globalist Agenda”.

In the class, we will cover the 4 stages I mentioned in this email, as well as actionable steps that you can take today to ensure your privacy and freedom today.

You can register to attend the class here.

I really hope to see you in the class.

It is a very important one.

Thank you!

Glenn Meder

 

Photo credit: pixabay.com (edited)

Coming Soon to a Country Near You: Canadian Government Is Euthanizing Mentally Ill and Disabled Citizens: ‘It’s EUGENICS’

Watch for the Liverpool Care Pathway also. Nil by mouth often without telling the patient’s family. I am aware from feedback and my own observations that the ‘protocol’ if you could call it that, is used here in NZ. It’s been said it’s no longer used . It is a forerunner I’d guess to what’s happening now. Dr Vernon Coleman has also warned us what is coming along the lines of euthanasia. EWNZ

By Frank Bergman @ Slay News
via Exposing the Darkness

A prominent expert is warning the public that the Canadian government is now euthanizing mentally ill and disabled citizens as part of a “eugenics” agenda that has been thinly disguised as “assisted suicide.”

The chilling warning was issued by Kelsi Sheren, a military veteran-turned-anti-euthanasia activist.

Specifically, Sheren is sounding the alarm about Canada’s taxpayer-funded Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) program.

During a whistleblowing new interview with Triggernometry, Sheren said:

“MAiD is medical assistance in dying, but let’s call it what it is.

“It’s eugenics. It’s not MAiD. It’s eugenics.

“And the reason I say that so emphatically is because the statistics around who is using medical assistance and dying versus who is being euthanized are radically different.”

MAiD was originally launched by the Canadian government in 2016 to help terminally ill patients end their suffering.

However, Sheren is among several experts warning that MAiD has morphed into something more sinister.

The “assisted suicide” program has now become a system that increasingly targets people with mental health challenges, disabilities, and other non-terminal conditions.

Essentially, the citizens targeted for euthanasia are those requiring long-term care who are considered a burden on Canada’s taxpayer-funded socialized healthcare system.

“We had a girl in British Columbia last year… walked into Vancouver hospital,” Sheren continues.

“She was suicidal…

“She was met by the doctors who told her she couldn’t see psychiatrists for six months…

“And then she was then sat down while the nurse put her hand on her knee and said, ‘Have you heard of MAID?’ to a vulnerable person who just expressed that she was suicidal.”

Sheren asserts that this practice is the same eugenics program pioneered by the Nazis.

The controversial historical practice aims to “improve” society by controlling who gets to live or reproduce.

Eugenics was even popular among American progressives until it became taboo following World War Two.

“This is a movement to remove the vulnerable, disabled, liabilities, burdens on society, full stop,” Sheren notes.

“That’s what this is,” she emphasizes.

“This is not compassion and care dying with dignity or empathy.

“This is, let’s remove the problems from society.”

“We are turning healthcare practitioners who went into the practice to help people,” Sheren adds.

“We are turning them into everyday serial killers.

“And there is a moral issue to that, that those doctors, those family members, were not like, not ready, not trained to handle at all.”

WATCH:

Expert Warns Canadian Government Is Euthanizing Mentally Ill and Disabled Citizens: ‘It’s Eugenics’

In recent years, Canada’s liberal government has expanded the euthanasia laws to include people who might be struggling with depression, anxiety, or other treatable conditions.

The government is now euthanizing citizens suffering from poverty and homelessness, vaccine injuries, and even hearing loss.

FULL VIDEO:

Source: slaynews.com

The untouched blue volkswagon .. Michelle Melendez, author of The Great Maui Land Grab explains why blue objects don’t burn

The 2025 Los Angeles fires. Two video links below plus info on Michelle Melendez’s revealing book on the Maui fires:

UN Blue Volkswagen Is Untouched (info on the blue under channel’s info)
With these fires, historically, it’s noted that blue objects don’t incinerate, however glass & metal do. Houses with blue roofs also escape the blaze. Below an image from a video by Jeff Berwick. As with the blue objects, neither are the trees burning. 

blue roofs LA fires 2025

Maui Fire Insider Reveals PROOF That LA Fires were NOT Natural!
(Hear interview with Michelle about the Maui fires and what happened: eye witness)

Michelle Melendez's book The Great Maui Land Grab

The book at Amazon:

Great Maui Land Grab: What caused the Maui fire and is your home next?
“If you’ve never questioned the Maui Fire of August 8, 2023, this book will show you why you should. You will discover many anomalies that will leave you bewildered. Experts share how it’s not only impossible it was a natural fire but also highly unlikely that the winds came from Hurricane Dora. The author leads you through an investigation of the Maui fire and the why, who, and what is coming for the Hawaii islands and the world!

Get ready to discover…

  • 9 questionable weather events
  • 23 fire anomalies
  • How the Hawaii legislation is setting the stage for the land grab
  • Why the land is being taken
  • Who is possibly responsible
  • What to do about it!

If you think something like this could never happen to you, think again!”

SOURCE

Photo credit: Video Screenshot

 

The Big Debate: How Many New Doctors Will NZ Need if the Gene Technology Bill is Passed?

Thanks to Zara for the link. Note, many more historical articles at the source to bring you up to speed EWNZ

From Guy Hatchard

Currently, there are 19,350 doctors in New Zealand; that’s one for every 264 people. According to Hon. Judith Collins, our Minister for Business Innovation and Enterprise (MBIE), we are all going to live longer and enjoy better health as a result of the massive deregulation contained in the Gene Technology Bill.

In this article, we are going to examine this claim very carefully. If passed, the Bill will change New Zealand irrevocably, we need a deep dive and a proper debate.

This article is also available as a PDF to download, print, and share.

Gene technology in our healthcare system is going to require some extra highly skilled doctors, but how many and how much will it cost us? High profile billionaire biohacker Bryan Johnson, 47, boasts that he only ages 8 months every year. So that is something we could all aim for. Bryan spends just $2 million a year on his health, he has 30 doctors and recently increased his pill intake to 91 pills a day. So the aspirational ratio is about 30 doctors for every person. We could probably accept a few less than that, but we might not live quite as long as Bryan. Probably best to go trial and error. Start with a modest 10 doctors per person and see how long we can all live. A lot of farmers will need to retrain and we might need to import more food. Most people would be doctors.

Joking apart, gene technology is insatiable when it comes to doctors and costs. The astronomical salaries of experts, expensive equipment, CRISPR patent fees and the constant need for testing associated with personalised genetic therapies all add up. If you think that the $10,000 estimate your builder gave you for a veranda renovation is too high, you might baulk at the multi-million dollar costs for your individual gene renovation. But don’t worry, the government is determined to foot the bill on our behalf. A clause in the bill REQUIRES that New Zealand automatically adopt any old gene technology as long as any other two countries have approved it. If it all works out, it is going to be like new dance moves in the 80s, everyone will be doing it. However published science shows this might just be a ridiculous dream, it is time to wake up.

Now let’s get serious.

We need an open public debate with published evidence not just misleading PR hype of the type the government is currently pumping out without supporting evidence. For example let’s look at an article in the prestigious journal Nature entitled “Four Success Stories in Gene Therapy“. Nature is absolutely in favour of genetic experimentation, so this recent article should contain the very highest level of evidence that Collins should be presenting to the public for debate.

Collins is very excited about using CAR T cell therapy to treat cancer in New Zealand. According to Nature, CAR T cell therapy costs about NZ$820,000 per shot. 85% of patients go into initial remission but only just over half of them are still in remission at the end of the first year. CAR T cell therapy is not without risk. It can cause severe side effects, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a dangerous inflammatory response that ranges from mild flu-like symptoms in less severe cases to multi-organ failure and even death. The article reports that with a combination of newer powerful adjunct drug regimes and vigilance, a TEAM of attending doctors can try to work out how far to push treatment without triggering CRS.

Currently there are about 30,000 new cases of cancer diagnosed in New Zealand each year. From the glowing publicity being pushed out, I suppose Collins wants us to believe that all of them will benefit from CAR T cell therapy. In which case the cost would be $25 billion, a figure that exceeds the current total cost of all healthcare in New Zealand.

So let’s for a minute remember the goal here—HEALTH and specifically less cancer. A report published in the UK Daily Mail based on official cancer statistics is entitled “Under-50s bowel cancer epidemic exposed: Shock figures reveal the exact age group for whom rates are growing quickest“. Bowel cancer rates have been on the increase for some time, but the latest UK figures published for 2022 show that the incidence of bowel cancer among men in their early 40s increased by a staggering 57% between 2019 and 2022. Women in the same 40-44 age bracket saw an increase of 50%. According to the article doctors are completely baffled and seemingly unable to identify a cause.

I know what you are going to say, but forget it. Despite the obvious temporal coincidence between the sudden dramatic rise in cancer and the pandemic, doctors have been quick to reassure us. Professor Pat Price, oncologist and chair of Radiotherapy UK, admitted the unprecedented rapid growth in bowel cancer rates among young people presented “a serious public health challenge,” but she added: “It’s also critical to dispel misinformation. Covid vaccines aren’t causing cancer” (no evidence offered). Phew, I was worried there for a minute. Instead the article offers this theory: “Experts believe poor diets packed with more ultra-processed foods, obesity and a lack of exercise could be responsible for the alarming cancer trend.” Let’s assume this is correct.

The article also reports that New Zealand has the second fastest growth rate of bowel cancer in the world, just behind Iceland.

If that is the case, shouldn’t our government be prioritising an education programme on lifestyle, exercise, healthy diets, fresh foods, etc.? Why would we want to pass a Gene Technology Bill, which allows even more tinkering with traditional foods without any labelling, traceability, safety testing, or liability for inevitable mistakes? It’s a real puzzle.

Studies show education about lifestyle changes would be a very cost effective approach whose effect sizes simply dwarf the meager and inconsistent results of biotechnology reported so far. Multiple studies show lifestyle changes including diet and exercise have a beneficial effect of reduced cancer incidence. Cancer is the number two cause of death after heart disease. A meta-analysis of nine studies entitled Association of Vegetarian and Vegan Diets with Cardiovascular Health: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies and Randomized Trials found very large effect sizes including a 29% risk reduction for cardiovascular disease (CVD). It reported a 14% reduction in CVD mortality and a 32% reduction in Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality. One of the studies evaluated showed a significant 39% risk reduction for stroke incidence. It doesn’t stop there, we have reported extensively on the effects of meditation not just on cancer (one insurance study showed a 55% reduction in cancer incidence among practitioners of Transcendental Meditation), but also across the board of disease categories. None of this will require more doctors and very little expense. It could put our national health back on track. It should be a no brainer, instead we have the Gene Technology Bill.

So what else is the Gene Technology Bill promising us?

The Bill commits New Zealand to use all of the gene therapies of the future. CRISPR gene editing is another of Collins’ favourites that she is promising will revolutionise public health. There are ten thousand single gene mutation heritable illnesses so far identified by science. The so-called promise of CRISPR theory is that all of these should eventually be reversible via a single gene deletion or replacement. So what does the Nature article say about the best and most exciting results from the use of CRISPR so far?

Two of these diseases are sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia. At a recent conference, Vertex Pharmaceuticals and CRISPR Therapeutics announced the results of a clinical trial of beta thalassemia and sickle cell patients treated with CTX001, a CRISPR-Cas9-based therapy. In all, 22 patients have received the treatment over a number of years at a cost of NZ$5 million per patient all of whom initially experienced increased levels of haemoglobin and reduced pain. After one year, only five of the patients had any residual beneficial effects. Vertex paid an additional NZ$85 million in patent fees for the licence to use CRISPR gene editing techniques involved in the treatments.

In summary: improvements are patchy at best, the costs are astronomical, the side effects are very serious and any benefits mostly don’t last very long.

Clearly these results are not going to bring about a revolution in New Zealand healthcare outcomes nor are they conceivably affordable for any but the mega-rich or a small number of beneficiaries of multi-million dollar New Zealand government grants presumably selected through a bruising lottery process. They are more likely to bankrupt our healthcare system and distract from viable proven paths that really could improve public health outcomes.

So what is the extent of the problems with CRISPR gene editing?

Is gene technology a healthcare revolution that has become affordable and actually works as Collins hypes? Or is it permanently just around the corner out of reach as it has been for the last 70 years? Or just perhaps, has something else gone terribly wrong as we know happened with biotech during the pandemic to everyone’s cost?

Well first of all, CRISPR gene editing is not as precise as Collins’ and MBIE PR claim. A paper in Nature published in October 2024 is entitled “Gene editing of NCF1 loci is associated with homologous recombination and chromosomal rearrangements” The paper describes attempts by scientists using CRISPR gene therapy to treat deficient chronic granulomatous disease, which is a rare inherited genetic disorder that prevents white blood cells from killing fungi and bacteria. It causes a primary immune deficiency associated with functional defects in neutrophils and macrophages. Mutations in any one of five different genes can cause this condition.

The study’s results reveal a central problem with CRISPR techniques. Most of us imagine that genes are somehow as solid and understandable as the world around us, made up of specific distinct identifiable objects which can be swapped if one becomes defective. Rather like changing a tyre when you have a puncture. Many genetic models or theories, and certainly all popular explanations pretend this is the case. In fact as you reach the very very small time and distance scales of DNA, you have reached an area completely foreign to the waking world of experience. The study revealed that many genes appear almost indistinguishable from one another or homologous. We can imagine that the situation is similar to repeated use of identical sub routines in a complex computer programme, but scaled up by a factor of one trillion. As a result, the CRISPR gene scissors begin to cut up, rearrange or delete other genetic chromosomal structures which were not the intended target, causing unintended consequences and health problems.

This is not because CRISPR has been incorrectly or inaccurately programmed or targeted, but rather the inevitable result of a fundamental property of matter at small time and distance scales—increased similarity in structure and function. The law of least action is in play. At this scale of matter, universal fields, quantum properties and unification play a greater role. Everything begins to look and behave in a confusingly similar fashion. CRISPR gene editing tools are based on the destructive properties of bacteria and when faced with an array of similar targets the derived CRISPR tools revert to type and embark on some random destructive cutting and pasting.

Because genes control all the functions of our physiology from the most fundamental level, the capacity for serious adverse effects is enhanced. This is one important reason for the mind boggling costs and high doctor to patient ratios of gene technology. A lot can go wrong and often does.

As we have reported extensively at GLOBE, in the microscopic physical world, consciousness plays a vital role. The observer enters into physical theory in multiple ways. In fact it plays an essential and leading role in triggering the outcomes of events at the atomic scale. DNA has holistic functions which are closely connected to its ability to support awareness or consciousness, including, in humans, self-reflective states of mind. No one in biotechnology understands how this delicate miracle of life happens, but like a bull in a china shop they are apparently determined to wreak havoc and see what eventuates.

The self-belief in the biotech community and the capacity for exotic experimentation are only matched by the determination to avoid any kind reasonable requirement for labelling, safety testing, containment or difficult ethical questions. Another requirement of the nascent biotech industry is freedom from any sort of liability and the permission to patent genes and genetic processes.

Judith Collins’ Gene Technology Bill concedes all of this to the bioscientists clamouring for the freedom to experiment on us.

According to Collins, New Zealand will become a world leader in biotechnology experimentation. Certainly we will end up to our detriment as guinea pigs subject to the most permissive regulatory regime in the world, where a government appointee will decide everything for us from what goes into our breakfast cereal to what goes into our pills, without any requirement to inform us on the labels, not even in the small print. Collins is repeating safe and effective and wants to push the Bill through with little or no public debate, but where is her evidence? According to current scientific assessments it is not safe or effective. Biotechnologies are dogged by poor results, serious risks and unaffordable massive costs. So is it Hey Ho and off we go with the Coalition into the brave new world of unrestrained gene editing, or do we, as we do in our personal lives, exercise some common sense. We just have one parting question for Minister Collins. Did she do her homework or did the dog eat it?

In this article we have covered just a few points. There are a lot of concerning provisions in the Bill. Find out more by viewing our YouTube video The Gene Technology Bill. What Kiwis Need To Know and then make a submission to the Health Select Committee by February 17th.

There are many reasons to reject the Gene Technology Bill. We have published suggestions for a submission template. Write to your MP. They need to be quizzed on this egregious Bill. They are trying to get this fast tracked during the holidays.

We do not live in a country where people are willing to let others take away their food choices, their rights, their beliefs and increase exposure to serious long term environmental and health risks.

SOURCE

Photo credit: hatchardreport.com

More links to the California fires

There are so many links currently … as folk figure out what’s really been going on … more disaster capitalism. Here are some I’ve gathered over the past week:

Maui Fire Insider Reveals PROOF That LA Fires were NOT Natural!

EMERGENCY! California Los-Angeles Criminal Fires – DEWs Chemtrails Flammable Spark Dust
NEVER GOT EVACUATION NOTICE, BLOCKED ROADS 6.09, THEY CANCELLED FIRE INSURANCES EARLIER IN 2024 17.16, SIMILARITIES TO MAUI FIRES, WHY THE POWER SUPPLY NOT DE ENERGIZED, SMART CITIES

California wildfires: A community in ruins
NO WATER!

Directed Energy Weapons Burning Homes to Ash
EXAMINING THE ACTUAL FIRES, WHAT BURNS OR DOESN’T AND WHY

THEY KEEP ON PUSHING THE CLIMATE HOAX AND BURN THE GROUND USING ENERGY WEAPONS TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE THEIR FAKE NARRATIVE – INFO@SAVEUSNOW.ORG.UK
MARK STEELE – HE IS A WEAPONS EXPERT

With temps in the 60’s, what they’re calling a “wildfire” was the planned annihilation of Pacific Palisades, to make LA a “smart city” in time for the Olympics
PROF MARK CRISPIN MILLER (NYU)

More on those “wildfires” in California, from other experts who’ve been watching them with eyes wide open
PROF MARK CRISPIN MILLER (Eye witness interview)

Burn Back Better: The Mayor Of LA Was A Leading Member Of A Radical Organization With Ties To Another Terrorist Group That Blew Up US Capitol In 1983, And Went On To Launder Money For BLM

The LA Fires were the result of Globalist Policies and not Climate Change: Did Smart Meters, Geoengineering and DEWs also contribute to the historic fires  (UPDATED to include info on the smart meter risk)

Photo credit: pixabay.com

Weather modification & Wildfires: the many law suits against governments’ participation are global

VIDEO CLIP

View the very many instances globally where governments have been called out for their participation in weather modification regarding the effects this has had on populations…

From the Weather Modification channel at Rumble

 

Satellite image shows all 3 major fires in Los Angeles starting at the same time – PLANNED & executed

Featuring a clip from Youtube channel OFF GRID with DOUG & STACY. 
Their website: https://offgridwithdougandstacy.com/

(Note: third fire hidden in above image …however it is clear in the video. In addition a reader has notified me that that image is from fires in 2020. See comments. And here. This does not however detract from the important info contained in the video. I’m awaiting info from the source).

Note also, Deborah Tavares who features in the video speaks of the UN Agenda 2030 ICLEI countries, of which NZ is one. ICLEI cities, Dunedin and Christchurch.

Posted at stopthecrime.net

“I KNEW SOMETHING WAS VERY, VERY WRONG”🔥 YOUTUBE IS RESTRICTING THIS VIDEO…..

Should the clip disappear from Youtube, here is the link at Rumble posted by stopthecrime

Check two others of their clips below on topic … MORE at their channel. Whilst they’re still there, this one is being restricted.

The FIRES are “the plan”🔥 This is disturbing!

What happened to all the water?!? Check this out…


Link to Report from iron mountain (pdf file)


See also:

WARNING: Globalists are intent on destroying everything including humans: a WEF speaker admits all this right on camera

WARNING: Globalists are intent on destroying everything including humans: a WEF speaker admits all this right on camera

From Mike Adams with Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch

VIDEO LINK

“Today we bring you an urgent warning for all inhabitants of planet Earth. It’s not just the fires. We must stop the deliberate climate engineering / geoengineering / weather weaponization destruction of our biosphere or we all perish.

If we do not stop these planet-destroying schemes, farms will fail, crop yields will plummet and much of humanity will starve. This will lead to revolts, revolutions, violence and financial collapse.

This seems to be precisely what the globalists want to achieve. They are pushing mass human extermination to make way for the robots. And in today’s broadcast, we feature a clip of a WEF speaker who admits all this right on camera.” Mike Adams

– Globalist Depopulation Strategy Exposed (0:00)

– Interview with Dane Wiggington on Geoengineering (6:36)

– The Role of AI and Depopulation (36:13)

– The Impact of Geoengineering on California Fires (36:44)

– The Broader Implications of Geoengineering (50:58)

– The Role of AI in Depopulation and Energy Consumption (53:57)

– The Impact of Geoengineering on Agriculture and Food Production (1:09:17)

– The Broader Implications of Geoengineering on Global Stability (1:15:37)

– The Need for a Comprehensive Approach to Sustainability (1:16:28)

– The Urgent Need to Address the Environmental Crisis (1:17:03)

– Impact of UV Radiation on Global Gardens (1:17:24)

– Human Responsibility and Beyond (1:20:44)

– Mouse Utopia Experiment and Historical Parallels (1:22:25)

– Call to Action and Takeaways (1:27:06)

– Venus Syndrome and Climate Engineering (1:29:24)

– Chemical Ice Nucleation and Weather Control (1:30:50)

– Final Thoughts and Call to Wise Up (1:32:20)

– Preparedness and Discount Codes (1:34:01)

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

A similar warning comes from Prof Mark Crispin Miller (NY Uni):

Don’t “vaccination,” and the Blitzkrieg that incinerated all Pacific Palisades, PROVE that we are in the hands of psychopaths? You better believe it.

“Those who literally CAN’T BELIEVE what the authorities have done to them and all the rest of us had better wake up fast, because their self-protective blindness has us all at risk”

The authors of the worst atrocities in modern history have always grasped the chilling paradox that they were largely shielded from exposure by the very heinousness of what they’d done, and/or what they were doing. In other words, the perpetrators were, and are, protected from exposure not so much by mass indifference (although that, surely, is a factor) as by mass incredulity—a sort of sentimental chauvinism, shielding us from guilty knowledge (and, therefore, complicity) by the authoritarian conviction that those in power on our side certainly would never do such things, whereas the Enemy (of course) does little else.

The maintenance of that mass delusion has required two strategies, one practical, one psychological.

READ AT THE LINK

 

Photo credit: Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

The US is 1 of 47 countries globally that makes rain by cloud seeding (BBC)… why are they not using it to extinguish the LA fires?

An edited repost from the same scenario seen in Australia in 2020.

Cloud seeding is a well known tech and is employed all over the world according to a BBC documentary (see video excerpt below). This is going on in 47 countries, including the US, involving 150 programs ‘as we speak’ says the commentary.  See below an application form used in the state of Texas to modify the weather.

Copy of global cloud seeding.png
Screen shot from BBC documentary showing countries employing rainmaking technology called cloud seeding
A.texas license
Application form used in Texas for a license to modify the weather

THE INCREDIBLE TRUE STORY OF ARTIFICIAL CLOUDS AND WEATHER MODIFICATION

Revealed: The Australian companies manipulating our weather

The US military also used it as weather warfare during the war against Vietnam, known as Operation Popeye.  Australia was the first to trial cloud seeding back in 1947. They’ve been covertly studying it ever since, government and private business interests modifying weather to suit their own interests.

Consider the following report obtained in 1996 by the US Dept of Defense titled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 (download the pdf, found at the WayBackMachine). Weather modification is well documented and no conspiracy.

So ask yourself,  why are they not using it to put out fires?

In the case of Australia’s fires, Max Igan provides some answers here in a video titled What’s Really Happening With the Australian Fires, posted at the time of the devastating 2020 bush fires. In another video titled Drought by Design – The Genociding of Australia, he explains where the water has really gone from the dried up Darling River and why there is a drought. It’s not as you think and it’s not what mainstream is telling you.

Even more curiously, in 2009 the Sydney Morning Herald reported on an offer by Russia to the Australian Government for assistance with then current fires in Victoria that caused the loss of 173 lives. The offer involved the use of Russia’s fire jets, capable of dumping “42,000 litres of water or retardant on a fire – almost five times the maximum capacity of the ”Elvis” skycrane helicopters.”  The offer was declined & “a spokeswoman for the Victorian Government said that despite a search of all available material, no record of the Russian offer could be found.” Strange that.

Another issue in Australia had been budget cuts.

NSW’S PREMIER ONLY RECENTLY SLASHED FIRE SERVICES FUNDING BY $40 MILLION & TOLD 1000S OF CITIZENS NOT TO EXPECT RFS HELP

A NSW fireman of 16 years, Senior Deputy Captain, Murray Drechsler, blamed the government. “The government isn’t working for the people. It’s working for big business and corporations,” he said. Hear him speak at this link.

In the current LA fires, there is a similar scenario with cuts taking place prior to the fires and no water in the hydrants! Folk also comment in the many videos that the fire trucks they saw were few.

Cast your mind back to the Lahaina fires also. So many similar anomalies.

Lahaina, a perfect storm or a perfect crime? (a new book by a local eye witness to the Lahaina fires – Corbett Report)

As truth seekers have noted for many decades now, particularly in very recent years, the disasters we see happening are not entirely natural. We have consistently been called conspiracy theorists, however, the evidence of the destructive intent by humans is now right in plain sight.

The weather has been weaponized

Deborah Tavares Reveals the Truth About Microwave Wildfires, DEWS, Smart Meters, Chemtrails, Weather Weapons , Smart City “Kill Zones” * LINKS

In little NZ even we are seeing highly questionable changes. I add these lest you think it’s all happening ‘over there’. For instance when White Island here erupted with tourist parties tragically caught out at the time on the island, the rescue people had deliberations and made the decision not to go! The next anomaly was, when private folk without question went immediately to the rescue, a helicopter pilot was charged and taken to court. He lost his business. Meanwhile the NZ authorities tried to take the credit for the rescues carried out. First responders were the private rescuers not the official ones. (In North Carolina with Helene, similar happened!) Private rescues also happened in the Cyclone Gabrielle disaster in Hawke’s Bay, NZ. Folk took off in their jet boats to save people stranded on rooftops and were threatened with prosecution also. Similar treatment for a helicopter pilot there. Then there were the firemen in the Port Hills fires in 2017 who were held back from attending the fires early on. And just 10 days prior to the White Island eruption, curiously, our Civil Defense had transformed into the new NEMA.

This all goes against common humanity. The instant resolve to go to the rescue of one’s fellow humans is being punished.

We have similar observations in recent flooding events world wide, notably Helene in US (NC) (see also here, here, here and here) also Florida, and in Spain (see here and here).

Catherine Austin Fitts On Helene: “It’s Not A Natural Event” Says It Is A Giant Land Grab

We are seeing frequently the usual markers (some or all) … cover up of true numbers dead (see here also), rescuers not allowed, late arrival of military or any official help, disappearance of funds given, dams released, late or no warning, whistleblowers censored. (See this link). People previously unaware now in shock and horror that their governments would do this to them.

NZ’s Real Cyclone Damage The Govt Won’t Tell You! Tim Baker on The Vinny Eastwood Show

The reality?

I personally have concluded, we are now to a large extent, on our own. Don’t rely solely on government (corporation) or any of their official departments that are also corporations. It’s a global crime by the same ones who just spent four years culling us all. You cannot trust any of them. Prepare as this man did for the current LA fires. He saved his own home. Get your emergency supplies in. Your escape routes worked out (they block those, ignore them). Warn your loved ones. Take warning from Lahaina, NC and elsewhere. Listen to the ‘conspiracy theorists’ … their info is now fact!

EWNZ

OTHER LINKS:

1/9/25: FIRESIDE THEATER W/ DEBORAH TAVARES
(Note, at 52 mins, Deborah speaks to why they are not using weather modification)

Examining the strange anomalies surrounding recent disasters world wide, NZ included: NASA planes, dam releases, failure of systems, mining interests

How that “wildfire” so PRECISELY burned out Maui’s poorer residents—who may now be “resettled” in a “15-minute city” (Schwabspeak for “concentration camp”)

Other links & updates about Maui

Avoid the FEMA camps, rescue centers, ships & planes: Hurricane Harvey rescuer reveals shocking info from 2017


Photo: screen shot from BBC documentary featured

The Regulatory Standards Bill that Act has tried 4 times prior to introduce, is currently flying under the radar

Note: submissions close Monday 13 January … thanks to  Steve Snoopman for alerting me to this …

“Attempts to introduce the legislation in 2006, 2009 and 2011 failed. Commentators at the times recognised the intentions of the Business Roundtable to introduce a legal straitjacket. It is of huge concern that this legislation which has been rebuffed four times as being a dangerous constitutional shift is practically guaranteed passage.”
Noel O’Malley, Lawyer

Two articles on topic:

  1. From the Otago Daily Times … by lawyer Noel O’Malley:

Is anybody taking notice of the Regulatory Standards Bill?

A draft Bill put out for consultation late last year has Noel O’Malley somewhat concerned.

Such is the attention being paid to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, now before the justice select committee, it seems very little attention is being paid to the Regulatory Standards Bill now open for consultancy*.

Submissions on the Bill will close on January 13, one week after they close on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill.

Presumably, it will then be referred to the House for a first reading.

David Seymour, the sponsor of the Bill, claims the low wages experienced in New Zealand are caused by low productivity, which in turn is caused by “poor legislation”.

The answer, he claims, will be found in the Regulatory Standards Bill.

For those not familiar with the content of this Bill, a lot of backstory is required.

The Regulatory Standards Bill was conceived by the (then) Business Roundtable (now the New Zealand Initiative).

Act New Zealand has made four attempts to introduce a version of this Bill since 2006, failing each time, as under scrutiny, its dangerous consequences became clear.

Commentators at the times recognised the intentions of the Business Roundtable to introduce a legal straitjacket.

Attempts to introduce the legislation in 2006, 2009 and 2011 failed.

Likewise a Bill to this effect, introduced by Seymour in 2021, with the support of the National Party, was condemned as a dangerous constitutional shift undermining public and collective rights and threatening parliamentary sovereignty.

This recognises the ideology of Act in place of alternative principles embodied in Te Tiriti, international obligations, community wellbeing together with climate and environmental protections.

Passage of the Bill is contained in the Act Policy Programme, which, under the National-Act coalition agreement, National has agreed to support, unlike the Treaty Principles Bill.

It is of huge concern that this legislation which has been rebuffed four times as being a dangerous constitutional shift is practically guaranteed passage.

Preliminary advice on the Bill has been provided by the Ministry of Regulation, established by Seymour and of which he is the minister.

This advice highlights the proposals presented omit any mention of Te Tiriti and its role as part of good law-making, thus avoiding how the Crown will meet its obligations under the proposed legislation.

Even a cursory examination of the Bill leaves no doubt of the intent to promote individual and property rights over all others, constrain regulatory powers, and reduce the government’s ability to implement environmental protections, social safeguards and Te Tiriti-based initiatives.

The Bill goes further to establish a regulatory standards board, removing the role of the courts to consider complaints from the public about existing regulations which include legislation which is inconsistent with one or more of the Bill’s principles.

One can conceive complaints about recognition of collective Māori rights, environmental protections or social safeguards on the basis of inconsistency with individual rights, unrestricted property rights, equality before the law and imposition of taxes and levies.

As Melanie Nelson wrote in E Tangata (15.12.24), we are being asked to submit feedback on two sets of sweeping constitutional changes without fully grasping the impact of these extensive proposals on our lives and the country.

“Do we want a minor party’s libertarian ideology to shape the boundaries of legislation, government actions and judicial interpretations to significantly influence who we are as a nation, what we collectively stand for?”

* A draft version of the Regulatory Standards Bill is now out for consultation. A final version of the Bill has yet to be introduced to the House.

• Noel O’Malley is a Balclutha lawyer and past president of the Otago District Law Society.

SOURCE

2. From E-TANGATA by Melanie Nelson:

The ‘dangerous’ bill flying under the radar

New Zealand stands at a pivotal moment in its constitutional development. Not one but two key bills, both driven by the Act Party, signify a profound new direction for the country, writes Melanie Nelson.

Much has been said about the significant impacts of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill.

Meanwhile, its long-standing companion, the Regulatory Standards Bill, is advancing quietly through government processes, with limited public awareness, minimal media coverage, and little parliamentary debate.

Consultation on the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill opened on November 19, the day the hīkoi arrived at parliament. The consultation period ends the week after submissions close on the Treaty principles bill.

Both bills, if progressed, will result in significant constitutional reforms with profound implications for New Zealand.

They propose comprehensively changing the nation’s legislative and political environment by embedding rigid legal frameworks that prioritise individual and property rights, constrain regulatory powers, and reduce the government’s ability to implement environmental protections, social safeguards, and Tiriti-based initiatives.

Restricting legislative freedom: A legal straitjacket in the making?

The focus on the Treaty principles bill has overshadowed its dull but dangerous regulatory cousin.

The Regulatory Standards Bill is the brainchild of the Business Roundtable (now the New Zealand Initiative). The Act Party has tried three times, since 2006, to introduce a version of this bill — failing each time it was put under scrutiny, as its dangerous consequences became clear.

Yet, this latest attempt seems to be sailing through with little to no scrutiny so far.

READ AT THE LINK

 

Photo: Getty Images