Every time a Russian missile crashes into a building housing militia, it's said that Russia deliberately target civilians.

And during these usual morning Ukrainian photoshoots, a PR exercise unwraps.

While in the back they evacuate the surviving militia, in front of the… pic.twitter.com/q5mMa1nLrF

— Alternative News (@AlternatNews) October 16, 2026

Delulu : slang, short for “delusional” — used both as an adjective and noun to describe someone who holds wildly unrealistic beliefs, fantasies, or expectations.

“NATO bosses are delulu about their ability to successsfully wage war on Russia.”

It’s claimed to be a real building — Hodek Apartment House (Hodekův činžovní dům), a piece of Czech Cubist architecture located at Neklanova 98/30 in the Vyšehrad district of Prague — but nope, that doesn’t look like this.

(police media release)

A man will appear in court on serious driving charges following an incident on the Expressway, State Highway 1, Waikanae, Wednesday night.

Just before 8:25 pm Police noticed a person driving at nearly twice the 110 km/h speed limit travelling south on the Kapiti Expressway towards Waikanae. The driver failed to stop for Police and a pursuit was not initiated due to the manner of driving.

Within several minutes, the vehicle was observed by traffic cameras leaving the Expressway at Waikanae and getting back on heading northbound, before crashing into the wire barrier near the Ngarara Bridge.  The driver was located shortly afterwards by attending Police and assessed by ambulance – however he was not injured.

The road was closed for some time while the scene was assessed and cleared, as debris from the crashed vehicle was spread across all lanes.

The 35-year-old driver is charged with failing to stop for police, reckless driving, and driving while disqualified. He is due in Porirua District Court on 20 October.

Inspector Renée Perkins says the reported manner of driving was incredibly concerning, and thankfully not too common.

“It’s a wonder the driver or any other road users were not injured or worse given the manner of driving,” Inspector Perkins says.

“Our road policing team are highly visible, doing a great job cracking down on speed and this type of reckless driving behaviour.”

by Jon Fleetwood

Doctors, scientists, and advocates with a combined social media following of more than 66 million have signed an open letter demanding the removal of mRNA products, an end to PREP Act liability protections, and real help for the injured—or the health freedom movement will withdraw support ahead of the 2026 midterms and 2028 election.

An open letter demanding that President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. remove mRNA vaccines from the market has surpassed 3,300 signatures, according to Dr. Mary Talley Bowden.

Today, Dr. Bowden confirmed to JonFleetwood.com that the letter had collected 3,397 signatures as of her latest count.

The signatories reportedly have a combined social media following of more than 66 million.

Published September 18 by Americans for Health Freedom, the letter challenges the Trump administration over its failure to deliver on a central demand of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement: removing mRNA products from the market.

Doctors, scientists, legislators, and other public officials have signed a letter calling for greater transparency, independent investigation, and accountability over unresolved questions surrounding COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy.

You can sign the letter here.

The signatories demand a ban on mRNA-based vaccines, termination of the COVID-19 emergency declaration under the PREP Act, repeal of the law’s liability protections, and reforms addressing conflicts of interest at federal health agencies.

The letter also warns Trump and Kennedy that continued inaction could cost them the support of health freedom voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential election.

The executive summary reads:

As influential leaders within the MAHA and health freedom movements, we are writing to object to policies under your oversight related to the mRNA platform, and to call you to act on our policy goals.

While the centerpiece of the MAHA and health freedom agenda has been removal of mRNA shots, you have failed to take decisive action on this front despite overwhelming credible evidence to the harm of this technology. Instead, your policies related to mRNA technology are neutered and self-defeating, putting pregnant women and children at risk, misleading parents and eroding their rights, and failing to help those harmed by vaccines.

If you continue to ignore our central issue of removing the mRNA platform, the MAHA and health freedom movements will withdraw their support of you, and you will face the political consequences.

Unanswered questions remain about whether COVID mRNA vaccines contain undetected endotoxin contamination, after FDA testing missed up to 30% of added endotoxin activity, and whether the complete physical identity of the injected material and the protein allegedly produced inside vaccinated humans has ever been directly established.

Jon’s websites: Substack and follow at Instagram / X / Facebook.

from Claire Deeks

With the election just a few weeks away, there’s something I want to talk about. I’ve heard from people who have decided they won’t be voting this year. Others are still trying to work out who, if anyone, deserves their vote.

And I understand why.

After everything we’ve experienced over the past six years, it’s hardly surprising that so many New Zealanders have lost faith in politicians and the political system.

When Alia, Libby and I started Voices for Freedom back in 2020, we were three mothers who were deeply concerned about what was happening to our country and what it meant for our families. We had no idea what lay ahead. We certainly didn’t expect to find ourselves doing what we’re doing today!

But we knew that staying quiet wasn’t an option. And so did the thousands of New Zealanders who joined us. Together, we’ve challenged government decisions, asked difficult questions, supported one another, built communities and created our own independent media platform.We’ve had our fair share of disappointments along the way. But we’ve also seen what can happen when enough ordinary people refuse to give up. In fact, we’ve just had another reminder of that.

This week, New Zealand was one of only two countries to abstain from a United Nations vote on a declaration concerning pandemic preparedness. Foreign Minister Winston Peters made the decision, citing concerns about protecting New Zealand’s sovereignty and our ability to make our own decisions about public health.

And the reaction has been quite something! Former Prime Minister Helen Clark called it “humiliating”. Chris Hipkins described it as an embarrassment. 

Well, I see something rather different. For years, people like us have been raising concerns about the WHO, international health agreements and the importance of keeping decisions about New Zealand in New Zealand. And here we have a political party taking a position on the international stage that reflects some of those concerns, despite considerable pressure to fall into line. That matters. And I think we should recognise it.

You don’t have to agree with everything Winston Peters says or does to appreciate this particular decision. You don’t even have to like the man!

We should still question him, challenge him and hold him accountable, just as we should every other politician. But this is a timely reminder that political pressure, public scrutiny and persistent voices can make a difference.And that brings me back to the election.

I know many of you feel there is no party that truly represents your views. I share plenty of those frustrations. But I worry about good people becoming so disillusioned that they decide there’s simply no point in participating.Because the decisions made in Parliament will affect us whether we vote or not. They will affect our families, our businesses, our freedoms and the opportunities our children have in the years ahead. And as we’ve learned the hard way, the people making those decisions matter.

We don’t have to find a perfect political party to recognise that some outcomes may be better than others. Nor does voting mean giving anyone a free pass. Whoever forms the next government, our job remains the same. We keep asking questions. We keep speaking up. We keep holding them to account. That’s what Voices for Freedom has always been about.

So, if you’re thinking about sitting this election out, I’d encourage you to give it some more thought. Look carefully at the options. Consider what matters most to you, what each party has actually done, and what the possible election outcomes might mean for New Zealand.And please, take the time to understand how MMP works. Your party vote and electorate vote do different jobs, and the way our electoral system operates can produce some surprising results. We’ve put together some resources to help explain all of this, and I hope you’ll find them useful. Whatever you decide on election day, I hope you make that decision from a position of knowledge and conviction, rather than frustration or resignation. Six years ago, we decided that our voices mattered enough to stand up and use them. I still believe that today. And I hope you do too.

Claire Deeks | Co-Founder of VFF & RCR

P.S. Check out the Vote Smart campaign at www.VoteSmart2026.co.nz

For the first time, Zelensky is directly and openly challenging not only Trump, but the United States as a whole.

By Geoff Waterhouse

New Zealand has pledged more than NZ$168 million in financial assistance and in-kind support to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in February 2022. But how much do taxpayers know about the financial arrangements, procurement contracts and ultimate recipients?

Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Within weeks, the New Zealand Government had committed financial and military assistance.

On 11 April 2022, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced a further NZ$13.1 million assistance package. Included was NZ$7.5 million to contribute to weapons and ammunition procurement by the United Kingdom, along with NZ$4.1 million for commercial satellite access for Ukrainian defence intelligence.

This was not simply a matter of New Zealand sending equipment from its own military stocks. Taxpayer funding was being committed to procurement arrangements administered overseas.

That raises a reasonable question: what documentation is available showing how those funds were spent?

From NZ$30 million to more than NZ$168 million

The April 2022 announcement brought New Zealand’s stated total contribution to approximately NZ$30 million.

The assistance programme continued following the change of government in 2023.

In February 2024, the National-led Government announced another NZ$25.9 million package, including NZ$6.5 million for the United Kingdom-administered International Fund for Ukraine, intended to procure weapons and ammunition.

In July 2024, another NZ$16 million package was announced. This included NZ$4 million for the UK- and Latvia-led Drone Capability Coalition.

In June 2025, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters announced a further NZ$16 million, including another NZ$4 million for the Drone Coalition and NZ$4 million for NATO’s Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine fund.

By 30 June 2025, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s annual report, New Zealand’s total pledges of financial assistance and in-kind support exceeded NZ$168 million.

An important distinction must be made. This figure is not a statement that NZ$168 million in cash was transferred directly to Ukraine. It includes the assessed value of military training, personnel deployments, equipment, humanitarian assistance and other support, alongside financial contributions.

Nevertheless, it represents a substantial commitment of New Zealand public resources.

The overseas procurement arrangements

Several of the funding mechanisms deserve closer examination.

The first is the United Kingdom’s procurement of weapons and ammunition, to which New Zealand committed NZ$7.5 million in April 2022.

The second is the UK-administered International Fund for Ukraine, which received a further NZ$6.5 million commitment announced in February 2024.

The third is the UK- and Latvia-led Drone Capability Coalition, for which New Zealand announced NZ$4 million contributions in both July 2024 and June 2025.

These are not all the same programme. They involve different arrangements, participating countries and procurement processes.

The question is whether sufficiently detailed records exist to establish the payment pathways, contractual recipients, equipment purchased and applicable oversight procedures for New Zealand’s contributions.

What do the official records tell us?

Government announcements establish that the funding commitments were made and identify several of the programmes involved.

Official Information Act disclosures and other procurement records provide additional information about the administration of some contributions.

However, identifying a funding commitment is not the same as tracing a particular payment through to a named contractor and a completed delivery.

Nor should the existence of overseas procurement arrangements, by itself, be interpreted as evidence of wrongdoing. International cooperation in military procurement can have legitimate operational purposes.

But public accountability remains important, particularly when governments are committing substantial sums overseas.

There are questions worth asking:

• On what dates were the financial contributions actually transferred?
• Which government departments, funds or intermediaries received them?
• Which contractors ultimately benefited from the procurement expenditure?
• What equipment was purchased, and what records establish its delivery?
• What auditing and reporting arrangements apply to New Zealand’s contributions?
• What information can reasonably be released publicly without compromising legitimate security requirements?

These are questions about transparency, not allegations that criminal conduct has occurred.

Two governments, one continuing commitment

Another noteworthy feature is the continuity of the assistance programme.

The original commitments began under the Labour Government led by Jacinda Ardern. Subsequent funding packages were announced under the National-led Government headed by Christopher Luxon.

Whatever the political differences between the two administrations, New Zealand’s financial and military support for Ukraine has continued.

That continuity makes it appropriate to examine the entire programme from 2022 onwards, rather than treating it as the responsibility of one political party.

Seeking answers

I have been examining government announcements, Official Information Act material and publicly available procurement records in an effort to better understand these financial arrangements.

I have also brought relevant information and questions to the attention of United States authorities, including the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the Department of State Office of Inspector General.

These approaches do not establish that any wrongdoing has occurred, nor do they imply that the authorities have opened an investigation.

The purpose is to identify whether any relevant international financial or procurement connections merit further examination.

The central question remains straightforward: New Zealand has pledged more than NZ$168 million in assistance to Ukraine. Can the Government provide a clear, sufficiently detailed account of how the financial contributions were administered, where they went, and what was obtained?

New Zealand taxpayers are entitled to ask.

Official sources

1. New Zealand Government, 11 April 2022: New Zealand sends C-130 Hercules and 50-strong team to Europe to support Ukraine. Includes the NZ$7.5 million UK procurement contribution.
2. New Zealand Government, 22 February 2024: NZ announces new support for Ukraine. Includes NZ$6.5 million for the International Fund for Ukraine.
3. New Zealand Government, 10 July 2024: New Zealand increases support for Ukraine. Includes the first NZ$4 million Drone Coalition contribution.
4. New Zealand Government, 23 June 2025: New Zealand announces further aid for Ukraine. Includes further multinational funding commitments.
5. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Annual Report 2024–25: Supporting Ukraine in coordination with key partners. Confirms pledges exceeding NZ$168 million by 30 June 2025.

We know what’s happened to other country’s donations:

Why is Zelensky in London?

Zelensky hides money in Britain.

Since 2012, Zelensky owned a network of offshore companies in Britain and luxury real estate in London.

He received tens of millions of dollars Ukrainian oligarchs accused of murders and stealing billions from the… pic.twitter.com/Rwzyj0yzd1

— Diana Panchenko 🇺🇦 (@Panchenko_X) October 15, 2026

Ukrainians bought €2,000,000,000 (BILLION) of real estate in Spain in 2026 (Spanish Notaries Council).

Spain gave Ukraine €2.7 BILLION in 2022-2025.

And €2 BILLION of it went straight into Spanish villas.

Not bad.

— Diana Panchenko 🇺🇦 (@Panchenko_X) October 14, 2026