Says Iride McCloy: “This was during my tenure moment in Council as the Mayor and was an actual event with the Dog Ranger actually having the name of Mr Wolfe!

“I can’t believe that it was me and I was actually there !   My darling dog was Ziggi and I don’t think he enjoyed it either. 🙂 !

“Take care and remember to enjoy a good laugh.”

TVNZ profit slumps by two-thirds, CEO looks beyond abandoned merger

{Extracts from the NZ Herald — behind a paywall]

TVNZ has reported a net profit of $4.8 million for the six months to the end of 2022.

That was a two-thirds fall from its net profit of $15.2 million in the first half of the 2022 financial year, which itself was less than half the $33.9 million booked for the first half of the state broadcaster’s 2021 financial year.

Revenue fell 2 per cent to $180.3 m as income from advertising dropped 1 per cent to $171.3 million. CEO Simon Power told the Herald a fall-off in government Covid advertising was a factor.

And TVNZ warned in a statement: “Inflationary pressures and interest rate increases are likely to deliver a softer domestic advertising market through the remainder of 2023.”

“Digital revenue also grew 16 per cent year-on-year. These are big numbers, and we are focused on growing our reach further by expanding our content catalogue and continually improving the user experience.”

TVNZ refuses to provide a breakdown of broadcast vs digital revenue.

from Consortium News

In the past year, additional proof has emerged proving the West’s provocation of Russia to give Russia its “Vietnam” in Ukraine. 

Consortium News on Feb. 4, 2022 warned that the U.S. was setting a trap for Russia in Ukraine, as it had in Afghanistan in 1979 and Iraq in 1990, to provoke Russia to invade Ukraine to provide the pretext to launch an economic, information and proxy war designed to weaken Russia and bring down its government — in other words, to give Russia its “Vietnam.” Twenty days later Russia invaded. 

One month later, President Joe Biden confirmed that a trap had indeed been set, as reported by Consortium News on March 27, 2022, republished here today. The evidence that the U.S. wanted and needed Russia to invade as cause to launch its economic, information and proxy wars was clear: 

• The U.S. backed a coup in 2014, installing an anti-Russian government in Kiev and supporting a war against coup resisters in Donbass.
• The 2015 Minsk Accords to end the Ukrainian civil war were never implemented.
• On the day of the Feb. 24, 2022 invasion Biden told reporters that economic sanctions were never intended to deter Russia, but to show the Russian people who Russian President Vladimir Putin was.  In other words the U.S. was not trying to stop the invasion but to overthrow Putin, as Biden confirmed a month later in Warsaw, in order to restore the dominance over Russia the U.S. enjoyed in the 1990s. 
• The United States and NATO rejected Russian treaty proposals to create a new security architecture in Europe, taking Russia’s security concerns into account. Despite a Russian warning of a technical/military response if the draft treaties were rejected. The U.S. and NATO rejected them nonetheless, knowing and welcoming the consequences. Rather than withdrawing NATO forces from Eastern Europe as the treaty proposals called for, NATO sent more troops.
• For 30 years, NATO continued expanding towards Russia, despite promises to the contrary, routinely holding exercises near its border, despite fully understanding Russia’s objections, from Boris Yeltsin to Putin, and knowing it would provoke a hostile reaction.  Sen. Joe Biden said as much in 1997.
• The fake Russiagate scandal helped prepare the U.S. population for hostilities against Russia and launched sanctions based on a lie that have never been lifted. 
• Despite 100,000 Russian troops on the Russian side of the border, the OSCE reported an increase of shelling by Ukraine of Donbass at the end of February 2022 indicating an impending offensive against ethnic Russian civilians who had suffered eight years for resisting an unconstitutional change of government in 2014.  It was tantamount to baiting those Russian forces to cross the border. 

In the past year, additional evidence has emerged proving the West’s provocation:

• U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin acknowledged that the U.S. strategy in Ukraine is to “weaken” Russia. To this end, the U.S. has stopped peace efforts, even by Israel, to prolong the conflict. 
• Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, former French President Francois Holland, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and former Ukrainian President Petro Poroschenko all admitted in recent months that they never had any intention of implementing the Minsk Accords (endorsed by the U.N. Security Council) and were stringing Russia along to give time for NATO to train and equip the Ukrainian military for the Russian intervention it anticipated. 
• Planning for sanctions against Russia began in November 2021, three months before the invasion, according to Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Council. 
• Planning to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines were begun by the United States in September 2021, five months before the invasion, according to reporting by Seymour Hersh.         
• Taken together, all this evidence leaves little doubt that the U.S. was provoking Russia to invade Ukraine in order to implement its plan to bring down the Russian government.  That the U.S. plan has so far failed, is another matter. 

This was Consortium News‘ report on March 27, 2022:

In a moment of candor, Joe Biden has revealed why the U.S. needed the Russian invasion and why it needs it to continue, writes Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News
March 27, 2022

The U.S. got its war in Ukraine. Without it, Washington could not attempt to destroy Russia’s economy, orchestrate worldwide condemnation and lead an insurgency to bleed Russia, all part of an attempt to bring down its government. Joe Biden has now left no doubt that it’s true.   

The president of the United States has confirmed what Consortium News and others have been reporting since the beginnings of Russsiagate in 2016, that the ultimate U.S. aim is to overthrow the government of Vladimir Putin.

“For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden said on Saturday at the Royal Castle in Warsaw. The White House and the State Dept. have been scrambling to explain away Biden’s remark. 

But it is too late.

“The President’s point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region,” a White House official said. “He was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change.”

On Sunday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, “As you know, and as you have heard us say repeatedly, we do not have a strategy of regime change in Russia, or anywhere else, for that matter,” the last words inserted for comic relief. 

Biden first gave the game away at his Feb. 24 White House press conference — the first day of the invasion. He was asked why he thought new sanctions would work when the earlier sanctions had not prevented Russia’s invasion. Biden said the sanctions were never designed to prevent Russia’s intervention but to punish it afterward. Therefore the U.S. needed Russia to invade. 

“No one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening,” Biden said.  “That has to sh- — this is going to take time.  And we have to show resolve so he knows what’s coming and so the people of Russia know what he’s brought on them.  That’s what this is all about.”  It is all about the Russian people turning on Putin to overthrow him, which would explain Russia’s crackdown on anti-war protestors and the media.

It was no slip of the tongue. Biden repeated himself in Brussels on Thursday: “Let’s get something straight …  I did not say that in fact the sanctions would deter him.  Sanctions never deter.  You keep talking about that. Sanctions never deter.  The maintenance of sanctions — the maintenance of sanctions, the increasing the pain … we will sustain what we’re doing not just next month, the following month, but for the remainder of this entire year.  That’s what will stop him.”

Continue Reading

The first two months in 2023 present us with a turning point in the legal arguments around Covid-19 vaccination in New Zealand.

To: The Hon. Prime Minister Chris Hipkins

Two publications by the Ministry of Health itself present evidence that within the government there is knowledge that the Pfizer mRNA Covid vaccine cannot be regarded as safe and effective. Therefore from this point in time forward, there is no credible legal defence that the government can advance to cover its failure to openly inform individuals and the public at large of the inherent health risks of Covid vaccines.

Up until this point in time, the government’s public announcements, including your own under the previous administration, relied on the argument that the government is ‘following the science’ and monitoring international Covid journal publishing. This was never credible, but allowed room for a fanciful defence (certainly a weak argument) of ‘accident, ignorance, misapprehension, or misdirection’ in any possible legal case brought under criminal or civil law. This can no longer be the case.

Firstly a preprint paper was published on 3 February 2023 in the Lancet authored by our own Ministry of Health “Adverse Events Following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (Pfizer-BioNtech) in Aotearoa New Zealand”. The paper reveals there is a statistically significant association between Pfizer mRNA vaccination and both Myocarditis and Acute Kidney Injury (AKI).

Acute kidney injury (AKI), also known as acute renal failure (ARF), is a sudden episode of kidney failure or kidney damage that happens within a few hours or a few days. AKI causes a build-up of waste products in your blood and makes it hard for your kidneys to keep the right balance of fluid in your body. AKI can also affect other organs such as the brain, heart, and lungs.

The study examined the comprehensive medical records of 4 million NZers. There were 1778 more cases of AKI than predicted from historical pre-pandemic rates. An alarming rate of 1 case for every 2,200 vaccinations. In addition to AKI and Myocarditis, researchers also found elevated rates of blood clots and platelet damage.

Secondly, information concerning mortality in 2021, 2022, and 2023 correlated with vaccination status has been released by Te Whata Ora—Health New Zealand following a Freedom of Information (OIA) request. The figures are signed off by Astrid Koornneef, Interim Director of Prevention, National Public Health Service.

The released figures include all NZ registered deaths by month. The figures show that for the last six months of 2022, 80% of all people dying in New Zealand had received Pfizer mRNA booster shots. Yet according to official government figures updated 14 February 2023 only 73.2% of those eligible (18+ years) have received a booster. In other words, booster recipients are disproportionately represented among registered all-cause deaths. For more analysis refer here.

These two data sets certainly point towards serious risks associated with Pfizer mRNA Covid vaccination and stand in need of further investigation. The first only investigated outcomes within 21 days of Covid vaccination, the second indicates serious effects persist in the general population past 21 days. Taken together these point to a need for analysis of the causes of the current high rates of hospital admissions and deaths with reference to vaccination status.

Despite the ongoing need for more investigation, the results are sufficiently concerning according to ordinary standards of vaccine risk assessment to require an immediate halt to vaccine administration. This has not happened. Instead your Minister of Health, Ayesha Verrall has announced a new booster shot for everyone over 30. Verrall did not reveal the concerning new safety data to the public. Instead she has urged people to receive the vaccine as a priority.

Findings of this type are not unique to New Zealand, increasingly publications in learned journals are highlighting concerns about Covid vaccine safety. There is much academic debate in progress which has received little or no coverage in New Zealand media. Your government appears to share the burden of responsibility for a lack of balanced coverage in NZ mainstream media.

There appears to be a misapprehension among NZ health professionals concerning the reliability of biotechnology vaccine manufacturing standards. Data points to huge variability in safety by vaccine batch. The following chart records serious vaccine injury and death by batch number in the USA sourced from publicly available VAERS data sets. You can see that the number of injuries varies hugely by batch. A few injury numbers are similar to those recorded following flu vaccination, but most batches lead to injury volumes considerably higher, up to 14 times higher.

As early as January 18 2021 Orange County California medical authorities flagged an unusually high pattern of injury and death associated with a single batch they had been administering. Pfizer should have immediately alerted New Zealand authorities to such anomalies. They probably had a contractual obligation to do so. Now that it has become a matter of public comment, it should not be possible to continue to assert Covid vaccine safety. New Zealand has a code of Good Manufacturing Process for pharmaceuticals. This includes a requirement for uniformity of pharmaceutical medicine contents and action. Apparently, Pfizer covid vaccines do not meet our code.

The scientific evidence concerning the lack of covid vaccine safety has not reduced the stitched up action of government intelligence services, the police, and Te Punaha Matatini’s Disinformation Project in coordination with media and social media to monitor and reduce the reach of those raising pertinent questions. As you know, under the Prime Minister’s office there is interagency coordination for mis/disinformation monitoring and response. This involves multiple government departments. If these programmes and participants are not fully informed of the legitimacy of concerns about Covid vaccine safety, this amounts to misdirection and possibly harassment on the part of the Prime Minister’s office itself.

I and many others believe New Zealand has struggled to define its relationship with unregulated global influences in the modern era. There is much scope for commercial and geopolitical misdirection even via established channels of medical, military, and political cooperation. We need to be more alert as a nation to our own sovereign and economic interests especially when we consider health and the legal protections that have been afforded to multinational interests like Pfizer and others.

You are newly appointed to a position of power and influence. You have stated that you intend to reconsider the policies followed under your predecessor. It was therefore very surprising to find your Minister of Health doubling down on vaccine requirements against the weight of her own department’s findings. I urge you to look into this very thoroughly. As a trained lawyer, I expect you realise that going against the weight of safety evidence is very much a betrayal of the trust the public has placed in the government.

I hope you will announce a revision and retraction of Covid response policies in the light of the new evidence that is being published. Apparently New Zealand has acquired 1.7 million doses of Pfizer bi-valent vaccines. Why? Have you considered returning them as not fit for purpose? The weight of evidence points in that direction. Evidence that is accumulating by the week in learned journals.

It seems clear that we have passed a point where policy mistakes can be described as accidental, if continued they will appear to be deliberate. The public stands in need of an honest explanation. It may take courage to speak out, but doing so will be a mark of integrity and genuine concern for health and safety.

Yours sincerely

Guy Hatchard PhD

https://www.facebook.com/paul.baroniii.3/videos/701648764785195/

At present the government of Jacindaland is at Stage 3 — fighting its skeptics, critics and opponents.

Inhabitants of Jacindaland have become well aware of this fact.

The Leftist mantra is: “I control, therefore I am.” That is why they can not live and let live. From Brandon Smith at alt-market.us: It should be clear to anyone paying attention during this current stage of instability in our modern era that something is very wrong in terms of American society. I’m not talking about […]

Deconstruction: Why Leftist Movements Cannot Coexist With People That Value Freedom, by Brandon Smith — STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC