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

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL ‘UNDRIP’ AND VISION 2040 NEW ZEALAND

George Orwell’s- Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” Orwell explaining disparities that exist in our society

A proclamation by the pigs who control the government, in the novel of Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’. The hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the equality of citizens, but give power and privileges to a small elite

Orwell parody of as he criticised  Stalinist Russia. He said ‘”Windmill or no windmill, life will go on as it had always gone on, and that is badly

Orwells “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”, takes me back to the researched archives of the Beehive (The wasps nest) 15th September 2007.

The NZ Minister Of Maori Affairs gave a ‘Wake Up’ speech in the house, however three years later the National Party ignored the warning. And now the great push to introduce the UNDRIP into Health, Education, Infrastructure, Economy etc., etc.,

The hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the equality of citizens, but give power and privileges to a small elite

 

We are all one people. We argas (arigas) altar omra piano (Pi-arno). (Gaelic)

He Iwi Tahi Tatou

PLEASE CLICK ON THE IMAGE  :   ABOVE TO LINK YOU TO MY RUMBLE VIDEO MORE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE

 

...

PARLIAMENT LEGIZLATED THE TE TIRITI o WAITANGI

‘The Te Tiriti o Waitangi did not create Partnerships nor Principles’

Nothing in this ACT shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the Principles of the Treaty. First tie the Principles of the Treaty had been documented) There are NO Principles in the Treaty Of Waitangi 1840.

1985 Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act. While the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act was about the settlement of historical grievances, the 1985 Amendment Act was a very different matter. The recognition of iwi-Māori rather than pan-Māori as the inheritors of Treaty settlements established the reviving tribe as both political player and economic corporation.

1985 Amendment Act, Deputy Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer agreed to Sir Hepi Te Heuheu’s request to insert the clause “Nothing in this Act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” into Section 9 of the State-owned Enterprises Act 1986. This is the first reference in legislation or policy to the principles of the Treaty – indeed, the first indication that the Treaty has principles. Parliament did not define the principles — an unconscionable failure which opened the way for the courts and government officials to determine what is probably one of the most important political events of the 20th century. Treaty principles, including that of partnership, now appear in almost all legislation.

1987 Court of Appeal decision stating that the Treaty established a relationship “akin to a partnership”. Although the judges likened it to the obligation partners in a partnership had they did not say that the Treaty actually created a partnership. Nor did it. However, “partnership” was quickly picked up by the Waitangi Tribunal and by the 1987 Iwi Leaders’ Forum. From that time this powerful interest group has achieved enormous success in claiming constitutional change and ownership rights. “Partnership” is the justification. The possibility that the He Puapua Report will be implemented either in full or modified form demonstrates the group’s success to date.

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/m%C3%A2ori-party%E2%80%99s-head-clouds-over-non-binding-un-declaration Horomia speech

https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/assets/Publications/Ecosystem-services-in-New-Zealand/2_3_Christie.pdf

. https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2013-07/ltfs-13-bg-nrs.pdf  37 pages pdf

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2017-12/Natural%20Resources.pdf

https://www.tearawhiti.govt.nz/assets/Tools-and-Resources/Providing-for-the-Treaty-of-Waitangi-in-legislation.pdf

 

...

THE GOVERNMENTS ZILCH TRANSPARENCY AS TO THE THERAPEUTIC PRODUCT BILL

FIRSTLY-TO MAKE MY CASE I WILL EXPLAIN WHAT AN ‘OFF LABEL MEDICINE ‘is, later you will find out why I am explaining this ‘An Off Label Medicine is an unapproved drug can be used under certain regulations, legislations.

Under Sect 23 of the Medicine Act 1981 this provides the Minister of Health to grant provisional consent when considered desirable for the medicines to be sold, supplied or used on a restricted basis (LIMITED BASIS) for the treatment of a LIMITED number of patients (People)

June 12th 2015 The National Library Of Medicine published an article ‘Off-Label drug use as a consent and health regulation issue in New Zealand. ‘Off Label’ described as not yet approved or the status of drugs that have been approved

The NZ Medicines Act 1981 specifically allows for off-label drug use, however this authority is limited-Code of Health & Disability Services Consumers Rights Regulations and Common Law state:- It is required that ‘off-label’ drug use is of an acceptable standard, the patient should be fully informed, the patient must give informed consent.

Off Label drug use is an extremely important issue, the current law provides medical practitioner very wide discretionary power without providing classification for what is required of the practitioner in exercising this discretion ’off label’.

SO WHAT HAS THE NZ GOVTS THEREPEUTIC PRODUCTS BILL  GOT TO DO WITH THE REPLACING OF THE MEDICINES ACT WITH ‘OFF LABEL’ MEDICINE?

The Government had unsuccessfully introduced policy proposals for the Therapeutic Content proposals  back in 2011 and 2016. In 2019 the Therapeutic Product proposal was back on the governments table. “Iwi/Maori natural medicines would be exempted from the Therapeutic Product proposal”

A Med-Safe Report in May 2022 refers to the Medicine Act being replaced with the Therapeutic Products Bill to allow for ‘Off Label’ Medicines Chris Hipkins the COVID19 Response Minister and Andrew Little Minister Of Health where the Director General has the ability to make decisions regarding the administration of the COVID19 jabs, the dose and the frequency as the pandemic developed whilst being outside of the established Medsafe Regulations- medicine process.

A legal base for the provision of the medicines process of any further doses of COVID19 Vaccines (Jabs) including Pfizer’s 4th doses. The 4th dose had not yet been approved by Med-Safe. The government had recommended that Maori and Pacifika peoples over the age of 50 who are immune-compromised can receive the 4th Pfizer dose before winter 2022.  NO public consultation was undertaken as to the governments proposal, however the 4th dose was consistently promoted by mainstream media.

Ministry of Health reported that Pfizer have not yet applied for approval of 4th dose in NZ, that local jurisdictions have to find their own approval strategies.

2.The Ministry of Health reported as to Maori, Pacific peoples health- cannot be overstated as to the impact of COVID19 that there is a time pressure to maximize immunity when winter illnesses are at their peak. (Specific targeting of Maori and Pacific Island peoples for COVID19 jabs -guineapigs) saying “It would be ideal to enable the broader doses of4th Pfizer doses. Opportunities to administer flu and COVID 19 jabs at the same time.

 To provide their populations with 4th doses, but they had to find their own legal route.. However Standing Orders cannot be made for an unconsented medicine (A new medicine), this undermines the purpose and consents process under the 1981 Medicines Act

NOTE: Under the Medicines Act 1981 ‘Off Label’ – number of people receiving doses of ‘unapproved Med-Safe medicines are limited. Pfizer COVID19 dose 4 was unapproved and therefore limited as to how many New Zealanders could receive it.

The government ‘WITH URGENCY’ introduced new arrangements, they  were implemented to amend the Medicine Act introduced 7th June 2022, passed in mid June- recommended by Andrew Little that the Ministry Of Health would be responsible for the implementation of the 4th dose of Pfizer, utilizing all existing delivery settings, processes & technology that has been used previously for the COVID19 rollout.

Ministry Of Health to monitors new data collection. Andrew Little Minister Of Health will administer the application of the Medicines Act 1981 to ensure ‘off-label’ medicines eg COVID19 Pfizer 4th Dose practices.( Ria-moh-amat-may.22.pdf)

In a Court hearing-Judge Rebecca Ellis stated when referring of ‘off label’ medicine, “a limited number of people  specified for in Section 23 Medicines Act 1981. This could NOT be stretched to the whole population over 16years old” Andrew Littles response to Judge Ellis was “I will fix the snag” (Intro to the Therapeutic Product Bill)

RNZ reported 18/5/2021 ‘Technical Anomaly Spurs Urgent Law Change for COVID 19 Vaccine. Government URGENTLY’ seek a change of law to ensure COVID19 Vax rollout is LEGAL following the High Court decision of Judge Rebecca Ellis. Judge Ellis ruled it was ‘reasonably argued, that the governments approval of Pfizer vaccine rollout went beyond the Medicines Act 1981 allowed” . This gave  Andrew Little the right to approve medicines for a limited number of patients. However the COVID 19 Vaccine rollout would cover all New Zealanders over the age of 16years. THUS NOT LIMITED AS IN MEDICINE ACT 1981

Chris Hipkins response to Judge Ellis was “this raises no safety issues, it just highlighted a technical anomaly as to the law. NOTE THE GOVERNMENT WAS TECHNICALLY BREAKING THE LAW. AND THEY NEEDED TO COVER THEIR ARSES.

Andrew Little again responded to Judge Ellis “The government will pass legislation under URGENCY to rectify the problems ( THERAPEUTICS PRODUCTS BILL- This will most definitely be passed to save Governments arses)

Six products are potentially affected by Judge Ellis court decision these include Pfizer Vaccines, 2 Flu Vaccines and 2 types of contraceptives and an electrolyte solution

3.On the 30November 2022 the Therapeutic Product Bill was officially introduced by Andrew Little to the House (Parliament). He describes this in his speech in the Beehive “To modernize the way medicines, medical devices (includes COVID Test Kits) and Natural Health products are regulated. Strict rigorous regulations on natural health products eg. Vit C, Vit D etc., etc., you can buy at the supermarket.

The Therapeutic Product Bill if passed replaces the Medicines Act 1981 and the Dietary Supplement Regulation 1985 with one comprehensive  regulatory regime. Andrew Little stated “FIT FOR THE FUTURE’. Enables NZ to take advantages of advances in medicine -gene therapies, AI and machine learning software also vaccines for pandemics. The Therapeutic Product Bill legislation will work alongside, contribute to ‘Pae Ora Health Futures Act’

David Seymour said “Medsafe tended to approve drugs that were approved elsewhere in the world saying “Well, has Medsafe ever declines to approve a drug that the rest of the world is safe”. David Seymour was supporting replacing the Medicine Act 1981 with the Therapeutic Product legislation. He also stated  “the Court were right to uphold the law, however he backs the law change to replace the Medicine Act with the Therapeutic Product Legislation.

As to Judge Rebecca Ellis court outcome David Seymour said “the Court were right to uphold the law, however he backs the law change to replace the Medicine Act with the Therapeutic Product Legislation. National Party COVID19 Minister Chris Bishop said to reporters that National Party support the law change.  .

RNZ Reported 18/5/2021. Technical Anomaly spurs Urgent Law Change. Government urgently seek a change in law to ensure COVID19 Vaccine rollout is LEGAL following a High Court decision. Judge Rebecca Ellis ruled “it was reasonably argued that the government approval of Pfizer Vaccine rollout went beyond the Medicine Act 1981.

NOTE: The Medicine Act 1981 only gave the government the right to approve a limited number of patients, whereas the COVID19 Vaccine Rollout covered everyone in NZ over 16years of age. There are be legal enforcement includes, huge fines, court hearings etc., for those who do not comply to the Therapeutics Legislation (announced Beehive)

SO BASICALLY—THE THERAPEUTICS PRODUCT BILL IS TO SEVERELY RESTRICT  NEW ZEALANDERS ABILITY TO PURCHASE NATURAL HEALTH REMEDIES. FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO COVER ITS ARSE FOR CRIMINALLY BREAKING THE MEDICINES ACT 1981 BY REPLACING THE MEDICINES ACT WITH THE THEREUPEUTIC PRODUCT BILL TO PROMOTE JABS FOR PANDEMICS, MORE HUMAN TRIAL GUINEAPIGS. THE ADVANCEMENT USE OF AI AND GENETIC CELL ADVANCEMENT TRIALS AND DRUGS.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25096169/

https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300310925/government-to-introduce-a-new-law-for-vaccine-after-legal-challenge

https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/COVID-19/status-of-applications-asp-ria-moh/amat-may22.pdf

 

...

NZ GOVERNMENT WAS PUT ON NOTICE ‘HOMICIDE’ AND IGNORES THE CRIMES ACT 158

Conflicts Of Interest In Clinical Trial: 

References Clinical Trial 30th December 2020. Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA Sars Cov-2 Vaccine.  Vaccines are needed to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and to protect persons who are at high risk for complications. The mRNA-1273 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA-based vaccine that encodes the prefusion stabilized full-length spike protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes Covid-19.

The Conflict Of Interest Statement Kicks In: However the researchers then stated serious adverse events were rare as to the conclusion of their study. However it is important to note that there was a conflict of interest statement the researched study was funded by the NHI to conduct clinical trials in collaboration with Janssen and Moderna. Receiving grant support from Pfizer, Merck, Pasteur, Eli Lilly. Consulting fees were funded by Horizon Pharma and GSK for fees on data monitoring,. Dr Bennet who was involved in the study owning stock and stock options in Moderna, Dr, Pajor another person involved in research owing stocked and being employed by Moderna, other doctors working in the research study too owned stock in Moderna and employed by Moderna.

Research finds COVID-19 Spike Protein binds to cells in the heart and couls help explain some effects of severe infection (28/08/2021). The Spike Protein found on the surface of COVID 19 virus cells causes damage to cells in the small blood vessels of the heart, according to early findings presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress.

Researchers from the University of Bristol have found that, in cells in a dish in the lab, the spike protein binds to cells called pericytes which line the small vessels of the heart. This binding triggers a cascade of changes which disrupt normal cell function, and can lead to the release of chemicals that cause inflammation. This happened even when the protein was no longer attached to the virus. There is some previous evidence to suggest that following Covid-19 illness, the spike protein can remain in the bloodstream after the virus has gone and travel far from the site of infection. This research could help explain and ultimately treat some of the effects of severe Covid-19 infection, where levels of the virus are particularly high.

Research has shown that vaccination is a safe and effective way of reducing your risk of severe Covid infection, so is the best thing you can do to reduce your risk of Covid-19 complications, including heart damage. Researchers took small vessel cells from the heart and exposed them to the spike protein. They found that the spike protein alone was enough to disrupt normal cell function, and lead to the release of chemicals that cause inflammation.

They then blocked the CD147 receptor and found that this prevented the spike protein from causing some of the changes to the cells. However, the inflammation continued. Now the researchers hope to find out if a drug blocking CD147 in humans can help to protect people from some of the complications arising from Covid-19. Professor James Leiper, Associate Medical Director at British Heart Foundation, which funded the research, said: “Covid-19 has presented an unprecedented challenge for the cardiovascular research community. There is still a lot that is unknown relating to how the virus can impact our health in the long term

PLEASE  CLICK ON THE LINK PROVIDED WITHIN THE IMAGE ABOVE TO VIEW MY RUMBLE VIDEO ‘ NZ GOVERNMENT WAS PUT ON NOTICE ‘HOMICIDE’ AND IGNORES THE CRIMES ACT 158′

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33378609/

https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2021/august/covid-19-spike-protein-binds-to-and-changes-cells-in-the-heart

 

 

...