Since this interview was recorded, Meng Foon has indeed condemned the two dreadful Maori Party MPs. Why that highly offensive pair get any attention from the MSM is hard to understand.
Awful offensive comments by Labour’s Kelvin Davis also get condemned.
Most of the evidence points to the U.S., which may leave a lot of Europeans wondering this winter what the hell they’re getting out of the alliance. From Moon of Alabama at moonofalabama.org: For decades the U.S. opposed European projects to receive energy from Russia. It wants Europe to buy more expensive U.S. oil and […]Whodunnit? – Facts Related to The Sabotage Attack On The Nord Stream Pipelines, by Moon of Alabama — STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
by Apihaka Tamati Mack
Ngātiawa Tai Kapiti — Kapakapanui te Mounga
This was carved on Otāraua Hapu w’enua up Maungakotukutuku River, Reikiorangi, Tai Kapiti from the many Rimu trees in our ngahere [forest]. Our Otāraua Hapu: Rangatira Ta Henare Te Marau was a loyal Ngātiawa soldier.
Kapakapanui Waka was recorded by Governor Grey’s constabulary as “Chief Witi Rangitaake waka five passengers.” I have a copy of this document which names all of the waka and who was in them.
This is a photograph from Puke Ariki Museum, New Plymouth. “Description: Carved wooden tauihu (canoe figurehead) resting on rocks at the beach. This is thought to be from ‘Kapakapauni’, the waka Wiremu Kīngi te Rangitaake used to lead Te Ātiawa home to Waitara from Waikanae in 1848”. Note that whoever wrote this, erased the Ta Whiti original tribal title.
For more about tauihu, see here
from a reader
Last week, most of the submitters to the Gateway /Te Uruhi project requested an adjournment of the Independent Panel, largely due to the probability of the political support for the project being withdrawn in the next triennium.
But on 27 September 2022, Gary Simpson, the acting CEO of the Kapiti Coast District Council (KCDC) wrote to all the Councillors informing them that Council had e-mailed the Independent Hearing Panel (Panel) for the Gateway, opposing any adjournment of the hearings.
This was in response to the 7 Councillors who had written to Mr Simpson requesting an adjournment.
Mr Simpson indicated the Council’s position was not only to decline the request for an adjournment, but also declined to raise the Councillor’s concerns with the Panel.
This Council as an applicant does have the power to request or agree to an adjournment – but instead lodged a memorandum from lawyers Buddle Findlay [that would have cost Ratepayers $1000+ –Eds] supporting Council’s position to oppose the adjournment.
As a result of the Council’s opposition, Minute #2 was issued by the Independent Hearing Panel denying Clare Holden and Michael Wilson’s request for an adjournment. Ms Mary O’Callahan, the Independent Commissioner Chairperson stated: “We find that there are no special circumstances present to justify an adjournment” – the concerns raised about costs and political will to cancel the project was not in her view relevant to the Panel’s role.
As a result, submitters will be forced to participate in a hearing next week for a project that is very likely to be withdrawn.
The e-mail from Mr Simpson to Crs and staffers:-
From: Gary Simpson <Gary.Simpson@kapiticoast.govt.nz>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 4:30 PM
To: *DEM – Councillors <KCDCCouncillors@kapiticoast.govt.nz>
Cc: *XTEAM – Senior Leadership Team (SLT) <SeniorLeadershipTeam@kapiticoast.govt.nz>; Alison Law <Alison.Law@kapiticoast.govt.nz>; Tim Power <Tim.Power@kapiticoast.govt.nz>
Subject: FW: Support for Clare Holdens request to Adjourn RMA Hearing in relation to Te Uruhi.(gateway)
Dear Elected Members
Six of you have asked me to seek an adjournment of the resource consent hearing for Te Uruhi scheduled to begin on Monday 3rd October. This morning following the workshop in the Council Chambers I spoke to the councillors present — Crs Halliday, Handford and Compton — to outline my response to your email and the reasons behind it. The application for resource consent is consistent with the current council position reached by resolution. The request to adjourn the hearing by independent commissioners comes after most candidates in the election and a large amount of social media comment makes it clear that the project does not have their support and is likely to not be proceeded with by an incoming council. Therefore adjourning it now will save further expenditure both for the council and submitters.
The commissioners have issued a minute inviting comment from submitters and KCDC as applicant to the request for the adjournment. Our submission which was emailed to the commissioners yesterday opposed the adjournment. The grounds for doing so were as outlined above in that the council position was clear, that candidate positions and predicting election outcomes couldn’t be used to override a resolution, the RMA has timelines built into it which limit the commissioners power to adjourn/postpone hearings without the applicants consent unless other factors are present and that the substantial part of the resource consent expense has already been incurred. An additional factor of a late delivery of material to one submitter who doesn’t have email and who made a case of disadvantage as a result has also been dealt with in our submission. It is now up to the commissioners to determine whether the hearing proceeds as scheduled after they have considered the submissions received. That decision should be available tomorrow and I will let elected members know once it is received.
One final point, the email below asked that it be conveyed to the commissioners. I have considered whether this was appropriate as, you will appreciate as individuals none of you have any standing in the matter because you had not made a submission on the application and an existing resolution had set out the position of the council. I have asked Tim Power to consider whether my position is the correct one which he has confirmed to be the case. Accordingly the letter has not been forwarded to the commissioners.
Acting Chief Executive
Kāpiti Coast District Council
Tel 04 296 4894
Mobile 027 5778 707
by Caitlin Johnstone
Someone who believes the US or its proxies sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines can tell you exactly what they’d stand to gain from it and how little it would cost them. Someone who believes it was Russia has to perform weird mental contortions about Moscow sending some kind of message to the world and Putin being insane, or entertain the absurd notion that Russia could only stop Europe from obtaining Russian natural gas by destroying Russian pipelines. This says a lot about whose arguments are stronger.
The west has blamed Russia for bad presidents, for western racism, for western political divisions, for inflation, for pretty much every bad thing western power structures are responsible for, but blaming Russia for attacks on Russian pipelines is probably going to take the cake.
The Wolfowitz Doctrine, penned after the fall of the USSR, describes the US policy of ensuring that no other power develops which could challenge US supremacy. It’s important to understand that this wouldn’t just apply to nations like Russia and China, but to the EU as well.
Does it still count as a conspiracy theory when they’re just coming right out and saying it?
Nobody who supports NATO is a moderate.
Being an American liberal means wearing a “Punch Nazis” t-shirt while cheering Biden as he arms Nazi paramilitaries in Ukraine and Hillary Clinton as she praises Italy’s election of a fascist prime minister.
Looking forward to when things heat up with China so we can find out whether Australia is going to be Washington’s next Europe or its next Ukraine.
Both sides of the Ukraine proxy war are threatening to use nukes. Both Russia and NATO 100 percent understand that nukes may be used by either side and their use is never off the table. The mutual nuclear threat is always there, regardless of what mouth noises either side is making about them. It’s weird how many people I’m running into who don’t get this.
This conflict doesn’t magically get dangerous because of what some Russian official happens to be saying on a given day. It would be just as dangerous if nobody was saying anything about nukes. The threat is there regardless of what anyone says, and it’s rapidly escalating.
It sure was nice of governments to assign themselves the responsibility of regulating how we talk to each other online. I don’t remember anyone asking them to do this, and it sure sounds like a lot of work, but by golly they’ve volunteered for the job anyway:
Bernie’s Tweets @BernieSpofforthJACINDA ARDERN – There will be only one source of truth and free speech is a “weapon of war” She calls for your censorship, Citizens who think and speak for themselves are a danger to the new normal. Terrifying!
“How do you successfully end a war if people are led to believe the reason for its existence is not only legal but noble?”
I keep tripping on this part. She’s saying people should be forbidden to say certain things about a war, on the absurd grounds that free speech can prevent peace. Even if you ignore the tyrannical mentality from which this claim arises, it also just makes zero logical sense. People saying online that a war is justified prevents that war from being ended? What? How? How could that possibly even happen? What the fuck are you talking about?
If someone criticizing nuclear fucking brinkmanship looks like adoration for Putin or Russian propaganda to you, it’s because you’ve been so brainwashed by western propaganda that the most normal thing imaginable looks freakish and sinister in your eyes. Criticizing your government is normal. Criticizing agendas of unparalleled existential importance is normal. Criticizing the most powerful government in the world is normal. Only by tremendous amounts of propaganda are these extremely normal things made to look abnormal.
Online discourse is crawling with people who really, truly, sincerely believe that if someone doesn’t fully support their government’s foreign policy with Russia and believe 100 percent of what their government says about it, it means they love Vladimir Putin and support everything he does. You either believe Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom and support your government’s actions against Russia no matter how much it costs or how much it risks, or you love the Kremlin and think Putin is a saint. Those are the only two possibilities.
If you can propagandize someone into believing their government is pure and virtuous, they will necessarily see any opposition to that government as evil and malicious. That’s why anyone questioning official narratives about Russia can only be an evil tankie who hates democracy.
Someone who tells you that you love Putin and believe he’s perfect is really telling you that they love their own government and think it’s perfect. They see their government as pure and virtuous and worthy of blind obedience, so failure to do so is indicative of nefariousness.
by Geoffrey Churchman
Effectively the council now thinks this not insignificant sum is highly likely to be a write-off — it is in the KCDC’s official Annual Report for 2021–2022 to be issued very shortly.
We first learned about this loan 2 years ago during one of our coffee catch-ups with Karl Webber. Our immediate reaction was ‘what’?? Two years previous, the highly controversial decision to subsidise Air Chathams to the tune of $50,000 a year was publicly announced in 2018 at the time that Air Chathams began its regular flights to replace Air NZ which had decided to pull out in 2017 (and who the outgoing present mayor told to Stuff off.)
So, two years ago we learned that in a Maxwell/Power-ordered secret session the councilors agreed to loan them in addition to the subsidy a hefty $500,000. We sent Mr Power an official information request for copies of all correspondence between the council and Air Chathams. He ignored that request, so a complaint about it went as usual to the Ombudsman. That is one of the complaints to the Ombudsman about Mr Power still outstanding.
But why did councilors agree to this? Not all of them are half-wits — were they presented with dishonest information? Determining that needs Auditor General involvement, and that is where we are sending the matter.
I’m working on a broader article on the whole issue of the Airport and hope to complete that by the end of the weekend.
(National Party media release)
Year-on-year increases in industrial electricity prices since Labour came to office are making the cost of living crisis worse, National’s spokesperson for Energy and Resources Stuart Smith says.
“Figures from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment show that industrial electricity prices have increased by 63 per cent since Labour came to power. Compare that to the final five years under the last National Government, when prices went up by just 0.01 per cent.
“Industrial energy users provide New Zealanders with essential items including fruits and vegetables, milk, building materials, basic household chemicals, and much more.
“When these producers are hit with surging energy prices, these added costs are passed on to the end consumer, meaning Kiwi families are paying more for the essentials.
“Fruit and vegetable growers are one example of an industry struggling with energy costs. After years of rapidly rising prices, many growers can’t afford to heat their glasshouses. That is a core reason why fruit and vegetable prices have increased 15 per cent over the last year, and why Kiwis are forced to pay $15 per kilogram for tomatoes.
“Labour’s ban on offshore oil and gas has forced New Zealand to boost our coal imports, which has recently had price hikes between 45 and 60 per cent. Instead of importing more coal which produces more emissions, we could have used indigenous natural gas to support our transition to a cleaner, greener economy.
“Double-digit price increases every year since Labour took office shows their energy and climate change policies have missed the mark and Kiwis are paying the price.
“The Government should reverse the offshore oil and gas ban to use the fuel that is already here, which is a better alternative in terms of our climate change ambitions. We simply cannot afford to keep increasing our coal imports, as we have been under Labour.”
From a reader in Australia, older NZ readers will also relate
I watched a doctor on TV recently (Norman Swan on Australian Broadcasting Corporation) telling us that we needed children to play in the dirt with their dogs and cats and be allowed to build up some immunity! Well bugger me — who would have thought?
My mum used to cut chicken, chop eggs, and spread butter on bread on the same cutting board with the same knife and no bleach, but we didn’t seem to get food poisoning. Our school sandwiches were wrapped in wax paper in a brown paper bag, not in ice pack coolers, but I can’t remember getting E.coli. Almost all of us would have rather gone swimming in the creek, the lake or at the beach instead of a pristine chlorinated pool (talk about boring), no beach closures then either?
We all did PE at school and risked permanent injury with a pair of Dunlop sandshoes or bare feet if you couldn’t afford the runners instead of having cross-training athletic shoes with air cushion soles and built-in light reflectors that cost as much as a small car. I can’t recall any injuries, but they must have happened because they tell us how much safer we are now.
We got the cane or the strap for doing something wrong at school, they used to call it discipline yet we all grew up to accept the rules and to honour & respect those older than us. We had at least 40 kids in our class and somehow, we all learned to read and write, do maths and spell almost all the words needed to write a grammatically correct letter — funny that!
We all said prayers in school irrespective of our religion, sang the national anthem and saluted the Flag and no one got upset. Staying in detention after school netted us all sorts of negative attention, we wish we hadn’t got. And we all knew we had to accomplish something before we were allowed to be proud of ourselves. I just can’t recall how bored we were without computers, Play Station, Nintendo, X-box or 270 digital TV cable stations. We weren’t!
Don’t even mention about the rope swing into the river or climbing trees.
Oh yeah… and where were the antibiotics and sterilisation kit when I got that bee sting? I could have been killed!
We played “King of the Castle” on piles of dirt or gravel left on vacant building sites and when we got hurt, mum pulled out the 2/6d (25 cents) bottle of iodine and then we got our backsides spanked.
Now it’s a trip to the emergency room, followed by a 10-day dose of antibiotics and then mum calls the lawyer to sue the contractor for leaving a horribly vicious pile of gravel where it was such a threat.
To top it off, not a single person I knew had ever been told that they were from a dysfunctional family. How could we possibly have known that? We never needed to get into group therapy and/or anger management classes.
We were obviously so duped by so many societal ills, that we didn’t even notice that the entire country wasn’t taking Prozac!
How did we ever survive?
… as a global avalanche of adverse effects gathered momentum.
by Guy Hatchard
Three days ago Ardern spoke in New York about New Zealand’s early cooperation with the global push for universal mRNA vaccination:
“I’ve had a number of bilateral conversations. The first was with the lead of GAVI—the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunisation [probably its CEO Dr. Seth Berkley], the vaccine alliance in which NZ had played a key role in making sure that we had early contributions. He requested to have that meeting and it really struck me that first and foremost he wanted to thank NZ for its support but also to have a conversation around how do we make sure that we don’t lose any of the global momentum around making sure that children in particular are vaccinated.…”
Just what sort of contributions did New Zealand make? We have already discussed some of these in our article The Strange Case of the Gates Foundation, the US CDC, and Our NZ Health Data but international cooperation and national blackouts on information gathering went deeper.
At the height of the fear about Covid severity in August 2020, Ardern laid out a policy the government should be your sole source of truth. She has pursued this policy rigorously ever since. It is now apparent that politicians from all sides of parliament and also government advisors took this information very seriously. It turned out to be a huge mistake that isolated the whole country from the traditional processes and safeguards of scientific investigation.
Incredibly, our first hand sources indicate that politicians and some government scientists working on Covid-19 safety are still unaware of the full scope and findings of international Covid-19 publishing. They appear to have confined their assessments solely to pro-vaccine material provided by government-approved databases run by bodies like the US CDC, GAVI, and ICMRA (International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities). These bodies are supported by WHO, pharmaceutical corporations, and the Gates Foundation. They strictly control which studies are made available and how their results are interpreted.
Meanwhile our primary public health data that could provide hard information on what is actually happening here is being shared with the Global Vaccine Data Network but has not been released to the New Zealand public. Instead, the small number of people with probing questions are left with person-to-person conversations, which paint a revealing picture of state sponsored ignorance and suppression of fact. The great thing about living in a small close-knit country is that people talk to one another and little remains secret for long:
One government advisor spoken to, professed complete ignorance of key studies on natural immunity, still believing, contrary to recent research findings, that the immunity conferred by the Pfizer vaccine was superior to natural immunity after infection. They hadn’t even heard the names Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Aseem Malhotra, Vinay Prasad, etc.
ALL-CAUSE DEATH RATES ARE HIGHER AMONG THE VACCINATED
Another joyous New Zealand scientist is busy sharing anti vaxxer jokes like “I’m not worried about anti vaxxers. It is a dying movement.” Apparently unaware that the all-cause death rates are higher among the vaccinated.
One of our senior scientists offered the opinion that all those experiencing cardiac problems after vaccination (and there are a great many), already had a cardiac problem and were really lucky that the vaccine brought it to light so that they could get needed treatment. We should be so lucky.
Conversely, a few people are noticing the obvious, despite the government telling them not to look around. A lawyer told me that their property team has little to do, but their estates team members are run off their feet.
A number of undertakers are doing brisk business, taking note of the predominance of vaccinated clients, and finding those rubbery clots. They are speaking up and won’t be told to keep quiet.
Some nurses are unafraid to say that myocarditis following vaccination is not mild, not uncommon, and not confined to the elderly. While a cardiac surgeon is complaining he used to work three days a week and now he has to work four days. Cancer specialists have never seen anything like it.
Some insurance brokers are also notching up unusually high numbers of health claims.
Some indispensable, highly-qualified specialists working for the health service refused to get vaccinated and the Ministry of Health allowed them exemptions. Pity if your employer doesn’t value you.
Pity also if you are a surfer or an athlete who doesn’t go out to play anymore because you can’t catch a breath, although some of them are no longer here to tell us about it. Mostly those affected don’t even realise it could be due to Covid mRNA vaccination because of government censorship.
The great secret being kept from the public: all-cause mortality is at record levels and those affected are primarily vaccinated. GVDN could tell us, but they are keeping mum.
The Medicines Assessment Advisory Committee (MAAC) approved the Pfizer vaccine in New Zealand. They certified all the ingredients as safe!!! How? What information did they use? MAAC has 12 members whose names have not been made available to the public. According to a source, one of the lead members of MAAC’s deliberations was Dr. XXX (I’m sparing her the embarrassment of being named because our government might not appreciate it). Her Linkedin profile lists her as an expert on lamb survival. Did she have sufficient qualifications and expertise to mandate the health choices of five million humans? You decide.
We have a lot of experts on cattle and sheep breeding, we don’t actually have a great many, if any, experts on biotechnology safety of an international standard. It seems curious to me that no one was tasked with locating the arguments and the research papers that ran counter to the naive assumption of vaccine safety. Why wasn’t a sub-group told to assemble concerns and then debate them with the pro-vaccine committee members? In fact, why wasn’t there any public debate? No doubt most of our ‘experts’ would look under informed and inadequate if they had to debate in an open forum.
The provisional consent for the Pfizer mRNA Covid-19 vaccine was granted on 3rd February 2021 for use until 3 November 2021. It was signed off by Dr. Chris James, Group Manager of Medsafe. Conditions 53-57 of the approval required Pfizer to provide to Medsafe the results of their post-marketing adverse effect data and analysis which Pfizer finalised on 30th April 2021.
An OIA reveals that the safety report on which approval was based noted:
“The benefit risk balance of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine for…individuals 16 years of age and older, is not clear. At this stage, there is evidence only for short-term protection, and longer-term safety data are lacking. However, experience with the vaccine is accumulating rapidly. Notwithstanding uncertainties, in the light of high clinical need and the expectation of further data (including regarding duration of protection) around April 2021, a provisional consent…may be appropriate.”
So safety wasn’t clear and there was no long-term data. The April 30th Pfizer data contained disturbing information documenting an unprecedented range of adverse effects following vaccination. So why didn’t it lead to a review of the vaccine approval? And crucially, why did Ardern leverage her position as our sole source of truth and tell us again and again from the podium and via saturation government advertising that the vaccine was proven safe and effective?
Medsafe has not provided exact information as to when it first received the post-marketing adverse effect data from Pfizer, it has merely affirmed that it received it prior to 28th October 2021 on which date it renewed the provisional consent for a period of two years. It seems incredible that the arrival of the Pfizer report didn’t ring alarm bells or merit detailed discussion
The minutes of the original approval show that some of the (unnamed) scientists on the MAAC had other concerns. For example:
‘The data on long terminal half-life of the lipid nanoparticles (LNP) was considered unusual but unlikely to be a safety concern, as only two doses are intended to be administered.’
So why wasn’t the concern about LNP re-examined when the approval was renewed at the end of the October, when a third (booster) dose was already on the table? The Hatchard Report has discussed research findings of inheritable immune suppression due to LNP. No worries though.
It is hard to escape the notion that approval had become an assured rubber stamp. It is probable that the government was so committed by this stage that no other outcome would be politically acceptable. The growing international concerns about rates of myocarditis among the young would have been very unwelcome.
Further than this, it appears that national medical regulatory bodies around the world were egging each other on to make more daring and carte blanche safety claims, without adequate supporting data, and in spite of multiple safety red flags. It was like an avalanche of investors buying shares in a failing Ponzi scheme.
Now the safety bar is dropping by the week. A month ago the results from just eight mice were sufficient to get the rubber stamp for distribution of a Moderna bivalent vaccine to 171 million Americans. Igor Chudov has analysed the data. It is concerning. The results were very inconsistent among the eight ‘subjects’. Some subjects registered an effect size 73 times greater than other ‘participants’. In any case, all of the mice got Covid and we haven’t been told whether they survived. The trial failed, but the rubber was stamped. No one in the scientific establishment squeaked concern.
This is all evidence of a trend towards transhumanism—open season for genetic experiments on humans without adequate safeguards—all humans. It goes against all the current and historical safety signals.
‘Out of Touch’ Doesn’t Cover It
Read this substack by Alex Berenson which analyses data from a peer-reviewed study of 9.1 million people in the UK published in the Lancet. Ostensibly it is about the relationship between Body Mass Index and vaccine effectiveness, but it contains a mass of data which contradicts the remaining last ditch claim of vaccine advocates—Covid vaccination protects against serious infection and death. It doesn’t.
A table from the supplementary appendix 1 of the Lancet study is devastating. Like so many studies, the bad news for the vaccine is buried in supplementary material. Bear in mind this is a study on England infection data Dec 8 2020 to Nov 17 2021, so it only covers Alpha and Delta when the vaccine was supposed to be effective, unlike today’s dismal performance against Omicron. It shows that contrary to all they’ve told us before, the double vaccinated were at least 44% more likely than the unvaccinated to be infected. Covid vaccination never has protected anyone, it simply elevated risks (and that is a very mild way of putting it).
New Zealand engineered a ‘vaccine’ miracle — Not!
To sum up: New Zealand decided to be led by Bill Gates, big pharma, and the CDC. Ardern reciprocated, she kept the lid on scientific discussion and dutifully told the world New Zealand engineered a vaccine miracle. Our scientists and medical professionals meekly followed her lead. Perhaps they thought their time to rule had come.
In fact, our low mortality rates in 2020 were the result of closed borders and excellent contact tracing in a small, well-spaced population who were very compliant about lockdowns. When vaccines arrived in 2021 all cause mortality rose precipitously in lock step with the vaccine rollout. During 2022 all cause mortality rose further and broke records, but the data shows it wasn’t in the main due to Covid.
Ardern with the full support of the entire parliament, all our political parties, and the New Zealand scientific and medical establishment has created a well-oiled machine to suppress discussion and dissent, to label scientific concepts like ‘herd immunity’ and ‘vaccine adverse effects’ conspiracy theories.
Ardern now travels the world speaking about the benefits and necessity for internet censorship to suppress the disinformation and violent extremism (???) of anti vaxxers—ordinary concerned people who ask questions of their government and their medical professionals.
Last week at the UN General Assembly she called for
“efforts to develop a new global health legal instrument, strengthened international health regulations and a strong and empowered World Health Organization”.