🚨 BREAKING: Florida just SUED Pfizer for deceptively marketing their COVID vaccines as safe while women suffered miscarriages and teens had heart attacks
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 1, 2026
THE PEOPLE DESERVE JUSTICE.
“Weeks ago we learned Fauci and the biomedical state knew the COVID jabs were dangerous but…
Florida state sues Pfizer over that substance
02 Friday Oct 2026
Posted in Uncategorized
A NZ continues to push it still!!
Australia and NZ continue to push it. An Australian friend and his wife just had flu, covid-19 and shingles shots all at once yesterday. He was already noticing a very sore arm once he got home! Some never learn!
It’s easy to get cynical about those who submit to that pushers of that substance — ‘the fools deserve what they get’ — but not everyone can be expected to conduct due diligence about it, because they are used to believing what the Leftist Legacy Media say.
Third time lucky it seems https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2105692062658273699…
It boggles MY mind how ANYONE with even HALF a brain cell could have Labour and other UNIPARTY signs on their property. ESPECIALLY in view of the $168,000,000.00 of Taxpaupers sent to UKRAINE NAZIS in CASH and in KIND. Check out MAFAT if you don’t believe me and also this FINCEN WHISTLEBLOWER SUBMISSION
FINCEN WHISTLEBLOWER SUBMISSION
SUBJECT: New Zealand Government Funding Routed Through the United Kingdom for Ukraine Military Procurement – Request for Examination of Downstream Financial and Procurement Transactions
SUBMITTER:
Geoff Waterhouse
New Zealand
SUMMARY
I am submitting information concerning New Zealand Government funding routed through the United Kingdom for the procurement of military equipment for Ukraine.
I am not alleging that the New Zealand Government, United Kingdom Government, Ukraine, or any identified contractor has committed a violation of United States law.
Rather, official government documentation establishes the beginning of a financial and procurement chain, while important portions of the downstream transaction remain undisclosed.
I believe records available to governments, financial institutions and contractors may establish whether subsequent transactions involved U.S. financial institutions, U.S.-dollar clearing, U.S. persons or companies, correspondent banks, sanctioned or restricted persons, or other circumstances potentially within the jurisdiction of FinCEN, OFAC or another United States authority.
I respectfully request that FinCEN determine whether the transaction chain warrants examination.
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began on 24 February 2022.
1. THE INITIAL NZ$7.5 MILLION TRANSACTION
sRuOn 11 April 2022, the New Zealand Government publicly announced a further package of assistance for Ukraine.
The official announcement included:
NZ$7.5 million “to contribute to weapons and ammunition procurement by the United Kingdom.”
The announcement therefore identifies:
Source of funds:
New Zealand Government
Amount:
NZ$7.5 million
Purpose:
Weapons and ammunition procurement for Ukraine
Procurement mechanism:
United Kingdom
Date publicly announced:
11 April 2022
This occurred 46 days after the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion.
2. PAYMENT TO THE UNITED KINGDOM MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
Subsequently released New Zealand Government documentation records the NZ$7.5 million contribution as having been:
“Paid to UK MoD”
and indicates that the purchase of materiel was confirmed with the United Kingdom.
Certain information concerning the materiel has been withheld by the New Zealand Government under provisions of the Official Information Act relating to national security, defence and/or international relations.
Consequently, publicly available New Zealand documentation establishes that the money was paid to the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence for procurement, but does not provide a complete public transaction trail identifying the ultimate suppliers and recipients.
3. NEW ZEALAND’S ROLE IN SELECTION OF MATERIEL
Contemporary New Zealand Government documentation concerning assistance to Ukraine indicates that New Zealand would work with the United Kingdom to determine the specific defensive materiel purchased using New Zealand funding, informed by Ukraine’s priority requirements.
This is significant because the contribution was therefore described as funding for identifiable procurement rather than simply unrestricted financial assistance.
The natural next question is what was purchased and from whom.
4. SUBSEQUENT CHARACTERISATION INVOLVING THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR UKRAINE
Later New Zealand Government documentation refers to New Zealand’s military assistance through the UK-administered International Fund for Ukraine.
This creates an issue that I believe warrants clarification from the underlying accounting and procurement records: how the April 2022 NZ$7.5 million payment to UK MOD was subsequently accounted for within later multinational procurement arrangements.
I do not suggest that this accounting treatment was improper.
I submit it because identifying the precise accounting and procurement pathway may reveal the downstream recipients of the original New Zealand funding.
5. SUBSEQUENT NEW ZEALAND FUNDING
New Zealand subsequently made additional contributions to multinational Ukraine military procurement mechanisms.
Official New Zealand documentation confirms, among other contributions, NZ$3.5 million in military assistance to the UK-administered International Fund for Ukraine in 2024.
New Zealand has also subsequently provided funding for military equipment and materiel through the UK/Latvia-led Drone Coalition.
These later arrangements may provide additional records capable of identifying contractors, procurement mechanisms and financial channels associated with New Zealand-funded military assistance.
6. INFORMATION I AM SEEKING TO ESTABLISH
The presently available public documentation does not answer several important questions:
a. What weapons, ammunition or other materiel were purchased with the NZ$7.5 million announced on 11 April 2022?
b. Which prime contractors received procurement contracts associated with that funding?
c. Which subcontractors, agents, brokers or other intermediaries participated?
d. What entities ultimately received payments?
e. Which financial institutions processed those payments?
f. In what currencies were the transactions conducted?
g. Did any transaction involve U.S.-dollar clearing or a U.S. correspondent bank?
h. Did any U.S. company, subsidiary, person, technology supplier or financial institution participate in the downstream procurement chain?
i. Were any persons or entities participating in the transactions subject to applicable U.S. sanctions, export controls or other restrictions at the relevant time?
j. How was the April 2022 NZ$7.5 million payment accounted for within subsequent UK-administered Ukraine procurement arrangements?
7. POSSIBLE UNITED STATES NEXUS
I have not established that any of the transactions described above violated the Bank Secrecy Act, IEEPA, U.S. sanctions regulations or any other United States law.
That determination requires information which is generally unavailable from public New Zealand Government records.
However, the international nature of the procurement chain means that relevant evidence could potentially exist in:
• international payment records;
• SWIFT/payment messages;
• U.S.-dollar correspondent-banking records;
• UK Ministry of Defence procurement and payment records;
• International Fund for Ukraine procurement records;
• contractor and subcontractor accounting records;
• beneficial-ownership records;
• export-control documentation; and
• records held by financial institutions processing the transactions.
FinCEN and other U.S. authorities may have access to information unavailable to a private researcher which could establish whether such a U.S. financial nexus exists.
8. AUSTRALIAN PARALLEL
Australian Government documentation may provide a useful comparative line of inquiry because Australia also arranged military assistance through the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence during the early period following Russia’s February 2022 invasion.
I suggest examining whether the New Zealand and Australian payments were handled through common UK MOD procurement, contracting or financial mechanisms.
I do not presently allege any impropriety concerning the Australian arrangements.
9. HOW I OBTAINED THIS INFORMATION
I am an independent researcher resident in New Zealand.
The information described above has been assembled principally from publicly released New Zealand Government records, including:
• New Zealand Cabinet and ministerial material;
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade records;
• New Zealand Ministry of Defence records;
• New Zealand Defence Force material;
• Official Information Act releases;
• United Kingdom Government procurement and defence material; and
• publicly available corporate and regulatory records.
I can provide copies of the principal documents and URLs to the original government sources.
10. INFORMATION NOT IN MY POSSESSION
I do not possess banking records showing the downstream movement of the NZ$7.5 million after payment to UK MOD.
I do not possess UK MOD internal payment records identifying the ultimate contractors paid from that contribution.
I do not possess SWIFT messages, correspondent-bank records or contractor banking records associated with those payments.
Those records are precisely the evidence that could determine whether the transaction chain has a relevant United States financial or regulatory nexus.
11. REQUEST TO FINCEN
I respectfully request that FinCEN’s Office of the Whistleblower assess this information and determine whether the downstream financial and procurement trail warrants examination.
If FinCEN considers additional documentation useful, I can provide a detailed chronology and the primary-source New Zealand and United Kingdom Government records supporting this submission.
I would also appreciate confirmation of the reference number assigned to this submission so that any additional evidence I discover can be associated with the same matter.
Australia has donated $1.8 BILLION!!!!!!!!! What is SIGNIFICANT, to me at least, is the New Zealand STARTED funding Ukraine just 46 DAYS AFTER the invasion started which is to be expected since JASINISTER was in charge BUT it has continued througout the term of this present ?????????????????? Can’t think of a suitable word. Be interesting to see what happens in the upcoming selection. More of the same you can bet, short of a mass awakening