CONNECTING THHE DOTS TO THE ‘GLOBAL RESPONSE’

Governments have given billions of taxpayer money to Gates and the World Economic Forum. In 2019 before COVID19 was introduced to the world the UN and WEF officially committed to a partnership arrangement.

On May 4, the EU and several European governments held a Covid 19 donor conference and pledged 7.4 billion euros of tax money. The money will be given to organizations funded by Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum in a non-transparent way. For a long time, Gates had to give money to the UN and governments to be allowed to co-govern the world. Now he is given money by governments for his global governance work.
Only two days earlier the G20 group of the most important industrial nations let the World Economic Forum, i.e. ultimately by Silicon Valley companies, draw up their digital strategy for “the pandemic and beyond”. How the future will be determined as to compliance to a One Global Public-Private Corporate Governance.
The German government explained information as to the ‘Global Response’ initiative to combat the corona virus, through a press release.
24 April 2020, the Gates Foundation launched an initiative less than 2 weeks later that the EU and Governments are holding a Donar Conference to contribute 7.4 billion Eros.

On 24 April, the Gates Foundation launched an initiative and less than two weeks later the EU and governments are holding a donor conference to contribute 7.4 billion euros. This response time is extraordinarily short.
In 2018, GPMB was founded by the World Health Organization (WHO), which has the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as one of its largest funders, and the World Bank, which is cooperating closely with the Gates Foundation in various bodies including the ‘Better Than Cash Alliance’. Chris Elais the president of the Gates foundation is a member of the GPMB Board of directors.

Taxpayers’ money, ordered indirectly by the Gates Foundation is to be distributed to various Gates-funded organizations to be passed on to big pharmaceutical companies that comply with the philosophy of Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum.
Much of the money raised will be given to the World Health Organization (WHO), the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) and the Coalition for Epidemic Prevention Innovation (CEPI) to invigorate their capabilities.

GAVI provides immunisation in developing countries. Main financiers are the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Bank and the WHO.
CEPI is an offspring of the 2017 Davos meeting ot the World Economic Forum, the club of the largest multinational corporations.
Gates Foundation, founding members are the WHO, significantly financed by Gates, and the EU Commission, delegating one member to the Board of Directors.
Apart from CEPI, Unitaid and the Global Fund are reported as recipients in various media. Unitaid is a WHO-based fund, co-funded by the Gates Foundation.
The purchasing of large quantities of drugs at discount prices for people in poor countries, then forwarding those drugs to partner organizations to ensure they are only used in the target countries. Implementation partners include Gates Foundation, Clinton Foundation and GAVI
Unitaid supports pharmaceutical companies’ profit maximizing strategy.

Under the aegis of WHO, The Global Fund was established by money from the Gates Foundation, however now its manly financed by UN Nation Governments.
What do all these Gates-funded and co-run institutions do? Among other things, they write reports that are most interesting by what they leave out.
WHO, Gates Foundation happen to be part of organizing or taking part in the Corona Pandemic Simulation Exercise Event 201 in October 2019.

The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB) is an independent group of global leaders that have recently called for a renewed global social contract laying out six solutions for what they call a ‘safer world’, in their annual report which are in the Strategic Plan 2021-2023. Other publications are ‘A World without Disorder, A world prepared and the latest being ‘The window of opportunity for ending this pandemic and preventing the next is closing rapidly’ and other reports.

TAKE NOTE: The co-chairs of GPMB, El hadj As Sy and Gro Brundtland. El hadj AS Sy is the Chair of George Soros’ Open Society Initiative for West Africa. Gro Brundtland is former Director General of WHO, who also has connections to Soros. She was also Vice President of the World Socialist Party. Co-convened by the Director-General of the World Health Organization and the President of the World Bank , the GPMB is comprised of political leaders, agency principals and world-class experts.
Dr. Anthony Fauci is listed on the Board of Directors of the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB)

...

Parliamentary Blog Posts View all Categories

PUBLIC-PRIVATE CONTROL SYSTEM

The UN Secretary General and the World Economic Forum signed on June 13 a Strategic Partnership Agreement for the implementation of the 2030 agenda (SDG). Accelerated actions to UN Agenda 2030 17 lobal Development goals

17 out od 17 global goals relate to Climate Alarmism. 14 out of 17 relate to UN lobal Strategy of Vaccine 2011- 2020, and the decade of vaccine.. leave no-one behind, everyone, everywhere at every age.

Jacinda Ardern boasts se as included the accelerated actions to UN Agenda 2030 into New Zealand’s domestic policy, she intends to lead other UN Nations worldwide. New Zealander’s are sitting on the edge of a very dangerous precipice

The provisions of the strategic partnership effectively provide that corporate leaders will become ‘whisper advisors’ to the heads of UN system departments, using their private access to advocate market-based profit-making ‘solutions’ to global problems while undermining real solutions

The WEF agreement with the UN, and all other forms of corporate capture, seriously undermines and erodes democratic processes worldwide.
For further information please go to the link above to my Rumble Video

...

NEW ZEALAND COVID-19 PROTECTION FRAMEWORK

On 3 December, the country will leave behind the alert level system which has been in place since early 2020 and move into the traffic light system. Jacinda Ardern said “for the most part, if you’re vaccinated, you can go about doing all the kinds of things you’d usually expect … what varies is just how large those gatherings are at different levels”. (Medical Discrimination)

Vaccination certificates would allow businesses to be able to open and operate at any level, of course businesses will want to want to increase their customer base.

RED… The red setting will allow hospitality to open with vaccine certificates, but gathering limits, physical distancing, masks and other public health measures would be used, also more track and tracing

Orange, vaccination certificates in close contact businesses, gatherings no limits on numbers of people marae, close contact businesses….

Green, places requiring vaccination certificate requirements, no limits- hospitality, wedding, places of worsip, marae, events- outdoors/ indoors..close contact businesses.

Please go to Link above which will take you to my Rumble video – giving you more information on this serious situation

...

FLUORIDE IN NZ DRINKING WATER, WHO DECIDES WHETHER IT IS SAFE?

On 9 November 2021, the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill passed its third reading in the House. The Bill moves decision making authority on community water fluoridation from local authorities to the Director-General of Health.

The Bill describes:- powers and duties of the Director-General in relation to making directions for or against water fluoridation…duties of water suppliers (including local authorities) in relation to implementing Director-General directives about water fluoridation.

In deciding whether to make a direction to fluoridate, the Director-General of Health will be required to consider:- scientific evidence on the effectiveness of adding fluoride to drinking water in reducing the prevalence and severity of dental decay also whether the benefits of adding fluoride to drinking water outweigh the costs, including consideration of local oral health status, population numbers, and financial cost.

Water suppliers will be required to fluoridate a water supply if directed to do so by the Director-General of Health. Those already fluoridating will be required to continue to do so.

Fluoride is one of the most abundant elements found in nature. Water is the major dietary source of fluoride. Water fluoridation was once heralded as one of the best public health achievements in the twentieth century.

Major concerns about excessive fluoride intake and related toxicity were raised worldwide, leading several countries to ban fluoridation. Fluoride is the ionic form of fluorine, the thirteenth most abundant element in the earth’s crust. It is released into the environment naturally in both water and air. Other important sources of fluoride are tea, seafood that contains edible bones or shells, medicinal supplements, and fluoridated toothpastes
The recommended intake for fluoride is expressed as an adequate intake rather than recommended dietary allowance, because of the limited data available to determine the population needs. The adequate intake for fluoride is 0.7 mg daily for toddlers, rising to 3 mg daily for adult women and 4 mg daily for adult men. It remains unclear whether fluoride is truly essential

Although Dental Association’s strongly supports fluoridation of community drinking water supplies, however, strong contradictory opinions also are held
Fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment… The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classifies fluoride as a drug when used to prevent or mitigate disease (FDA 2000). As a matter of basic logic, adding fluoride to water for the sole purpose of preventing tooth decay (a non-water borne disease) is a form of medical treatment.

All other water treatment chemicals are added to improve the water’s quality or safety, which fluoride does not do.
1 Fluoridation is unethical. Informed consent is standard practice for all medication, and one of the key reasons why most of Western Europe has ruled against fluoridation.
2) With water fluoridation we are allowing governments to do to whole communities (forcing people to take a medicine irrespective of their consent) what individual doctors cannot do to individual patients.
3) Does a voter have the right to require that their neighbor ingest a certain medication (even if it is against that neighbor’s will) Is it right that the Director- General of NZ should have this right??
4) The dose cannot be controlled. Once fluoride is put in the water it is impossible to control the dose each individual receives because people drink different amounts of water. Being able to control the dose a patient receives is critical. Some people (e.g., manual laborers, athletes, diabetics, and people with kidney disease) drink substantially more water than others.
5) The fluoride goes to everyone regardless of age, health or vulnerability. According to Dr. Arvid Carlsson, the 2000 Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology and one of the scientists who helped keep fluoridation out of Sweden:
6) “Water fluoridation goes against leading principles of pharmacotherapy
7) People now receive fluoride from many other sources besides water.
8) Fluoridated water is not the only way people are exposed to fluoride. Other sources of fluoride include food and beverages processed with fluoridated water

It is now widely acknowledged that exposure to non-water sources of fluoride has significantly increased since the water fluoridation program first began
The level in mothers’ milk is very low. Considering reason #6 it is perhaps not surprising that the level of fluoride in mother’s milk is remarkably low (0.004 ppm, NRC, 2006). This means that a bottle-fed baby consuming fluoridated water (0.6 – 1.2 ppm) can get up to 300 times more fluoride than a breast-fed baby.

There are no benefits, only risks for infants ingesting this heightened level of fluoride at such an early age (an age where susceptibility to environmental toxins is particularly high).

Fluoride accumulates in the body. Healthy adult kidneys excrete 50 to 60% of the fluoride ingested each day (Marier & Rose 1971). The remainder accumulates in the body, largely in calcifying tissues such as the bones and pineal gland (Luke 1997, 2001). Infants and children excrete less fluoride from their kidneys and take up to 80% of ingested fluoride into their bones (Ekstrand 1994). The fluoride concentration in bone steadily increases over a lifetime (NRC 2006).

No health agency in fluoridated countries is monitoring fluoride exposure or side effects. No regular measurements are being made of the levels of fluoride in urine, blood, bones, hair, or nails of either the general population or sensitive subparts of the population (e.g., individuals with kidney disease).

There has never been a single randomized controlled trial to demonstrate fluoridation’s effectiveness or safety. Despite the fact that fluoride has been added to community water supplies for over 60 years, “there have been no randomized trials of water fluoridation” (Cheng 2007).

Randomized trials are the standard method for determining the safety and effectiveness of any purportedly beneficial medical treatment. In 2000, the British Government’s “York Review” could not give a single fluoridation trial a Grade A classification – despite 50 years of research (McDonagh 2000).

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to classify fluoride as an “unapproved new drug.”

Benefit is topical not systemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 1999, 2001) has now acknowledged that the mechanism of fluoride’s benefits are mainly topical, not systemic. There is no need whatsoever, therefore, to swallow fluoride to protect teeth.

Since the purported benefit of fluoride is topical, and the risks are systemic, it makes more sense to deliver the fluoride directly to the tooth in the form of toothpaste. Since swallowing fluoride is unnecessary, and potentially dangerous, there is no justification for forcing people (against their will) to ingest fluoride through their water supply.

Fluoridation is not necessary. Most western, industrialized countries have rejected water fluoridation, but have nevertheless experienced the same decline in childhood dental decay as fluoridated countries. (See data from World Health Organization).

Too much fluoride per individual can caused serious health issues. One size does not fit all.
I have also listed a number of health risks when too much fluoride is consumed on another blog on my website.

Please see link above to more information on my Rumble Video.

...