While trust lawyers market us to foreign capital, Tourism New Zealand has spent the last 17 years proclaiming us to be “100% Pure New Zealand“.
Comment: This article points out some facts that fly in the face of the official line. It should be noted however, that all Western countries have been under Cabal control and subjected to a very similar set of circumstances. This is not just happening in NZ.
Although there was a time when New Zealand had a pristine and untouched environment, it is long past. Yet the assertions to the contrary are deliberately constructed, tailored and manicured by marketing and advertising gurus who, with wheels freshly greased by public funds, then impress them upon the global public.
“The national tourism agency can’t put a dollar figure on the total cost of 100% Pure over its [then] 13-year run, citing commercial sensitivity…”
Indeed the Tourism Authority, which publishes its Three Year Marketing Strategy, has redacted the entire budget allocation section. It is the only segment which has been blacked out.
Astonishingly, the leader of New Zealand likened the country’s tourism marketing to, of all things, a McDonalds meal and infers that the advertising should not be taken seriously. Stuff.co.nz reports:
Prime Minister John Key compared New Zealand’s global “100% Pure” tourism marketing campaign to a fast food ad.
“It’s like saying ‘McDonald’s, I’m lovin’ it’ – I’m not sure every moment that someone’s eating McDonald’s, they’re loving it… it’s the same thing with 100% Pure,” he said.
“It’s got to be taken with a bit of a pinch of salt.”
The Panama Papers is a prime example of the Prime Minister applying this ‘with a bit of a pinch of salt’ attitude to the international image and reputation of New Zealand . Now the world is beginning to rub its eyes and awaken from the dream that has become a nightmare: ‘100% Pure New Zealand’ is as pure as a Big Mac Combo.
New Zealand Is A Big Mac
According to McDonalds.com a Big Mac contains:
“A double layer of sear-sizzled 100% pure beef mingled with special sauce on a sesame seed bun and topped with melty American cheese, crisp lettuce, minced onions and tangy pickles.”
According to Fooducate.com, a Big Mac contains over 80 ingredients, the vast majority of which are human-manufactured chemical compounds, including:
So this is what our Prime Minister’s political agenda and spin has reduced us to. A Big Mac combo. Looks good and safe in the posters, but it can kill you.
Unfortunately there is a whole lot more under the surface than just dodgy hamburger ingredients. The damage that has been wreaked upon the land, particularly after the last 8 years is vast, profound and potentially irreversible.
It is overdue for us to examine how precisely the Land of the Long White Cloud was so thoroughly desecrated – when, why and who by.
The Big Picture
The 1% run a transnational operation and they collect countries like baseball cards. Once consumed those countries exist in name and our memories only. They are added like stocks to a portfolio, run by the real bond traders – a conglomerate of intelligence agencies that, where New Zealand is concerned, operate under the auspices of the Five Eyes (FVEY).
Tiered, like a twisted wedding cake in reverse, FVEY holds the vast majority of all the world’s electronic data. A two-way waterfall, it vacuums up everything it can off all those below it, with or without their co-operation, then trickles a portion of it back down over the tiers, in quantities that reflect their diplomatic priority or favoured status.
The harsh truth is that for the countries who have been sucked into this arrangement, there are effectively no governments. The entire charade of politics is precisely that – a pantomime. You could turn the sound off and it would make no tangible difference to the political course of the country which, except in extremely rare circumstances, is not charted by the citizens.
Because democracy is the greatest undelivered promise of the 20th century. Which is why the mask of Western civilisation is set askew by any exercise of democratic rights to dissent – by any mass movement of the people – be it Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, or any other.
Our heads of government are civil servants only in the sense that they maintain a public veneer of civility and they are indeed servants – to people who we seldom know the names of and have never voted for.
“Our relationship with the United States is in the best shape it’s been in for a very, very long time.”
This is unsurprising given that a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York has been in charge of our country for the last 8 years.
According to Wikipedia, the FRBNY is ‘the most important of the banks‘.
So first we get a Prime Minister with a U.S. Federal Reserve seal of approval, then next thing we know, American National Security Agency facilities are revealed on New Zealand soil.
Despite the obvious lack of any foreign bases operating on American soil. Because funnily enough, the Americans do not allow foreign countries to operate bases on their soil.
As I once discovered by reading Bob Woodward’s books, you can often learn more from those who disagree with you than from those who agree. It’s amazing what slips through the cracks. While full of imperial apologism, this link is an absolutely fascinating anatomy of the justifications for US military hegemony that are used to indoctrinate much of the First World.
I highly recommend that you take the time to read the full discussion. There are countless edifying morsels. Also many contradictions.
The various reasonings for American global domination include:
It’s just to save global trade from pirates and criminals
It’s because other countries can’t defend themselves
It’s so other nations don’t have to spend so much on their own military
It’s because “America cooks the dinner and Europe does the dishes“
While more than 90% of the conversation is pro-Empire, eventually the excuses lessen and there are some pretty major insights.
Which indicates that the exercise of US power is less about stopping pirates or protecting trade routes, but actually involves outright malicious invasion and subterfuge to the detriment of its perceived enemies.
“The US military is that house guest of dubious benefit, questionable timing, faulty manners, but impeccable credit. “
What has never been sufficiently explained either in rhetoric or in law is how a Commonwealth Country like New Zealand, supposedly beholden to the British Crown, has American military facilities and direct political influence, seemingly more so than British.
Yet Britain ostensibly didn’t bat an eyelid at the Edward Snowden revelations about New Zealand. Which suggests that, as with arguably more than 100 other countries, the U.K. has also been thoroughly compromised by the United States.
That from a military perspective, they function as one. That their national interests are aligned.
But this is not how we were raised. We were raised to believe we are a sovereign nation that, when necessary, stands up to the superpowers and exerts an independent foreign policy, even if that comes at a diplomatic or political cost.
Yet how could we ever again engineer and assert a differentiating foreign policy now? With the infrastructure of global oppression present on our soil, hoovering up the private communications of all our citizens, in complete irreverence for our Bill of Rights?
We have to go back 30 years to get a glimpse of a Prime Minister prepared to take personal risks on principle.
One who not only stood against the Americans, but even against the Commonwealth itself, when Prime Minister David Lange went to England to publicly defend our anti-nuclear stance. From the documentary, “Revolution“:
David Lange: “Margaret Thatcher sent a note through her High Commissioner, which he delivered to me, asking me not to do it and that sealed it as far as I was concerned. I told him what I thought of him, and of his new hair dye and various other things like that!
And I decided definitely to go, and we settled the terms of the debate. It was one of those interesting occasions when Foreign Affairs were put to the test. I went to the UK without any Foreign Affairs official. It was the only time a Prime Minister has ever travelled out of New Zealand, without a Foreign Affairs official."
Interviewer: “Was that because they disapproved…’
David Lange: “Oh, they disapproved completely. ”
Interviewer: “Did they try to talk you out of it?”
David Lange: “They did… It was unbelievably fraught with danger and yet had such potential for advantage, and I was attracted to it.”
There was of course, despite the risk, a happy ending. Lange’s performance was historic and compelling; he received a standing ovation from both sides of the debate at the Oxford Union – an occurrence the President of the Union said he had never witnessed in 25 years.
In that very debate, Lange spoke to the United States’ reaction to New Zealand’s exertion of its own sovereignty.
Lange: “We are in fact, to be made an example of! We are to be ostracised! We are to be convicted of some form of heresy and put on probation. We are to be kept there until we are compelled to resume our seat in the dress circle of the nuclear theatre.”
The debate was a huge win, for which Lange was internationally lauded.
Yet it was soon followed by an act of terrorism on New Zealand territory, when French agents bombed the Greenpeace flagship, the Rainbow Warrior, killing a New Zealander and sinking the vessel.
David Lange: “It was a defining moment for me because I knew that was the end of any New Zealand commitment to the so-called Western alliance. It was not when it was sunk that I knew, it was when we knew who’d sunk it that I knew. Then the overwhelming silence from Great Britain.
Margaret Thatcher was prepared to condemn Gaddafi for everything but the French could go and kill people in our harbour. [Australian Prime Minister] Hawke never said anything. Ronald Reagan pretended total indifference.
We never had a peep out of those people that we were allegedly in a Western alliance with, those people who fought for democracy.”
So the UK was silent when an ally committed an act of “state-sponsored terrorism” on its own Commonwealth territory. What a remarkable object lesson.
Rainbow Warrior Sinking 25 Years On - Nine News
New Zealand, however, was not cowed. It upped the ante and passed its nuclear-free legislation into law and was promptly kicked out of the ANZUS defense agreement.
Yet we stood tall and defiant.
David Lange: “The great irony of the last fifteen years of foreign policy, has been that our foreign policy stance had the seeds of its change.. in my government… it was nurtured and watered by the American reprisals, but it was set in a hanging basket by the French. It was all their own work.
Thus the bullying of New Zealand had the opposite of its intended effect."
This short video discusses the impact of New Zealand’s past political independence.
New Zealand Anti-Nuclear History: Prominent Kiwis Share Their Views
As Marianne Elliott from ActionStation.co.nz says:
“…it reminds me that it is possible to completely shift a political narrative and to arrive at a political outcome which seemed radical and impossible at the beginning.”
And Peter Douglas:
“…New Zealanders are very proud of the fact that they live in a country that was small but brave enough to make those sort of pronouncements and to suffer the consequences of them at that time.”
The American political and military subjugation of New Zealand that has occurred in this new millennium would once have been considered a literal invasion. Their bases being present on our land, an act of war.
Yet John Key’s government, awash in and drunk on the conspiratorial secrecy of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, has been complicit in playing down the extent of the American infiltration and projected a nonchalance in the face of the recent revelations.
It has openly accelerated our very obvious transition into American vassalage and despite there being no legal precedent outside of various secretive military co-operation agreements, New Zealanders are supposed to ignore or accept the corrosion and ultimately the loss of their natural rights and their national identity.
Patriotism: A Foreign Concept
We are suffering attack after attack on hard-won liberties and allowing the agenda of the global American Empire to dominate all domestic considerations.
An Empire that literally consumes everything it touches. Sucks out all worth and value, asset-strips and impoverishes. Privatises gains and socialises losses.
Our country is but a hollow shell, relegated to nostalgia.
A country where patriotism has become a foreign concept – a luxury only afforded within the bounds of American Exceptionalism – and even then, the only true loyalty is to capital.
A country where the desecration of our land and the blood and pain of our people is the price of our enslavement to the global 0.00001%. Where humanitarianism is depicted as a dirty word and empathy ill-advised; a privilege; one with strings attached, that attracts blowback.
In a world where narcissists brand the courageous narcissistic; and call the learned naive. Empaths, they call us. They spit it. As if to care about others is the most dirty, heathen concept imaginable to them.
Bullshit because the impotent indexes themselves are inherently flawed. They prop up a myth that ‘somewhere is OK!’ and provide false hope to the global populace.
But I call bullshit mostly because New Zealand is in fact, unsafe, not at all peaceful, and corrupt. It is however, accomplished at hiding it, and trades on a reputation that is extremely outdated, if not outright misleading.
Street fights are a norm in the central business districts at night, but also happen in broad daylight and in schools.
A legacy of John Key’s predecessor, Helen Clark, is the absolute mountains of money spent on international P.R. during the making of Peter Jackson’s ‘Lord Of The Rings’ movies, to promote an image of New Zealand befitting the scenery of the movies: wholesome. Green. Natural. Untouched.
Child obesity going through the roof. Adult obesity going through the roof. Citizens who dare protest the above conditions, are being interfered with, stalked, harassed, maligned, abused, assaulted and exiled by the domestic security agencies.
All this under the auspices of the Five Eyes.
The Five Eyes Is Actually The Four Eyes… And The Three Eyes…
Herein lies the great inequality of the intelligence sharing agreements with the United States that New Zealand citizens have been subjected to.
For while we are told that through the FVEY, we are ‘partners’, which supposedly is of significant enough value to justify spying on our entire domestic citizenry and handing all that intelligence over to FOREIGN NATIONS…. it turns out that actually, FVEY is not the top-tier of that twisted, reverse wedding cake.
There is in fact:
Kiwis refusal to allow nuclear-powered US warships in our waters led to the creation of the Four Eyes, a new military intelligence-sharing tier and explicitly excluding us.
Then when the Canadians had a crisis of conscience, quite rightly as history shows us, and refused to join in the destruction of Iraq in 2002, they too effectively got kicked from the club, and the Three Eyes was born.
Making the US, the UK and Australia the top tier of the wedding cake. Right?
Well, actually, no.
The Two Eyes
According to a commenter on electrospaces.net:
Cost Vs. Benefit
Given all the above, we have to ask ourselves. What is New Zealand really gaining by our alignment with Empire?
While inevitably, study after study will come out claiming that we are a Utopian paradise. Nothing could be further from the truth. If the country in its current form really is the best this world has to offer – we have utterly failed ourselves, this planet, its peoples and our future generations.
For the desecration of New Zealand continues to be tolerated domestically and concealed internationally.
The picture is really bleak and will remain so, until we accept responsibility and rise to change it.
I pray to one day be able to report on how we reversed the trend. But that will take courage, unity and action. Foresight, commitment and integrity.
1080 Poison Dropped On Fishing Guide And Clients On West Coast River January 15 2017 | From: Uncensored A 1080 drop over a West Coast river broke no rules, operators say.
Murchison-based fishing guide Scott Murray said hundreds of 1080 pellets were dropped from helicopters as he and other fishing parties were on the Mokihinui River, north of Westport, on December 2.
Murray said many pellets landed in the river and some landed on him and his American clients who were appalled by the operation.
“[My client] talked about whether it was even worth coming back to NZ. He said he thought this was clean, green NZ. The rest of the world is shocked at the fact we use this bloody crap basically. It makes me quite angry just thinking about it.”
The aerial drop was carried out by contractors completing pest control work for the Department of Conservation’s Battle for our Birds programme and primary industries organisation Ospri’s TBfree programme.
In a statement Ospri said details of the incident were unclear as no report had been received. It said all 1080 application operations were clearly regulated under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act and consents were issued by appropriate authorities including the Ministry of Health.
No breaches of consents in the Mokihinui operation had been recorded.
Ospri said the timing and location of aerial operations was notified to all land users and operators in the region, and was publicly available. Factsheets containing maps detailing the location and boundaries of the operation, which covered 46,000 hecatres, were published, and there were also public notices.
Ospri said tourism concessionaires were provided with operational maps and details on the planned timeframes, including contact details for the contractor.
For the Mokihinui operation, concessionaires were notified on three separate occasions. The operation was completed on December 2.
Murray, co-owner of Murchison’s River Haven Lodge, said he had been notified that a 1080 drop would take place in the Mokihinui catchment, but were also told that the operators would be careful to avoid the waterways.
He said the drops continued throughout the day, and with a strong north-westerly wind blowing, there was no way to control the spread of pellets.
During a break for lunch, he fished out about nine pellets from the river, and saw others in deeper water, but gave up because there were too many.
“All I want to do is get the word out there that people think this 1080 thing is carefully placed and dropping it from the air into the bush. They’re not. New Zealand really needs to wake up, it’s an absolute abomination, it really is.”
“Word’s getting around that the NZ green image is getting tarnished. It’s not good for tourism.”
In 2014, two fishing guides caught up in a 1080 drop on the Mokihinui complained that they had not been notified of the operation despite holding permits requiring them be told.
Study: Manuka Honey Kills More Bacteria Than All Available Antibiotics January 2 2017 | From: NaturalNews
Not all honey is created equal. While the benefits of raw, unprocessed honey have been well-documented over the centuries, Australian researchers have found one type of honey, called Manuka honey, to be better than all known antibiotics.
Manuka honey is produced by bees that forage on the nectar of Leptospermum Scoparium, or New Zealand’s Manuka bush, as well as tea trees, native to Australia and New Zealand only.
This remarkable type of honey not only effectively kills bacteria, but none of the bugs killed by it have been able to build up immunity. In a world where many of the last resort antibiotics are failing against antibiotic-resistant superbugs, Manuka honey may hold the key to fighting resistance issues, saving thousands of lives worldwide.
Manuka Honey Fights Superbugs
Dr. Dee Carter from the University of Sydney’s School of Molecular and Microbial Biosciences noted that antibiotics not only have short shelf lives, but the bacteria they attack quickly become resistant as well, making them useless over time.
The report, published in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, claimed that Manuka honey killed almost every bacteria and pathogen it was tested on. Unlike all antibiotics available on today’s market, none of the bugs tested were able to survive the honey treatment.
According to Dr. Carter, there are particular compounds, like methylglyoxal, in the Manuka honey that cause multi-system failure in the bacteria, killing them before they are able to adapt and build up immunity.
What Manuka Honey Can Do For You
Manuka’s biological properties range from antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antiviral, antibiotic and wound healing, to immune-stimulatory. However, what separates Manuka honey from the rest is that its antibacterial powers challenge even the toughest superbugs, such as the life-threatening methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
Manuka honey is marketed for cancer treatment and prevention, high cholesterol, chronic inflammation, diabetes, the treatment of gastrointestinal problems, and eye, ear and sinus infections. However, it might be most useful in treating skin wounds and leg ulcers.
According to one study, published in the scientific journal Peer J, chronic wounds are becoming a major global health problem, due to antibiotic resistance issues. They are costly and difficult to treat, and bacterial biofilms are important contributors to the delay in healing. There is an urgent need for new, effective agents in topical wound care, and honey has shown some great potential in this regard.
For their study, researchers reviewed Manuka honey in particular as an alternative treatment for wounds because of its broad-spectrum antibacterial activity and the inability of bacteria to develop resistance to it. Their study indicated that honey might prevent bacterial biofilms and eliminate established biofilms.
Furthermore, they reported that Manuka honey could successfully be used to kill all MSSA and MRSA biofilms in a chronic wound, supporting the use of this type of honey as an effective topical treatment for chronic wound infections.
In recent years, word of the biological benefits of Manuka honey has spread to every corner of the world, turning it into one of the most popular superfoods out there. Its fame and the over-demand, however, have caused shortages, resulting in fake, usually cheaper, products to enter the market. So, if you are going to spend your money on honey to reap its benefits, make sure you are buying the real thing.
It is headed by the United States, of course, but includes the United Kingdom in a grandfathered “special relationship” that increasingly resembles the role a ventriloquist’s dummy plays in a cringe-worthy comedy routine.
The United Kingdom’s former colony, New Zealand, thus, cannot honestly be described as a sovereign, independent, nation-state, however much its citizens would like to believe this to be the case.
Rather, this small nation of fewer than five million souls continues very much as in the past, an extremely junior – and therefore even more extremely disposable – sidekick who is good for a little public relations coup now and again but otherwise of small importance.
Before Kiwi readers throw up their hands in disgust, let it be argued that the good citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand should be glad of this status. It gives them the opportunity to strike out for actual statehood. The imperial core may chafe and lash out, but the stakes are so low it will likely allow full independence in the end.
The immediate obstacle remains New Zealand itself. Its elites, especially in the National Party (an ironic misnomer if ever there was one), identify completely with the Atlanticist Empire.
This is proven by the career path of its globalist Prime Minister, who cut his teeth as a servile hatchet-man for The City of London and whose most expensive residential property cuts a fine sky-line in Hawaii, USA.
Fortunately for New Zealand national independence, Prime Minister John Key has decided to resign his position. This surprise move ultimately stems from the Atlanticist imperial defeats in Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and the reversals to globalism in Britain, the EU, and the United States itself.
Sending Kiwi troops to Iraq over a year ago could even land Key in the dock at The Hague someday. He has certainly breeched a fistful of United Nations binding resolutions, and may have directly contravened New Zealand statute law by sending New Zealand forces to support terrorism in the Middle East.
In 2015, Key dispatched New Zealand armed forces to Camp Taji, Iraq, a former US base and prison north of Baghdad. There soldiers train the Iraqi 16th Mountain Division, whose area of operation lies northward from Taji to the Turkish border.
It just so happens that this Kurdish region is known for the theft of oil belonging to the nation of Iraq and the sale of this illegal commodity to Turkey, whose ruling clique uses it to launder ISIS-pirated oil from both Iraq and Syria.
Thus, the now running-for-cover, Key involved Kiwi armed forces in the furtherance of ISIS funding, arms and explosives purchases, and terror attacks (including those in Paris, Egypt, Mali, and elsewhere).
Proof that the 16th Mountain Division is involved in this oil-running lies in the assassination of its commander outside his home in July, 2015 (i.e., it is embroiled in a turf war over protection rights among Iraqi army units).
Proof that the former Prime Minister knows this lies in the very recent Official Information Act lawsuit by Minister Ron Mark which reveals that New Zealand’s armed forces are conducting absolutely no “after action” analyses on how the 16th Mountain Division has used its Kiwi training.
Turkey’s involvement in supporting ISIS has been an utterly open secret for many, many years.
Surely the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service briefed the Prime Minister. The mainstream press has been briefing the public on the issue since before 2013. As former US intelligence officer G. Murphy Donovan writes, Turkish support for ISIS is “the worst kept secret in Mesopotamia”.
Turkey receives more US foreign aid than any other nation, apart from Israel and Egypt. This number-one son seeks and receives permission for absolutely everything it does, including its laundering/brokering of ISIS oil and oil sales, and the shootdown of the Russian Federation’s Su-24 bomber on November 24, 2015.
Its security services also provide ISIS with weapons and domestically manufactured explosive compounds. Most recently, its military has invaded both Syria and Iraq in exactly those areas traversed by illegal oil and arms convoys.
And yet, the United States stoutly refuses to censure its tool, for reasons that should by now be pretty obvious – ISIS is an “Operation Gladio”-style manufactured enemy upon whom interventions may be blamed, because of whose existence popular sovereignty, political liberty, and political equality may be restricted, and by whom, lastly, false flag attacks may be conducted.
ISIS resembles the Contras of the 1980s or UNITA of the 1970s. The phenomena is, at its core, a mere intensification of the Al Qaeda model, which has served US imperialism so well since 1980. As former Reagan Administration official, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, states in a recent article:
“Washington is not opposed to terrorism. Washington has been purposely creating terrorism for many years.
Terrorism is a weapon that Washington intends to use to destabilize Russia and China by exporting it to the Muslim populations” of those countries.
The ultimate aim remains Atlanticist global hegemony and the looting of those two nations in order to repay twenty trillion dollars of government debt, sixty-four trillion dollars of overall debt, and six-hundred and fifty trillion dollars of derivative overhang.
This being the case, New Zealand involvement in Operation Inherent Resolve amounts to criminal participation in aggression, theft on a global scale, and wholesale – as opposed to retail – terrorism. The United Nations has passed many resolutions on these issues: for example, it declares all “direct or indirect” support for ISIS oil smuggling to be a breach of international law.
New Zealand statute law clearly prohibits all contravention of UN resolutions, whatever their nature, so its wilful entrance into the ongoing violence in the Middle East, organised by the United States, the EU and NATO, is a crime of aggression.
Former Prime Minister John Key, as then commander-in-chief, has ordered New Zealand armed forces to train and assist Iraqi military units who are culpably engaged in indirect support of ISIS. New Zealand troops, therefore, indirectly support ISIS.
This is expressly sanctioned by the United Nations and is a violation of international law. And it must be stressed that this was done with full knowledge. The Prime Minister cannot claim he did know that Turkey laundered ISIS oil with oil smuggled through the operational zone north of Camp Taji.
Everyone in Iraq knows this. The Russian Federation has filmed the immense, and impossible not to notice, scale of the theft. Footage shows at length oil heading for processing in Batman, Turkey, just across the border from Mosul.
With full knowledge but little concern, John Key has committed acts expressly prohibited by New Zealand statute law and is pretty clearly subject to prosecution. This is the most likely reason for the banker-turned-politician to have resigned.
Now that John Key has removed himself from the office he has hesitated not one second to sell to Atlanticist hegemony, perhaps the citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand can see to it that their country becomes an actual independent nation-state with full sovereignty, complete with its own foreign policy (based on positive and respectful interaction with all nations, rather than blind and cringing obedience to the global torture-master).
No honest human being could object.
John Key Era One Giant Facepalm
I'm not gonna lie. I'm glad to see the back end of him. Clothed, of course.
I could have chosen to dress up my column today with all sorts of nuanced, insightful, and charitable words about John Key's departure. It'd be akin to going to someone's funeral that you consistently bagged - both publicly and privately. Tacky.
My motto: Why waste time being anything other than honest?
There were three issues (from the multitudes) that got to me personally during his time in power. Like everyone, it's why we either like a politician or we don't. In 2008 I ticked National for my party vote. Like most of the rest of the country I was well and truly over Helen Clark and Labour, with the Foreshore and Seabed debacle being the final straw for me.
Key appeared fresh and new, and above all, keen. He wanted the job of Prime Minister, and his childlike zeal on election night was endearing. Within a year I was uncomfortable. Within two, it felt like I was sitting on a bed of nails.
I'm not sure of the exact moment I knew the Key train had uncoupled from its charisma caboose. All I know is the train thundered on without me onboard.
Logically, it was likely when I realised that Key had no understanding of, or respect for, the environment. He seemed to me to care only for running New Zealand like a huge corporation by squeezing every last dollar out of it - no matter the downstream consequences.
I say "downstream" because my focus back then was firmly on water quality. The Key-led Government has played a massive role in the funding of dairy and irrigation intensification since, leading in turn to the steady decline in the quality of our nation's waterways.
I'm not so naive to think he was solely responsible for such cynical fare. However, as the frontperson for the tragedy of losing our swimmable rivers, one must understand that some of us will never forgive such recklessness. A good money man? Key's bold and brassy belief that he managed the Global Financial Crisis well is, shall we say, deluded. He got lucky. Pure and simple.
I'll wager that within the next 12 months, and well before the 2017 election, our economy will match the global outlook perfectly. It'll be munted. He is less an economic guru and more a tinny bastard, frankly.
I say this in complete awe at Key's uncanny ability to ride the rollercoaster of pure providence. Despite the poor getting poorer, and the rich getting richer, he somehow managed to convince the wider electorate that he was a financial whizz - as opposed to the money trading gambler he ultimately is.
Inequality has never been worse in this country, and that has to be the test. Key's reign encouraged many to hate on the poor. Little did he and his cohorts comprehend, it also taught just as many to hate on the rich.
This will not be solved by a new face at the top, or by an obsequious media happy to create corny commentary for those of you who actually care that he is exiting stage right.
My biggest thumbs down is reserved for the free licence he issued to a particular segment of male culture. It's never a good thing when the public learn about the pubic. Key's predilection for appearing on trashy radio means we all possess the knowledge - like it or not - that he doesn't trim his "downstairs", has urinated in the shower, and had a vasectomy.
Call me passé but the title of Prime Minister should mean something. Jumping in a cage and picking up a bar of soap - in a nod to prison rape - is probably not a component of that.
Ponytail-gate sealed it. The man sent a message to the world - and I mean the world - that he was an unsophisticated fool at best, and a creep at worst.
Since then the planet's got Trump, so maybe Key won't be remembered for those weirdnesses. However, his legacy is that he contributed massively to the type of male culture in New Zealand that sees women as not much more than just pom-pom girls cheering from the sidelines. On a good day.
So, those are my top three gripes, and you'll have yours. Is there any redeeming feature about Key that I could mention? Yes, I think there is. Work ethic. He had a good one.
It's the end of an era that I'm glad to wave goodbye to. It was eight years of teeth gritting, face palming, guttural groaning, a fair bit of drinking, and throwing things at the TV. If you think he's aged, you should see me.
So long John, and thanks for all the (dead) fish.
New Zealand's Israel Resolution: Peacemakers Seldom Win Friends December 26 2016 | From: MSN
A UN Security Council resolution, calling for a ban on illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, has passed, with NZ taking a major role. Phil Smith outlines the background and the blowback.
New Zealand has dared to go where even Egypt's strongman, President el-Sisi, feared to tread.
President el-Sisi said he wanted to let Trump's incoming administration have first crack at the issue. It was obviously an excuse. Trump's nomination for Ambassador to Israel is a hardliner who wants more settlement construction and who has compared Jews who advocate for a 'two-state peace' to Capos (Jews who assisted in Nazi death-camps).
When el-Sisi retreated, New Zealand stepped up. Together with Venezuela, Malaysia and Senegal, New Zealand called for a vote on the resolution, and for the first time since the Carter administration, the US declined to veto a rebuke over illegal Israeli settlements.
The US noted that settlement construction had accelerated since the US vetoed a similar resolution in 2001, and that the Obama administration has been warning Israel for eight years that this 'trend-line' was both making peace more difficult and isolating Israel from the international community.
The Foundations of the Settlements
Settling population in militarily-occupied territory is contrary to the Geneva Convention, to international law and previous United Nations rulings.
Settlement building is usually strategic. Settlements create 'facts-on-the-ground', making it more difficult to give back captured territory (in this case, territory captured during the 1967 Six Day War). Hardliners believe the territory is theirs by God-given right, but its return, at least in part, would be necessary for a lasting peace based on a two-state solution.
The tracts that are currently Palestinian controlled areas are an unworkable, disconnected patchwork of territories.
Settlements also increase local conflict by expropriating land and resources to construct and sustain the townships. Moderate Israeli administrations have tended to restrict or demolish settlements, while hawkish governments look the other way, or - like the current one - are gung-ho on expansions which push Palestinians into an ever-diminishing corner.
Former US President Jimmy Carter has repeatedly stressed that peace in Israel/Palestine is only likely when the Palestinians also have a viable state, where middle class citizens have a reason to hope and work for a future. Some form of two state solution has been American policy for decades.
Seeing this may be about to change, and after significant antagonism from Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, President Obama apparently believes it is time to allow a line in the sand.
A few years ago, after the successful Bougainville peace talks, New Zealand imagined a role for itself as an international peace broker. It was a nice idea that turned out to be harder than it sounded, but it marked an increased New Zealand confidence to act independently, for good purpose.
This week's action is a further brave step from New Zealand. It has no obvious ulterior motives, but instead seems an attempt to simply do the right thing and bugger the consequences.
A nation like New Zealand cannot throw its feather-weight around internationally in order to win friends. Frequently, the opposite is achieved. A friend won with one action is alienated with the next, and nations often remember sleights more strongly than support.
New Zealand was already in Israel's bad books. In 2014 Israel refused to accept New Zealand's ambassador because he was also to act as an envoy to the Palestinian Authority. In October 2015, Israeli officials reprimanded our Ambassador after New Zealand dared propose a Security Council resolution that dared encourage a return to peace negotiations. Palestinian supporters were equally upset, seeing the wording as supporting Israel.
But this time is worse. Israeli-New Zealand relations haven't been so poor since 2004, when New Zealand imprisoned 'Mossad spies' for attempting to fraudulently obtain a New Zealand passport. After a year, Israel apologised and relationships were slowly mended.
This new rift may take longer. Much of the anger is being directed at the US, where President Obama could have chosen to veto the resolution.
But Netanyahu's conservative government will not take kindly to us fronting a resolution that pointedly calls East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory".
New Zealand's government will have known blowback was likely. It has decided that, if you ask to be on the Security Council you need to appear from behind the parapet and take a stand.
In an era where the world's mood seems to be trending towards resentment, aggression and extremism, a country wins few friends by calling for tolerance or asking for restraint. But that doesn't mean that working for peace and goodwill isn't the right thing to do.
The New Zealand Road Toll Statistics They Tried To Bury December 20 2016 | From: BreakingViews
I checked the latest road toll statistics a few days ago. Interesting. For the year from January 1, road deaths were up from 291 last year to 300.
For the 12 months to Tuesday, they were up from 315 to 328. For driver fatalities, the figures were up from 138 to 151 (for the calendar year to date) and from 146 to 170 (over 12 months). These are not big increases, but they appear to be more than mere statistical blips.
Even more interesting are some of the figures from a Ministry of Transport booklet called Alcohol and Drugs 2016.
Most of the tables in the booklet pull together figures covering the years 2013-2015 without breaking them down year by year. They reveal that alcohol and/or drugs contributed to 12 per cent of fatal smashes.
This might come as a surprise. Given the official obsession with alcohol as a risk factor (all those checkpoints, all those TV ads, all those earnest lectures from senior police officers every holiday period), I imagine most people would have thought the ratio of deaths attributable to booze must be much higher.
But what especially interested me was whether road deaths involving alcohol had decreased since the legal blood-alcohol limit was lowered on December 1 2014.
This is information of some importance, since the objective of the law change was to reduce the road toll. But you have to turn to page 8 before you find any figures relating to the year after the new limits kicked in.
These reveal that the number of alcohol-affected drivers involved in fatal crashes actually increased from 70 to 90 in the 12 months after the new law came into effect.
This was not what we were led to expect. It is the opposite of what the new limit was intended to achieve, which was to deter people who had been drinking from getting behind the wheel.
Opponents of the law change argued that it would punish safe, law-abiding motorists while hard-core drink-drivers would continue to flout the law with impunity. That appears to be precisely what has happened.
Drink-drive fatalities last year were the highest since 2010. In the 20-24 age group, the number of alcohol-affected male drivers involved in fatal crashes increased from 12 to 22 – that’s nearly double. For men overall, the number was up from 56 to 82.
If the numbers had gone the other way, I’m sure the ministry would have been shouting from the rooftops. As it is, it’s hard to escape the impression the figures were buried.
We shouldn’t be in the least bit surprised that the law change hasn’t delivered the promised improvement. Control-freak policy-makers and poll-driven politicians refuse to accept that human behaviour can’t conveniently be changed by legislative decree.
That’s also apparent from the anti-smacking law (on average, one child continues to be killed by domestic violence every five weeks while responsible parents risk prosecution for disciplining out-of-control kids with a harmless slap) and from laughably ineffective dog-control rules, which have entered a whole new realm of fantasy with the expectation that owners of dangerous dogs will obtain special high-risk dog owner licences, submit their dogs to good citizenship tests, have their properties inspected and demonstrate they understand their legal obligations.
Yeah, right. Can’t you just see gang members meekly queuing at council offices to fill in the forms and register their blood-flecked pitbulls for obedience training?
Now here’s the key point. Any benefits arising from lower blood-alcohol limits – and so far there don’t seem to be any – should be weighed against the social downsides.
As we brace for the annual bout of Christmas finger-wagging, we should ask whether New Zealanders’ enjoyment of life has been unnecessarily diminished just to satisfy the bureaucratic urge to regulate and control.
There’s an economic cost too. Country pubs - the heart of some rural communities - are going out of business and wineries can expect fewer summer visitors because people fret that a harmless tasting will push them over the limit.
Any supposed benefit must also be weighed against the undoubted change in the public attitude toward the police, who are increasingly resented as bullies and harassers - unwilling or unable to attend burglaries, but never short of the numbers to run alcohol checkpoints at all hours of the day, or to hamper law-abiding bar owners in their attempts to run a business, or to make the staging of public events such as wine festivals so onerous that some participating companies decide that it's just not worth the effort any more.
Comment: Anyone who still thinks the Police do not have quotas to meet for traffic and other 'offences' is deluded. It has been established as fact and I and many others have heard it admitted.
QUOTAS = REVENUE
New Zealand's 'Unusual' Earthquake Raises Complex Questions + USGS: “Early 20th Century Earthquakes May Have Been Man Made December 15 2016 | From: Sott / Uncensored
A devastating earthquake has hit New Zealand, but this unusual event, with long duration slip on several faults, will also provide an astounding data set for understanding a complex tectonic region.
Map showing location of the M7.8 epicenter (star), M > 3.0 aftershocks up until 04:20 NZ time on the 18th November (n = 1,782)
New Zealand was rocked by a magnitude 7.8 earthquake on Monday 14th November. This event had unusual aspects of slip distribution, duration, and kinematics, from which we will learn a lot about earthquake mechanics as data are collected.
The event that started ~100 km north of Christchurch with displacements less than 1 m, propagated northward, creating the largest surface displacements (so far observed) near the northern termination of the earthquake rupture, at the northeast tip of the South Island.
At this early stage, based on preliminary data released by the New Zealand monitoring partnership GeoNet, I find three properties of the earthquake particularly intriguing:
1. Slip Distribution
The large surface displacement at the northern end of the rupture explains why aftershocks are concentrated in the north, and why areas north of the rupture, such as Wellington, experienced more damage than Christchurch, which is closer to but south of the epicenter.
The earthquake adds insight to the discussion of whether an earthquake knows its size when it nucleates - this earthquake started small, and only reached large slip late in its propagation. The USGS estimates the greatest displacements were over 100 km from the epicenter.
Left: Before | Right: After
Therefore, as suggested in recent findings by Meier et al., there seems to have been no way to expect the large size of this earthquake from its small early slip. The question remains, why did the earthquake start small and get larger?
2. Type and Number of Faults
The area of the epicenter lies in the Marlborough fault system, known for strike-slip tectonics where crustal blocks slide horizontally. However, coastal uplift associated with this earthquake demands at least a couple of meters of vertical motion, related to collision or subduction, as well as at least 10 m of strike-slip.
Mapping of surface displacements has furthermore illuminated slip on as many as six faults.
The number of faults involved may explain the relatively long duration and complexity of slip. A question is whether the faults represent a mixture of strike-slip and thrust faults, or a population of variably oblique-slip faults; another question is whether the fault surface traces are linked to form a large fault at depth.
3. Slip Duration
The earthquake slip lasted longer than the one-minute slip duration typically considered to calculate local magnitudes. Initial reports therefore underestimated the magnitude.
The long duration is intriguing; slow propagation is typical of earthquakes originating from the relatively shallow subduction thrust interface, not faults on the continents.
Although this earthquake was not as slow as some 'tsunami earthquakes', this may imply rupture in a weak, low rigidity fault zone (e.g., Bilek and Lay). The earthquake occurred in continental crust, but near a transition from continental transpression on the South Island to westward subduction underneath the east coast North Island.
It has been suggested that subducted continental crust below the current strike-slip system is dehydrating, providing fluids that weaken the overlying continental faults.
As more data emerge, we will therefore learn a lot about how deformation is transferred from a subduction zone to a strike slip system, - also raising questions of what happens in the Cook Strait, between the two main New Zealand islands (see also Pondard and Barnes).
Coastal Uplift After Kaikoura Quake
USGS: “Early 20th Century Earthquakes May Have Been Man Made
A new study from the USGS suggests that some early 20th century earthquakes in southern California might have been induced (man-made) by past practices that were used by the oil and gas industry.
A new study from the USGS suggests that some early 20th century earthquakes in southern California might have been induced (man-made) by past practices that were used by the oil and gas industry.
In the new study, scientists evaluated the likely cause of several significant earthquakes within the Los Angeles Basin between 1900 and 1933, together with consideration of available oil industry records over this period.
They found that several damaging earthquakes, including a 1929 event near Whittier, California (estimated magnitude 5) and the 1933 Long Beach earthquake (magnitude 6.4) might have been induced by oil and/or gas production during the early decades of the Los Angeles-area oil boom.
During the early decades of the oil boom, withdrawal of oil was not balanced by injection of fluids, in some cases leading to dramatic ground subsidence, and potentially perturbing the sub-surface stress field on nearby faults.
In the middle of the 20th century, so-called water-flooding techniques were increasingly employed to compensate for oil withdrawal and to increase production of fields that were becoming depleted. Because industry practices have changed, the results of this study do not necessarily imply a high likelihood of induced earthquakes at the present time.
“It has been widely assumed that induced earthquakes do not contribute significantly to hazard in regions west of the Rocky Mountains, but our research suggests that damaging induced earthquakes might have occurred in the past, ” said Susan Hough, USGS seismologist.
“Our study further suggests that the rate of natural tectonic earthquakes in the Los Angeles basin for this time period might have been lower than previously estimated.”
Earthquake rates have increased sharply in recent years in some parts of the United States, including in Oklahoma, where earthquakes were formerly infrequent. Extensive past research has supported the conclusion that much of this increase is due to disposal of wastewater into deep geologic formations.
The study, “Potentially induced earthquakes during the early 20th century in the Los Angeles Basin,” was published Nov. 1 in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.
Pike River: The Great Disgrace December 13 2016 | From: Uncensored / Archvival
The recent open letter from the directors of solid energy regarding pike river - the greatest disgrace & corrupt act of treason in new zealand’s history.
Solid Energy's penned an open letter defending its plan to permanently seal the Pike River mine reiterating it won't change its stance. The company's directors maintain it's not safe to re-enter the mine, and say anyone who disagrees is being ‘reckless’.
But families of the 29 men who died in the in the 2010 explosions are protesting near the site and say Solid Energy is ignoring ‘expert research’ that shows the mine can safely be re-entered. The mine is expected to be permanently sealed by February.
According to Dr Jacob Cohen’s mind-blowing book Murder at Pike River Mine (on the Internet, (the NZ intelligence agencies have been trying to censor censoring it) or it is available through Mr Lawrie Drew at Greymouth (a father of one of the victims):
The 29 miners at Pike River Mine explosion in 2010 were all deliberately murdered, to facilitate Pike River Coal Ltd to collect a $100 million insurance pay-out, turn the public’s attitude away from underground coal mining and reduce opposition to open-cut mining.
allow BATHURST RESOURCES LIMITED (at the time registered on the Australian Stock Exchange but now dually listed) which foreign bankers also secretly control with Pike River Coal, to overtly come into New Zealand and buy up all of the country’s coal resources and then open cut mine it – which has by now almost been fully completed!
2. Interestingly, Dr Cohen mentions in great detail with references from Bathurst’s own website, that just before the explosion in the mine, BANK OF AMERICA was aggressively buying up shares in Bathurst Resources Limited. Guess who was working for Bank of America before he became NZ Prime Minister.
3. COLLUSION BETWEEN THE DIRECTORS OF PIKE RIVER COAL LTD, THE DIRECTORS OF THE BIG SHAREHOLDERS OF PIKE RIVER COAL, THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT, THE NZ PM, THE NZ MINISTER OF POLICE, THE NZ JUDICIARY, THE NZ INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, THE ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE PIKE RIVER COAL MINE DISASTER, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA AND THE FOREIGN BANKING CRIMINALS THAT CONTROL THE LOT AT THE TOP – has ensured the New Zealand public have been totally brainwashed about the true facts of this monstrous crime and cover-up.
4. And just to make sure the mine victims’ families, or the general public can’t ever know the full truth about the crime, or even get into the mine to inspect the crime scene, and can’t sue the Government, the companies or Pike’s criminal directors, the spurious rat and High Court Judge heading the corrupt, Royal Commission of Inquiry.
Oh, the quandry for the corporate 'it', such that is has intentionally failed
According to Lawrie Drew, HAS EMBARGOED ALL THE CRITICAL EVIDENCE FOR 75 YEARS! And yes, this has all been totally censored by the incredibly vile, corrupt mainstream media!
5. This means, in simple man’s terms, that the corrupt lawyers and judiciary involved all now know, that when for example the Government Department supposedly that wanted to bring CEO of Pike River Coal Peter Whittall to trial under Health and Safety laws (actually it was just a pretence because they all knew that it would fail) all that Peter Whittall’s legal counsel had to say to the judge in the pre-trial hearing was:
“Your Honour, as all the critical evidence has been been embargoed by the Royal Commission for 75 years, we cannot get disclosure and my client cannot defend himself against the allegations because all the evidence is being kept secret and cannot be accessed.”
Judge: “Case dismissed.”
6. This therefore means that the NZ Government, police, the judiciary etc. at least at the top - ALL KNOW they are a pack of lying criminals, including the drafters of this latest “Open Letter FROM THE DIRECTORS OF SOLID ENERGY.”
7. All I can say is, because of the widespread indifference of the the general public in putting up with this outrageous evil, we all deserve the judgment coming on us all. Because inevitably it will come. If they will get away with this, what will be next?
9. Finally these devils want to seal up the entrance to the mine with a 30 metre thick plug of concrete. 30 metres! Can you believe it? They sure do want to make sure nobody ever investigates the crime scene don’t they?
In the United States of America a similar coal mine explosion occurred at the Upper Big Branch Mine not long before Pike River explosion when exactly 29 miners were also killed. Since then, the miners’ families have received millions of dollars in pay-outs and the CEO of the company concerned Don Blankenchip is now in jail.
Yet here in New Zealand, not even one director has even been charged or brought to trial. We hear about the criminal activities of government agencies in the United States being bad, but our government and corporate criminal cabal is a hundred times worse! 29 miners cruelly killed, and yet nobody has even received a slap on the hand. What an utter disgrace.
Frankly, if we just sit back and put if with this rot and say nothing about the blatant lies being perpetuated by the mainstream corporate media propaganda goons, nearly five million of us, seriously, I fear for the freedoms and liberties of every single person in this country.
Isn’t it about time things changed dramatically?
Pike River Murder Of 29 Miners & Blocking Of Re-Entry September 25 2014 | From: Dr Jacob Cohen & 'Jack' (see download link below)
A censored book claims corruption at the very highest level of Government, Poice, International Bankers, Corporations and Media Propoganda - naming those who should be charged.
"I’ve been watching the reports on TV and mainstream media over last couple of days, and hadn’t realised that your victim’s families had sought, successfully, under the Official Information Act the expert’s reports that say the drift 2.3 km access tunnel is now perfectly safe for re-entry, yet Solid Energy have been lying about this fact, and it is plain what their delayed decision in October will be negative!"
"Clearly, there is something in the access tunnel that they know they don’t want to be revealed to either you or the public.
It all points to the fact the serious allegations in Dr Jacob Cohen’s book, MURDER AT PIKE RIVER MINE are 100% correct, and that all the miners were plainly murdered.
Further, in even greater support of Dr Cohen’s penetrating allegations now, is the undeniable fact that government intelligence agencies (it couldn’t be anyone else) have REMOVED and CENSORED the book almost entirely from the Internet. The only copy I could find this morning was on this site below.
You can have a look at the few remaining references to it if you GOOGLE-search it and you will find the book’s references are still there, but the book has been DELETED.
Perhaps, you and the families, could have copies of the book printed up and personally delivered to all MPs.
While this would not guarantee mine re-entry and police examination of some of the crime scene, at least it will mean that the entire government, (representing the entire nation) has been properly informed of the real truth and the blatant cover-up, headed by big business in collusion with the NZ Prime Minister John Key, brought out so vividly by Dr Cohen."
Every year the IRD identifies about $1.2 Billion in fraud committed by NZ business people. Yes, every year. It discovers around $30 Million in welfare fraud (tiny by comparison).
Yet, as Dr Marriott discovered - welfare fraudsters are far more likely to be sent to prison than white collar criminals. Remember our [Ex] Prime Minister is a banker and our country has been heisted by corporate money interests and our welfare state is seriously in demise, thanks to the aforementioned!
Tax Fraud Vs Welfare Fraud
I’m on the board of the Bruce Jesson Foundation which supports investigative journalism and each year funds a lecture on some aspect of society.
This year’s lecture was by Dr Lisa Marriott from Victoria University Business School on her investigation into how and why white collar tax fraud is treated far more leniently than welfare fraud.
Yet , as Dr Marriott discovered - welfare fraudsters are far more likely to be sent to prison than white collar criminals. You can eatch her lecture below.
Why are those less advantaged in New Zealand society treated differently from those who are in relatively privileged positions?
Why are white-collar tax evaders treated differently to welfare fraudsters? In the Annual Jesson Lecture in Politics for 2016, Dr Lisa Marriott considers the circumstances where this occurs, aiming to highlight and challenge issues of equity, privilege, and the construction of crime and criminals in New Zealand.
New Zealand’s ‘Elite’ Child Abuse Rings Exposed December 7 2016 | From: MediaWhores / Various
Minister of State Organised Child Abuse - Anne Tolley - has announced there will be no investigation into mass child abuse by the Crown. The Crown presumably has the God given right to abuse as many Kiwi children as it likes – and its none of tax payers business.
Fearless blog Lauda Finem that specialises in exposing NZ’s pedophile corporate elite and the justice system that appears to systematically protect them has recently posted allegations that the NZ judiciary have also been caught red handed covering up pedophilia in NZ.
The Justin Davis Files floating around the web seems to suggest that the NZ judiciary is actively involved in the covering up and protection of powerful pedophiles and pedophile rings in New Zealand – including some MP’s, and many top businessmen, doctors and dentists in NZ.
Whistle Blower Justin Davis gives us a first hand look into the world of these pedophiles who use sophisticated date rape drugs to drug and abuse children in their doctors rooms, dentistry clinics, churches and even MP offices.
The drugs they use mean the victims usually do not even know they have been abused, and just wake up in a haze feeling drowsy with no memory of the abuse – but they will never be the same – traumatised in the subconscious for life.
Every so often we see such cases float to the surface, but they are usually covered up and suppressed as quickly as possible – the fact is they are only the tip of the iceberg…..they are likely all connected, and probably using the same drugs and drug networks exposed by Justin Davis- drugs being distributed by top doctors and dentists around NZ.
We have also recently seen the astounding situation of NZ Judge Lowell Goddard seeming to fudge the ‘investigation’ into the Westminister Scandal in the UK – where over 100,000 children are alleged to have been abused by ‘British’ MP’s, Lords, Judges and high profile entertainers. The NZ judiciary right in the thick of it. They are very much an International operation – that much is clear.
Ironically – it was the blogger Cameron Slater who exposed in 2014 that at least 5 sitting MP’s have name suppression for child abuse crimes.
Slater is obviously part of same establishment with his blanket protection of John Key and his gang, but was being put under pressure during the Dirty Politics scandal and published it on his blog one day, presumably as a threat to those who he works with and for.
We know quite a few MP’s have had to stand down in recent years – Mike Sabin was one of them – but the public are not even allowed to discuss that case on the orders of the NZ judiciary.
And then there was ‘Prime’ Minister John Key’s ‘joke’ about the escaped pedophile killer Phillip Smith (there goes that name again) on the world stage / G20 summit. John Key obviously thinks pedophilia is quite humorous.
The very fact they call these people “Ministers” is highly suspect – it stinks of religious overtones – and we all know too well about the reputation of Church ministers. It is all the same “church” in our view.
John Key and his love for little girls ponytails – and his highly sexualised children. Something is clearly not quite right with the PM.
To their credit it was Radio NZ who reported on the “1000 children” who have gone “missing’ from Child Youth and Family over the years – the Government and Anne Tolley raced to counter the fall out by relabeling the Crown’s apparent child trafficking operation with a new name.
Radio NZ appear to spend most of their time covering this stuff up, but this article was good work on their part.
Facebook is awash with stories of Child Youth and Family now kidnapping children as young as 4 weeks old from their breastfeeding mothers – they do this using their “laws” and mandatory (and unverifiable) drug tests which they enforce on poor parents who are reliant on their communist welfare / warfare system.
So they take a breast feeding child off its mother at 4 weeks and place it in the hands of strangers where the statistics say they are at least 10 times more likely to be abused.
How can the public be assured these kids are not being kidnapped to order by pedophiles who are connected to these people who pose as Government and “Justice”? Perhaps these freaks feed off children – in fact some argue this is often the case.
There are numerous petitions online from families who have had their children ‘kidnapped’ by the State under dubious circumstances. Can you imagine knowing your kids have been taken by people with numerous documented ties to pedophile rings and child abuse? Horrific.
Its was exiled NZ author Greg Hallett who first claimed (quote) ” The judiciary shows itself to be a paedophile and crime creation movement whose primary goal is fatherless families.” in his book available on Amazon – “New Zealand a Blackmailer’s Guide”.
Greg was denied a fair hearing by the same judiciary in NZ and then had a number of murder attempts on his life before fleeing the Country back in 2007.
Further below we post some links to recent name suppression cases in which the NZ judiciary protect child sex offenders, many of them caught red handed, some even with child murder videos but still escaped conviction. A reasonable person would have to at least suspect that this is in fact a major goal of the judiciary in NZ- to protect child sex offenders.
“You will know them by their deeds”. Very wise words. Not by the fancy titles and ‘honors’ they give themselves.
You can watch Greg Hallett’s interview with US researcher Jim Fetzer below - Greg maintains his sense of humor even as the mafia chase him around trying to murder him- a true National / Kiwi hero, exposing the child abusers of NZ and their global network and risking his own life to do so...
Recent name Suppression and related cases in NZ- the Nation is literally crawling with pedophiles and the judiciary seem to go out of their way to protect them… the list includes MP’s, top businessmen and many more high profile New Zealanders. Quite a club they are running.
Some argue its the same agenda as Political Marxism and it springs from these people’s ancient religious beliefs – a scientific and/or spiritual method of destroying communities for power and control - and New Zealand is suffering under it at extreme levels under the John Key foreign banker regime, at least as much as it did under the Marxist Clark regime.
New Zealand Prime Minister John Key Resigns - Warned In Person By United States Secretary Of State John Kerry Of Arrest Status December 6 2016 | From: TheGuardian / Secure
Key says he would vote for his deputy prime minister, Bill English, if he put his name forward for leader, after shock announcement that he is quitting. The Cabal is falling and Key is the latest casualty...
We are witnessing the publicised beginnings of the fall of the Khazarian Nazionist Luciferian Cabal right now
John Key, the New Zealand prime minister and leader of the National party, has resigned in a decision that has taken the country by surprise.
Warning: Brace yourself for the horrific backslapping of Cabal minions... Wake up Rebecca.
Key held a media conference in Wellington at 12.45pm local time, after informing the cabinet of his decision.
His resignation will be effective from 12 December, when National MPs will meet to select a new leader.
Key said he would vote for his deputy prime minister, Bill English, if he put his name forward. English briefly led the party to its worst-ever electoral defeat in the 2002 election, but has since served as a successful finance minister.
Key is widely regarded as one of the most popular prime ministers in New Zealand’s history. He was first elected in 2008, and recently marked his 10-year anniversary as leader of the National party.
He said stepping down was the hardest decision he had ever had to make, but there was “no way” he could have served a full fourth term.
This felt like the right time to go, he told reporters;
“Sometimes you’ve got to make hard decisions to make right decisions,” he said, adding it was an opportunity to refresh the National party’s leadership of the country and hopefully clinch a fourth term.
“I think one of the reasons governments fail at that fourth-term hurdle is leaders don’t want to leave, everyone says ‘I’ve seen this before’. This is the chance to demonstrate newness about us.”
He said he had a “pretty long discussion” about standing for a fourth term with his wife, Bronagh Key.
“I don’t feel comfortable looking down the barrel of the camera and not being honest ... On a family basis, I don’t think I could commit much longer than the next election.”
He denied that Bronagh had given him an ultimatum, but said his leadership had come at a cost to his family.
“It’s been a decade of a lot of long, lonely nights for her and it’s the right time for me to come home.”
His children, Max and Stephie, had suffered an “extraordinary level of intrusion” along with the opportunities that came with being New Zealand’s “first family”.
In the past year, Key has had to answer to questions about his son’s burgeoning career as a DJ and social media personality. Spending more time with his family was a major factor in his decision to stand down, he said.
Key said he believed the mark of a good prime minister was one who left the country “in better shape than they found it”.
“Over time others will judge whether I’ve done that. All I can say is I gave it everything I had. I have left nothing in the tank.”
He said he considered his economic management of the country as a mark of success, even though New Zealand had weathered some crises during his government, including the Canterbury earthquake and the Pike River mining disaster. “Very few countries are in the financial position we’re in.”
But Winston Peters, the leader of the New Zealand First party, said Key had consistently misled the public about the state of the economy, and his resignation showed he was “unable to muddy the waters anymore”.
Key said he would remain in parliament long enough to avoid a byelection, but would step down as an MP before the next election. He said he stood down “hoping and believing New Zealand had been well served by the government I led”.
Comment: Key was warned to get the hell out by John Kerry (on his recent visit when he was also declined access to a secret facility in Antarctica) because the Cabal is going down and Key is fairly well up on the arrest list.
The reason for his placement at #4 is not clear, perhaps because of his bankster history. We are told that in the #1 spot is George Soros, followed by Hillary Clinton in the #2 spot. Interesting times indeed.
He plans to remain in Auckland after leaving politics, and enter the commercial sector.
English, who has Key’s backing to replace him, praised the prime minister’s “intelligence, optimism and integrity” and said he would be “judged by history as one of New Zealand’s greatest leaders”. He said the National caucus would “now consider the implications of the prime minister’s decision”, and that Key “left behind a united team with plenty of talent”.
He told reporters at a press conference that he learned from Key he was considering leaving in September. English had not yet decided whether to stand for leadership, but would not rule it out.
“Ultimately, that is a matter for the caucus ... We’ve put a premium on stability and unity, and I don’t think you should expect to see the kind of public brawling that you see over leadership changes in Opposition.
The country benefits from stable, clear direction and government.”
English pointed out that the caucus had only known about Key’s resignation “for a few hours”.
Say it ain’t so, bro - Australian PM
The leader of the Labour party, Andrew Little, and the Green party co-leader, Metiria Turei, both wished Key well for the future on Twitter.
Australia’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, said he was disappointed to hear from his “very good friend” that he was resigning.
“I sent him one very short message: ‘Say it ain’t so, bro’.”
Turnbull said Key was “one of the most outstanding national leaders in the world today”, whose influence was “out of proportion” to the size of the country.
“New Zealand has never boxed above its weight as much as it has done with John Key as its Prime Minister. He is truly outstanding.”
Turnbull’s “only consolation”, he said, was that Key’s resignation meant he might see more of him.
When Turnbull ousted Tony Abbott in September last year, he singled out Key’s leadership as an inspiration.
Abbott also praised Key’s “fine innings” on Twitter.
Australia’s opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said Key had been “a good friend to Australia” and wished him well.
The New Zealand dollar fell more than a quarter of a cent after the announcement.
Could This Healthy 23 Year Old’s Cardiac Arrest Have Been Caused by Exposure To 1080? + The Stock Deaths From 1080 Poison & How DOC Is Hiding Them In The Paper Work December 4 2016 | From: EnviroWatchRangitikei
We will never know because the NZ laboratoy lost her heart!
This story crossed my path recently on Facebook. It is apparently an old one, coming as it does from 2006. It is nevertheless a shocking story in more ways than one.
Shocking and sad for the family of this young woman, Whitney Robie was only 23. She had been hiking in the South Island, felt unwell, and after retiring to bed, died in her sleep of a sudden cardiac arrest it was later ascertained. Now they are left with few answers and no real closure regarding the why of her death. Read on.
She had come here to our ‘clean green’ paradise to live. Sadly she died here.
NZ is not clean and green people, it is severely polluted and toxic now -and worse, our authorities lie about that
Sudden accidental deaths (SADs) do happen however this story has some anomalies which could have but have not been solved due to a medical blunder. It is thanks to a GP who followed up on Whitney & questioned friends at the hostel where she was staying, that we have a little more of this story than we would otherwise have known.
Losing a heart for one thing is a shocker in itself. In a random and ordinary course of events such a mistake is feasible. But with a sudden unexplained death of a very healthy, active young woman … how could this possibly happen? When the clues to her death clearly lay within an analysis of her heart’s condition, how could they simply LOSE her heart? Well lose it they did. Or so they say.
The official story about this loss can be found at the following link:
A journalist who has been following this story for some time and says it has been shared more than 150 times now, has re posted it on Facebook with the attendant detail from when it first became news… here is the train of events as described by her (edited for brevity & omission of personal detail):
“Regarding Whitney Robie, she went hiking on her own in a 1080’d area (I believe it was gel/jelly) and felt unwell that evening, said so, went to bed and had a cardiac arrest in the night.
She was 23. From the USA, her obituary described how she was full of life, fit, loved the outdoors and had moved to NZ for an adventure.
She had no previous history of heart problems.
The Doctor concerned said he had gone to the hostel and spoken to the other guests straight after she died. Later when he heard her death had been recorded as a heart attack, he advised and pressed the authorities to run tests relating to possible 1080 exposure.
He was told however that the matter was now ‘officially closed’.
Her heart was sent for post mortem and was lost by the govt laboratory. This Dunedin GP was so concerned that he made a submission to ERMA in 2007 that included this account.
It was his opinion that the most probable cause of her death was 1080 poisoning, and that many others in NZ over the years have also died from it but that their deaths are either mistakenly or deliberately misdiagnosed.”
A letter to the editor in 2006 commenting on the actions of the Doctor involved gives further information about the unexplained early deaths of people working with 1080."
4.8.2. Heart as a target organ That single or repeated sublethal exposures to fluoroacetate can have toxic effects on the heart has been recognised for some time (e.g. Steyn 1934; Quin and Clark 1947; Hicks 1952).
In general, the action of fluoroacetate on the heart is to decrease the metabolic energy available in heart muscle, which affects the conduction system controlling the rate and strength of heart beats (e.g. Chenoweth and Gilman 1947)
Found on page 11 of the pdf
St Johns put out their Sudden Cardiac Arrest Annual Report in June and it shows the figures for rural as opposed to urban. The rates are far far higher in rural areas.
Rural New Zealanders had more than double the incidence of cardiac arrest than those in urban centres – approximately 160 versus 78 (per 100,000 person-years).
1080 is effective as a poison regardless of the mode of entry. It can be absorbed by the intact skin, but not readily, however it is easily absorbed through cuts, abrasions, and is rapidly absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract and through the lungs. One teaspoon of 1080 is enough to kill 30-100 adults weighing around 150 pounds. The potential for misuse is great
The main point is that although these deaths may or may not be attributed to 1080, more importantly, if nobody looks and checks then we are left with this element of doubt.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Plausible deniability is not good enough.
There are questions that are not being answered or even addressed.
It recently came to light from an Official Information request that DOC had lost 89 Kiwi , and yet they had not tested one of them for 1080. Doing so is not rocket science.
A blogger, NZRose commented here recently:
My partner and I spoke to the poison people late last year. They are contracted to lay everything from cyanide to feratox to take care of the ‘pests’ on behalf of the NZ Government.
I will never forget them laughing as they said that the 1080 had been doubled more than a year prior to our conversation. When we asked why they said “to Kill the deer, and the activists aren’t even aware yet”.
We responded with “Well now they are”. These people were too stupid to realise they were talking to the wrong people. (See the whole comment here)
Proceed with Caution
And in the meantime, this is all evidence enough for us to be extremely wary of exposing ourselves in any way to 1080. It is clearly a lethal product and by all reports right now, is being spread around quite indiscriminately. Finding it on walking tracks, in streams and on public seating and anywhere near where humans are likely to be, is simply not good enough.
Families with young children walk these tracks. If you intend hiking in our bush, please avail yourself of data about when 1080 was last spread in the area where you intend walking.
You can obtain this from DOC. We recently heard of two women who were surprised during a picnic by a 1080 drop who continue to experience illness, they believe, because of that unintended exposure. Clearly they were not aware of any intentions by DOC to be dropping 1080 where they picnicked that day.
1080 is an alias for Monofluoroacetate, a chemical. Monofluoroacetate was originally developed and marketed as an insecticide. It functions primarily by interfering with the citrate step in the Krebs cycle . The Krebs cycle is the major and an essential mechanism by which all air breathing creatures utilize food to produce energy.
It is therefore universally toxic to all animals, essentially every living thing except plants and some micro-organisms. The degree of toxicity of 1080 is extreme, but varies somewhat among species. It is categorised by the World Health Organization (WHO) as 1A, their highest rating, “extremely toxic” [1,2].
* The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies 1080 as ‘Extremely Hazardous’, most countries ban it outright. NZ uses 85% of the world’s supply … perhaps the world hasn’t figured out what a wonderful thing it really is. (References 1-5 are at the source) *Dr Q Whiting-OKeefe (BA Chemistry, Math), MD, FACMI
What I deduct from all of this is that until the NZ government desists from using it, we the public must be very vigilant in protecting ourselves. That to my mind includes warning others, particularly tourists who are sold our country on the basis of being ‘clean and green’.
The corporations (and our government is one) have a priority (a legal mandate) of profits over people, so they are not going to put your safety first. We believe it is far safer to err on the side of caution when there are any suspected or known risks.
Educate yourself on 1080 … find links at our 1080 page to the many resources available. Search for further articles exposing the risks of 1080 by searching ‘categories’ at the left of any page.
Note: for some reason, the Facebook sharing button is not working … in the meantime, to share please use the url.
The Stock Deaths From 1080 Poison & How DOC Is Hiding Them In The Paper Work
Farmers talk of their losses in this clip from the Graf Boys’ 'Poisoning Paradise' doco. Deaths described by those interviews include 6 cows, 13 deer, 250 sheep, 160 sheep, cattle and more.
When farmers are compensated for their losses they’re declared as, in one case, ‘track maintenance’ and another, ‘stock food’. Included for one farmer was the requirement to sign a confidentiality clause.
Complete dishonesty & whitewash by our authorities. Those mandated with ensuring your safety. Still trust them? The clip goes on to discuss the risks of the poison entering our food chain.
very real risks if you listen to the eye witness evidence.
Possum exports rejected by Japan because they’d seen documentary evidence on 1080 poison drops amongst our animals. A must watch. Please share. Show it to the nay sayers.
New Zealand’s Reputation Stained By Corruption - Case In Point: The Turitea Wind Farm November 30 2016 | From: TuriteaDocuments
Observers of recent world events have witnessed a pushback against corruption and the poor behaviour of governments. Unfortunately New Zealand is not corruption free. When making such a claim there must be concrete evidence to back it up.
This evidence, which has taken more than six years to assemble, is provided in the link below.
The government, which self reports on its corruption status, secretly colluded with Mighty River Power, a then State Owned Enterprise, and our local government authority, Palmerston North City Council [PNCC], to force a gigantic wind farm on the local community; known as the Turitea wind farm.
This was initiated during the reign of former Prime Minister Helen Clark. The consummation of a hitherto punitive, secret contract, which cancels the government’s social contract with all New Zealanders, took place during the current administration.
The Turitea Wind Farm is comprised of 60 turbines. The 60 3MW Turitea turbines are 10 metres taller than these at Tararua three and will tower over the city
This mafia like contract imposes a 3 million dollar penalty on PNCC if it helps anyone affected by the wind farm and further imposes unlimited liability if it changes its mind about supporting it.
A variation to the contract shows all participants would conspire to overthrow any decision by a court impeding the wind farm.
The wind farm was "approved" and a consent issued by a “judge”, Shonagh Kenderdine. Kenderdine however was not a judge as she had been automatically and compulsorily removed, by virtue of age, from the judicial register more than 13 months prior to issuing the consent at the conclusion of a Call-In process, which has higher legal authority than an actual court of law.
This fraud by Kenderdine is certainly not a Commonwealth first. Kenderdine, without a warrant and just a member of the public, took a very substantial bribe to bring the secret contract to a predetermined conclusion.
No one was supposed to find out. Virtually all the executive from the Prime Minister and Attorney-General down either know about this or are actively in on the fraud.
"Judge" Shonagh Kenderdine being awarded the Insignia if a Companion of the Queen's Service Order for services to the judiciary by then New Zealand Governor-General Sir Jerry Mateparae
They and a range of government agencies have been contacted on numerous occasions. These agencies include the Office of the Governor-General, police, Financial Markets Authority, LCRO, Judicial Conduct Commissioner, Ministry for the Environment, Serious Fraud Office, Environment Court, Law Commission, Ombudsman, Office of the Auditor General, etc.
With the exception of one, which was compelled to give the game away, all have maintained a code of silence.
The factual account linked below has all the hallmarks of a systematic fraud; corruption at the highest levels of government, subversion and alienation of existing law, illegal payments, securities fraud, media collusion, and PNCC ratepayers facing severe financial loss, the whole nine yards, but with two laughably novel twists.
1. The Turitea and Puketoi wind farms have been deliberately located right on top of three of the country's most dangerous active fault lines.
2. A 49% share in Mighty River Power, which owns the consents, was subsequently sold to unwitting investors.
Despite assurances the earthquake risk was not revealed. Taxpayers and individual investors will bear the inevitable losses.
Below is part of the fault line map of New Zealand. The red box shows the area of the location of the Turitea Wind Farm. The yellow box marks the town of Kaukoura, the worst hit area during the recent 7.8 magnitude earthquake.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
The recent 7.8 magnitude earthquake causing very serious damage at the top of the South Island is a stern reminder of the certain vulnerability of the Manawatu and Wairarapa landscape to even greater events.
Conspiratorial corruption is here laid out with all the proof needed. The main participants are identified and their actions laid bare. Be prepared for some surprises:
Are Microwave Transmission Weapons Of Mass Destruction Being Used To Trigger Catastrophic Earthquakes? + New Zealand Earthquake: The World’s Biggest Offshore Seismic Blasting Ship The Amazon Warrior November 17 2016 | From: GeoEngineeringWatch / TheContrail
Are unimaginably powerful microwave transmissions actively and aggressively being used as weapons of mass destruction? If all available evidence is examined, the logical conclusions are chilling.
When immensely powerful microwave transmissions are bounced off the atmosphere (facilitated by the atmospheric aerosol saturation) and directed back into the Earth's strata (in a seismically sensitive location), the triggering of seismic activity becomes scientifically possible.
“Spacecraft Saw ULF Radio Emissions over Haiti before January Quake
A French satellite observed a dramatic increase in ultra low frequency radio waves over Haiti in the month before the M7.0 earthquake earlier this year.
DEMETER’s is an unusual mission. Its job is to monitor low frequency radio waves generated by earthquakes.
Today, a group of geoscientists release the data associated with the M 7.0 earthquake that struck Haiti in January. They say that DEMETER saw a clear increase in ultralow frequency radio waves being emitted from the Earth’s the crust in that region in the build up to the quake.
The anecdotal evidence of electromagnetic effects associated with earthquakes is legion. Various accounts link earthquakes with mysterious light and heating effects."
The following year a deadly earthquake struck Christchurch, New Zealand. Many circumstances surrounding this disaster were also troubling. Did US officials know the earthquake was coming? Some excerpts from a report on the disaster are below.
"Was the Christchurch earthquake a terrible natural disaster, or was it a terrible MAN MADE disaster?
9 members of US Congress were in Christchurch for a summit meeting on Feb 21 & 22 but left Christchurch 2.5 hours before the earthquake hit and relocated to Wellington even though the meeting was not due to finish until the evening of Feb 22nd.
The US Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, was supposed to be visiting Christchurch and speaking at the summit meeting on Feb 22, but on Feb 18 announced she was cancelling her visit 3.
The Deputy Administrator of FEMA (US Federal Emergency Management Agency), Timothy Manning, just happened to be in Christchurch at the time with a US delegation.
All of the rest of the delegation left Christchurch shortly before the quake hit except for Mr Manning who stayed behind, and then after the quake hit he assisted with directing the emergency response.
Exactly the same thing happened with FEMA delegates with the Haiti earthquake. In Haiti , the FEMA delegates just happened to be there at the time conducting training exercises for responding to major earthquakes."
Recent releases from Wikileaks resulted in the headline below:
"Atmosphere Above Japan Heated Rapidly Before M9 Earthquake
Infrared emissions above the epicenter increased dramatically in the days before the devastating earthquake in Japan, say scientists.
They say that before the M9 earthquake, the total electron content of the ionosphere increased dramatically over the epicentre, reaching a maximum three days before the quake struck.
At the same time, satellite observations showed a big increase in infrared emissions from above the epicentre, which peaked in the hours before the quake. In other words, the atmosphere was heating up."
Though the science community is desperately trying to link pre-quake atmospheric heating to some unknown phenomenon of an atmospheric coupling with the pressure buildup in the strata, is this a rational conclusion?
The much more logical and straightforward conclusion is this, the atmospheric heating is being intentionally created by the global network of ionosphere heaters as immense microwave signals are bounced off of the atmosphere and back down into the planet.
Unfortunately, the science community is not allowed to even consider this possibility, let alone talk about it. In the period preceding the decimating Japanese earthquake, US Japanese relations were very strained.
The post-quake scenario of US/Japanese relations seemed to suddenly be unquestionable, was there a connection? Was the catastrophic quake just a natural event? Or an engineered warning to Japan?
"US Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to head back to New Zealand after checking out summer in Antarctica.
He's been criticized for heading to such a remote place while the US election riveted the world
He tweeted a photograph of himself boarding C-17 cargo plane in Christchurch saying "headed to Antarctica to see firsthand some of the drastic effects of climate change".
In Antarctica he was scheduled to meet with scientists and researchers at McMurdo Station, the largest research station of the US Antarctic programme, as well as visit surrounding areas on Ross Island, and the US Government's Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.
He is the first secretary of state and the most senior US government official to ever travel to Antarctica.
He is hosted by the US National Science Foundation, which manages the US Antarctic program me."
Noctilucent clouds in the skies above Antarctica are an ominous harbinger of the atmospheric damage that is occurring there
"Many are under the belief that HAARP, now labeled IRI, no longer exists Operationally due to the Gakona, AK spin. One must understand that these Frequency Generators are Globally Ubiquitous. There are so many that are of dissimilar designs, and go by different acronyms, it is not seen as functionally one and the same.
In the case of McMurdo’s Radome and all of the Radar equipment there; Raytheon has had the contracts beginning to end. The National Science Foundation and Raytheon Polar Services Company are housed in the same building. For years the station has grown. It can house 1258 personnel and an average of 200 winter over."
Raytheon is one of the largest private "defense contractors" on the planet, this corporation is also the holder of numerous climate engineering patents including some that relate directly to ionosphere heaters. The power structure is likely microwaving the skies for a multitude of reasons, none of those reasons are in the interest of the common good.
Shocking atmospheric flashing lights were filmed in the skies above New Zealand as the massive Earthquake was occurring.
Over 2 decades ago I dove alone on the wreck of the Rainbow Warrior, as it laid on the seafloor off the coast of New Zealand. I swam through the area shown above, around the ship, and examined the gapping bomb blast hole in the hull of the once noble vessel. I hovered over the wreck and contemplated the tyranny of those who rule the world.
We are all at a crossroads, and the horizon is darkening rapidly. The power structure wields weapons of unimaginable destruction, they can only do so because of the order-followers that carry out their insanity. As the saying goes, "we have seen the enemy, and they are us".
It is up to us, the people, all of us, to refuse any further participation in the insanity. It is up to us to fully investigate and fully face the whole truth. It is up to us to prioritize the fight for the greater good because we owe that debt to our children, to the planet, and to the whole.
New Zealand Earthquake: The World’s Biggest Offshore Seismic Blasting Ship The Amazon Warrior
Dots: Super-supermoon, Climate change huckster American Politician, Amazon Warrior, Oil Exploration and Mapping for drilling, Earthquake M7.5 and plates shifting generating many aftershocks the entire length of the fault line through NZ.
The 11/13/16 quake, with a magnitude of 7.8, was much stronger than the magnitude-6.3 quake in 2011. But it also was much deeper - striking 23 kilometers (14 miles) below the earth's surface. The 2011 quake had a depth of just 5 kilometers (3 miles). The shallower a quake is, the more destruction it tends to cause.
The evil empire are after New Zealand's unobtainium. First shake up the locals, destroy infrastructure, weaken the economy and then extort deals to rape the resources of the country.
If you were planning to do seismic blasting off the coast of a Country, the best time to do it would be with the super full moon wouldn’t it? So that people only discuss that as the possible reason.
Kaikoura was clearly the target – now destroyed, and that basin is full of the precious oil for the foreign bankers and the only thing stopping them was the people of Kaikoura - now homeless and to be relocated by NZ Navy ship. Kaikoura is also known for its whale populations, the area should be protected from ALL sonic oil exploration and Naval activity!
The World’s Biggest Seismic Testing Ship - The US "Amazon Warrior" - Parked On Top Of New Zealand Fault Line during the November 13, 2016 Earthquake!
The World’s biggest seismic blasting ship the Amazon Warrior was photographed off Rarangi Beach in Cloudy Bay last night. Right on top of a major fault line. The ship was met with protests when it arrived on the 13th! It was seen off the Coast of Kaikoura on Nov. 13th, but its ETA from Panama was 10 am on Nov 14th in Wellington.
The Amazon Warrior came from Panama, was seen off of Kaikoura on the 13th and then went to anchor off of Cloudy Bay at the top of the South Island, across the channel from Wellington. If you are steaming to NZ from Panama, and your destination is Wellington, then there is no need to go an extra 95 miles south before arriving at your charted destination; after a long sea journey of 7,353 miles.
This fact alone shows that there was something very fishy going on in the state of Aotearoa.
If their scheduled arrival was for 10am on the 14th in Wellington, then their trip to Kaikoura was already calculated into their original ETA. The AW's estimated project-to-project transit speed is 17 knots or 19.5633 mph. Thus traveling the 7353 miles to NZ will take around 16 days, and the last report in Vessel Finder was Oct 25, 2016 17:52 UTC which was probably the departure time from Panama.
Roughly Oct 26 to Oct 13 is 19 days, so they left plenty of leeway to ensure they could make it to Kaikoura before heading to Wellington…however rather than 3 days leeway, it is only 2 days because NZ is one day ahead of Panama.
On a ship like the Amazon Warrior... to travel 95 miles distance from Kaikoura to Wellington it takes around 5 hours, so they have 1.75 days to engage in their seismic mayhem. The ship only pulled into Cloudy Bay to avoid the protesters at Wellington. Yea, rather obvious isn't it. By their deeds shall they shall be known.
Further information on the Amazon Warrior is available here and here.
The company, a business segment of Schlumberger, offers 3D and time-lapse seismic surveys, electromagnetic surveys, and multicomponent surveys for delineating prospects and reservoir management.
The giant defense contractor Raytheon, now holds all 12 HAARP patents. HAARP devises can be made mobile on ships, such as the HAARP Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) platform.
A HAARP phased array antenna system was transmitting the 2.5Hz ULF frequency and it triggered the 9.0 magnitude earthquake off of Japan and ensuing tsunami.
The earthquake inducing 2.5 Hz ULF frequency was being broadcasted for two days prior to March 11, 2011…during which time the sky over Tokyo turned red as the ionosphere was pulled down into the oxygen rich atmosphere. DARPA is also developing an airborne version of HAARP.
Any country that is in the way of an oil pipeline, has valuable and strategic resources, or threatens to drop the $US dollar standard – is in danger of being chemtrailed, HAARP zapped and attacked with earthquakes and extreme weather events.
The earthquake frequency can be focused on an area during a solar flare event or full moon and once the earthquake is triggered, a seismic research vessel like the Amazon Warrior can take readings of the shockwaves moving through the earth’s crust and get an excellent picture of oil deposits even at very deep levels.
“America and NZ tested a system of using bombs to cause seismic activity and make tsunamis as a weapon in 1944 off the coat of NZ (yes, 72 years ago). "Preliminary modelling suggests that the earthquake was caused by a rupture of a northeast-striking fault that projects to the surface offshore"
The Amazon Warrior is due to commence imminent seismic testing for oil on behalf of Norwegian Oil giant Statoil. Seismic testing involves the dragging of a seismic airgun along the seabed, emitting seismic blasts every 10 seconds, 24 hours a day, from now until next May.
Statoil acquired their permit from American multinational oil corporation Chevron, and the permit extends along the eastern seaboard and to depths that are unprecedented for New Zealand.
Seismic blasting has been proven to be disruptive and harmful to sea life, including marine mammals, and is opposed by coastal fishing interests and eco-tourism operators including Ngāi Tahu’s Whale Watch ventures.
Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX) is an American multinational energy corporation. One of the successor companies of Standard Oil, it is headquartered in San Ramon, California, and active in more than 180 countries.
Standard Oil Co. Inc. was an American oil producing, transporting, refining, and marketing company. Established in 1870 by John D. Rockefeller as a corporation in Ohio, it was the largest oil refiner in the world of its time.
Tesla quaked Manhattan around Houston St. with a small resonant device attached to a beam in his workshop/lab, and smashed it with a hammer when it started to shake things to a dangerous level, which stopped the quake instantly.
One of his basic working principles was resonance, mechanical and electromagnetic. It's how the Tesla coil drives up huge voltage on a low current.
HAARP is an adaptation of Tesla technology used for nefarious purposes. The microwave array broils the Upper Atmosphere to 100°F with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam, that lifts areas of the ionosphere by heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything - living and dead.
Along with chemtrails and this heating of the atmosphere with HAARP dries up precipitation thus producing drought. I learnt somewhere they
HAARP uses sunspot cycles, sunspots, solar flares, hurricanes, fault tension build ups etc... for a EMF assisted corporate-political warfare. HAARP is boost assist and director of natural energies. They can even reflect of the moon to generate massive explosions.
On the HAARP web site in 2001 discussed successful moon bounce experiments (done since the 1960's by HAM radio operators) see: HAARP array may use Moon as a reflector to reach distant targets on Earth to create Nuclear-Sized Explosions Without Radiation!. In order to target the moon you need a steerable array and three arrays minimum are required.
HAARP is capable of creating weather like hurricanes and tornadoes and tsunamis and earthquakes. It is also capable of altering people’s moods.
NASA tomographic image of the subducted Farallon Plate in the mantle beneath eastern North America
Earth tomography is used by the oil and gas industry to find deposits. Tomography refers to imaging by sections or sectioning, through the use of any kind of penetrating wave or mechanical method. ELF waves or extremely low frequency waves can trigger an earthquake on faults that have built up tension.
Thus a ship like Amazon Warrior with even weak exploratory ELF waves can trigger fault lines into concussive domino effect earthquakes of “any” magnitude depending on how much tension is held in the tectonic ridges.
HAARP Weapon How to Make an Earthquake
It appears that the earthquake was accidentally triggered by the Amazon Warrior's exploratory ELF waves...then they quickly pulled out of the area to avoid being held responsible, but didn't go to Wellington due to the protest, and possible fear of reprisal from the New Zealand Navy.
However it is illegal to travel through New Zealand waters and conduct personal "business" PRIOR to checking in officially at one's port of entry first.
I conclude that the 11/13 quakes were accidentally triggered by an oil exploratory vessel working for Chevron. So Chevron should be made responsible for picking up the tab for repairing the damage to the country’s infrastructure and the lives of the people by this little chiropractic adjustment to the backbone of New Zealand.
The ship went about their business conducting their "research" in New Zealand territorial waters PRIOR to officially checking in with customs.
Plus this sortie was premeditated due to the original ETA, and so their actions were criminal and secretive... by going for the gold (oil) first before being invited into the country.
However reading the shenanigans of US officials in Christchurch before and after the 2011 quake....it appears that the 11/13/16 quake swarm was likely deliberate, and appears to be an act of economic war.
Goldman Sachs appears to be undertaking economic warfare on areas to drive up the prices of its commodities and stocks, and to lay claim to resources.
Canadian wildfires, pipeline attacks in Nigeria and the Gulf Oil Spill are likely sabotage undertaken by Goldman Sachs to drive up prices for its own benefit.
In New Zealand now, the Christchurch and Kaikoura quakes and the Rena shipwreck toxic spill event are acts of war against a sovereign nation for economic gain and to intimidate and demoralize Kiwis into submission to the poisoning and sacking of their country.
On 5 October 2011 the Rena ran aground near Tauranga, New Zealand, resulting in an oil spill. The spill has been described as New Zealand's worst maritime environmental disaster.
The ship was carrying 1,368 containers, eight of which contained hazardous materials, as well as 1,700 tonnes of heavy fuel oil and 200 tonnes of marine diesel oil.
Goldman Sachs Now Sees Chevron Better Off Than Exxon Mobil. Goldman Sachs is now buying and selling enough natural gas to make it one of the key players on the market - even reportedly overtaking oil major Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
Goldman Sachs, Chevron, the owners of the Amazon Warrior and the American Military Industrial Machine should be charged with war crimes, deliberate environmental sabotage and held accountable to damages.
John Kerry is in Bed with Goldman Sachs as is Evidenced by their Joint white Washing Projects
Secretary of State John Kerry and Lloyd C. Blankfein, chairman and CEO of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (NYSE: GS), in partnership with Harvard Kennedy School have announced the first-ever cross-border exchange and leadership program to support emerging women leaders across the private and non-profit sectors in the Middle East and Northern Africa.
Senator John Kerry appears to be Goldman Sachs running man, or rather flying man…but appears to be innocent of their crimes of international disaster capitalism.
John Kerry is the most Carbon Intensive Politician on the Planet - I guess we now know why John Kerry was making a short notice / unexplained trip to NZ right in the middle of a fierce US ‘elitecon’.
He went to Antarctica, which has a HAARP at the US base. Kerry is said to be on a climate saving mission. Speaking Sunday in Wellington, New Zealand before flying to Oman via Singapore…after NZ he flew to Oman, and another Arab Gulf states and then Morocco before winging to Peru and then back home.
John Kerry’s current trip could be said to be responsible for 853.4 metric tons of CO2 – as many as 52 average Americans produce in a year. The average CO2 emission for aircraft at 53.3 pounds per air mile. [ CarbonFootprint.com ]
World’s Biggest Seismic Testing Ship - Amazon Warrior - Parked On Top Of New Zealand Fault Line & 6.2 Aftershock Shakes New Zealand After Powerful 7.8 Earthquake Kills At Least 2 November 15 2016 | From: MediaWhores / RT / Various
If you were planning to do seismic blasting off the coast of a Country, the best time to do it would be with the full moon wouldn’t it? So that people only discuss that as the possible reason.
The World’s biggest seismic blasting ship the Amazon Warrior was photographed off Rarangi Beach in Cloudy Bay last night. Right on top of a major fault line.
It has now been well reported (in the real / social media) that the US State department had advanced knowledge of the Christchurch Quakes – with John Key saying they were “man made” earthquakes.
Surely the oil company banker would know? Plus the usual dose of foreign spies with extra passports on scene – as there always is with most of these events.
Kaikoura was clearly the target – now destroyed, and that basin is full of the precious oil for the foreign bankers and the only thing stopping them was the people of Kaikoura - now homeless and to be relocated by NZ Navy ship.
6.2 Aftershock Shakes New Zealand After Powerful 7.8 Earthquake Kills At Least 2
A new earthquake measuring 6.2 has struck 39km west of Kaikoura, New Zealand. This is one of the most powerful in a series of tremors that followed a 7.8 magnitude quake which struck the town, located some 180km northeast of Christchurch, on Sunday.
Local residents Chris and Viv Young look at damage caused by an earthquake along State Highway One near the town of Ward, south of Blenheim on New Zealand's South Island, November 14, 2016
The quake took place at around 12:30am GMT at a depth of 8.3 kilometers, and was initially measured at 6.8, but was later downgraded to 6.2 by USGS.
Meanwhile GeoNet, the official source of geological hazard information for New Zealand, measured the latest quake at 6.3 and said its depth was around 35 kilometers.
At least two people were killed following the initial quake which struck New Zealand just after 11:00am GMT on Sunday (12:02am Monday local time).
The ministry of civil defense immediately issued a warning saying that a “destructive tsunami” with waves of up to five meters (16 feet) was possible. The ministry treated the possibility of a tsunami as “an event of life-threatening or national significance.”
Tsunami warning sirens notified residents in coastal areas of New Zealand to leave for higher ground. Police and emergency workers mobilized in the wake of the quake to help with evacuations. Authorities eventually downgraded tsunami warnings around the country after people fled and the waves arrived two hours later.
“We've canceled the tsunami warning in place for Wellington to Banks Peninsula. Based on all available data, the tsunami threat has now passed,” Civil Defense said in their latest bulletin, stressing that coastal areas could still “experience unusual, strong currents and sea level fluctuations.”
New Zealand Prime Minister John Key confirmed that at least two people were killed. Police said one person died in Kaikoura and another died in Mt. Lyford, a nearby ski resort, AP reported. Police also say that several people had suffered minor injuries in Kaikoura.
A local state of emergency was declared in Kaikoura and Hurunui. Roads in Canterbury and Marlborough have been severely damaged. Trains and ferries between North and South Islands were also affected by the quake. Authorities are now assessing the extent of the damage from the quake.
After the initial 7.8 disaster, all trains on South Island were initially stopped but KiwiRail later resumed services between Christchurch and Invercargill, local media reported.
Whose Work Was The Inspiration For The First [Supposedly] Nuke-Free Country? November 2 2016 | From: HelenCaldicott / GregHallett New Zealand was the first country in the world to pass national nuclear-free legislation. Marilyn Waring reflects on how Dr. Helen Caldicott’s influence culminated in the passage of the cornerstone of New Zealand’s foreign policy.
If you were growing up in New Zealand and Australia post World War II, there’s a chance you knew about the United States using the Marshall Islands as a nuclear testing site from 1947 until 1962.
In an agreement signed with the United Nations, the U.S. government held the Marshall Islands as a “trust territory” and detonated nuclear devices in this pristine area of the Pacific Ocean - leading, in some instances, to huge levels of radiation fall-out, health effects, and the permanent displacement of many island people.
In all, the U.S. government conducted 105 underwater and atmospheric tests. You would have also known that the British conducted seven atmospheric tests between 1956 and 1963 on traditional Aboriginal land, in Maralinga, Australia.
It may be that you read Neville Shute’s 1957 novel On the Beach, in which people in Melbourne, Australia wait for deadly radiation to spread from a Northern Hemisphere nuclear war.
This book made a memorable impact on Helen when she read it as a teenager. When I was a teenager, some years later, I read Bertrand Russell’s 1959 classic, Common Sense and Nuclear Warfare.
Both Helen and I saw Peter Watkin’s The War Game, a BBC documentary drama about nuclear war and the consequences in an English city. In New Zealand the film was restricted for children unless accompanied by an adult, so I had to get my father to take me. The War Game won the Oscar for the best documentary in 1965.
France began its series of over 175 nuclear tests at Mururoa, in the South Pacific, in 1966. At least 140 of these tests were above ground.
In 1973, the New Zealand and Australian governments took France to the World Court for continued atmospheric testing, and forced the last tests underground. The testing finally came to an end in 1976.
In New Zealand the U.S. Navy made regular visits between 1976 and 1983 with nuclear-powered and, most likely, nuclear-armed, ships.
These visits produced spectacular protest fleets in the Auckland and Wellington harbours, when hundreds of New Zealanders - in yachts of all sizes, in motor boats and canoes, even on surf boards - surrounded the vessels and tried to bring them to a complete stop.
By 1978, a campaign began in New Zealand to declare borough and city council areas nuclear-free and, by the early 1980s, this symbolic movement had quickly gained momentum, covering more than two-thirds of the New Zealand population.
Helen Caldicott and I had not met up to this point, but these were shared parts of our history and consciousness when Helen visited New Zealand in 1983.
Helen Caldicott graduated with a medical degree from University of Adelaide Medical School in 1961. She moved to the United States, becoming an Instructor in paediatrics at Harvard Medical School and was on the staff of the Children’s Hospital Medical Centre in Boston, Massachusetts.
In the late 1970s, Helen became the President of Physicians for Social Responsibility. This group was founded when Helen was finishing medical school, quickly making its mark by documenting the presence of Strontium-90, a highly radioactive waste product of atmospheric nuclear testing, in children’s teeth.
The landmark finding eventually led to the Limited Nuclear Test Ban treaty, which ended atmospheric nuclear testing.
But it was the Three Mile Island accident that changed Helen’s life. An equipment failure resulted in a loss of cooling water to the core of a reactor at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania, causing a partial meltdown.
Operator failure meant that 700,000 gallons of radioactive cooling water ended up in the basement of the reactor building.
It was the most serious nuclear accident to that date in the U.S. Helen published Nuclear Madness the same year. In it she wrote:
“As a physician, I contend that nuclear technology threatens life on our planet with extinction. If present trends continue, the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink will soon be contaminated with enough radioactive pollutants to pose a potential health hazard far greater than any plague humanity has ever experienced.”
In 1980, Helen resigned from her paid work positions to work full time on the prevention of nuclear war.
In 1982, Canadian director Terre Nash filmed a lecture given by Helen Caldicott to a New York state student audience. Nash’s consequent National Film Board of Canada documentary If You Love this Planet was released during the term of U.S. President Ronald Reagan, at the height of Cold War nuclear tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union.
The U.S. Department of Justice moved quickly to designate the film “foreign propaganda,” bringing a great deal of attention to the film. It went on to win the 1982 Academy Award for Documentary Short Subject. That same year, Helen addressed about 750,000 people in Central Park, New York in the biggest anti-nuke rally in the United States to that date.
In 1983, I was serving as a member of the New Zealand parliament, having been elected eight years earlier at the age of 23.
Our parliament established a Disarmament and Arms Control Select Committee to conduct hearings on the possibility of making New Zealand a nuclear-free zone.
During this critically important time, Helen was invited to New Zealand on a lecture tour. The documentary If You Love This Planet was shown at her speaking engagements. I did not get to meet her, nor hear any of her lectures in person, as I was working in parliament every night. But I did follow the media coverage.
Helen told the magazine the Listener about having observed five-star generals in U.S. congressional and senate committees complaining that the Russian missiles were bigger than the American ones.
“The Russian missiles are very big (and) inaccurate and clumsy. America has very small, very accurate missiles, which are better at killing people and destroying targets,” she explained.
A frequent message in her talks to New Zealand audiences was the redundant overkill capacity of both superpowers. Caldicott noted to her audiences that “[T]he U.S. has 30,000 bombs and Russia 20,000.”
I had sat in a New Zealand parliamentary committee hearing some months earlier, when a government colleague, brandishing a centrefold of a Russian submarine, excitedly called for us to “Look at how big it is.”
I had thought that no one would believe me if I had repeated such an inane banality - when an adult male was more impressed by the size of the submarine than its capacity to destroy life on this planet.
Helen’s public addresses were grounded in the potential impact of nuclear weapons. “Imagine a 20-megaton bomb targeted on Auckland,” she told audiences in New Zealand.
“The explosion, five times the collective energy of all the bombs dropped in the Second World War, digs a hole three-quarters of a mile wide by 800 feet deep and turns people, buildings and dirt into radioactive dust.
Everyone up to six miles will be vaporised, and up to 20 miles they will be dead or lethally injured. People will be instantly blinded looking at the blast within 40 miles. Many will be asphyxiated in the fire storm.”
Helen did not hold back, explaining that nuclear war means “blindness, burning, starvation, disease, lacerations, haemorrhaging, millions of corpses and an epidemic of disease.” Helen’s dramatic and blunt style reduced many in her audiences to tears.
She always ended her talks with a call to action - especially to parents - as she strongly believes that nuclear disarmament is “the ultimate medical and parenting issue of our time.”
To those who would claim New Zealand was not a target she had a short reply:
“Trident submarines in ports are targeted. They are a first strike target. It is much easier to destroy subs when they are in dock than it is when they are submerged in the ocean.”
In 2015, I asked Helen how she managed to deliver such bad news and yet keep her audiences with her. “Being a doctor helps because you have to learn to negotiate with a patient and with language they can understand,” she explained.
“You have to convert the medical diagnosis and treatment to lay language. I also have to keep them awake sometimes by letting them laugh because it relieves their tension and because the stuff I say is pretty awful.” Helen told me that she practices “global preventative medicine.”
Helen’s tour through New Zealand in 1983 had a huge, and lasting, impact. At one stop, Helen addressed over 2,000 people at a public event in Auckland. The librarian with whom I corresponded looking for old newspaper reports of Helen’s visit, wrote to me:
“Her chillingly detailed description of the effects of a nuclear device detonated over the hall in which we were sitting remains rooted in my psyche to this day! …
The other message I most recall is the dichotomy she evoked between the destructive drive of ‘old men’ rulers, the instigators of war, versus the procreative energy of mothers most impelled to oppose them - which, however reductive, retains the compelling logic of a truism!”
Helen’s approach was transformative in New Zealand. Helen’s speaking events packed auditoriums, and overflows of audiences had to be accommodated using loud speaker systems.
People responded strongly to this woman, whose life work involved caring for children, speaking about medical effects of fallout, and speaking without the use of the clichéd military and defence ideological rhetoric that treated people as if they were simpletons who couldn’t understand.
Her speeches inspired people to act. After Helen spoke, the volume of mail delivered to my parliamentary office increased - particularly from women.
On May 24, 1983, 20,000 women wearing white flowers and armbands and holding banners with peace signs marched quietly up a main street in Auckland to hold a huge rally and call for New Zealand to be nuke-free. It was one of the largest women’s demonstrations in New Zealand’s history.
In her book, Peace, Power and Politics – How New Zealand Became Nuclear Free, Maire Leadbetter writes:
“I am one of many activists who think of Helen Caldicott’s visit as the point when the peace movement began to grow exponentially… Helen had a magical ability to motivate previously passive citizens to become activists.”
Shortly after Helen’s visit to New Zealand, in 1984, I advised that I intended to vote for the opposition-sponsored nuclear-free New Zealand legislation. This prompted conservative Prime Minister Rob Muldoon to call a snap election. Muldoon told media that my “feminist anti-nuclear stance” threatened his ability to govern.
Unfortunately, technically speaking, New Zealand is NOT nuclear free. We have food-irradiating facilities (sounds super healthy) and according to researcher Greg Hallett - a whole lot more in our past...
According to Hallett, "The Wairakei Geothermal Power Station was not for the production of power, but was built by the British Atomic Energy Commission to produce heavy water for the manufacture of nuclear weapons."
“The Wairakei Geothermal Power Station was a front for heavy water production to be used for nuclear power and the production of deuterium and tritium for hydrogen bombs. These were a thousand times more powerful than the first atom bomb and were first tested in at least three different locations."
“During the nuclear scare, Kiwis were buying houses in Taupo to be away from a nuclear blast, which they thought would be aimed at Auckland and Wellington.
The funny thing was, Taupo was the only nuclear target the Russians had in New Zealand. At least one nuclear weapon was aimed squarely at the Wairakei Geothermal ‘heavy water’ power station which produced much of the heavy water for the Western world.”
“But more importantly, New Zealand took over the production of nuclear detonators from Norway in 1961. Norway was producing detonators for nuclear bombs during and after World War Two and they paid quite a heavy price in casualties. After World War Two the Norwegians said, ‘A plague on both of your houses. Take this shit away’, and they stopped production."
“The Americans didn’t want the job as they’d be under attack, so New Zealand held its hand up highest and produced nuclear detonators in secret.
That’s Walter Nash’s duplicitous Labour government for you [1957–60]. He was charged with sedition while fronting as ‘a man of peace’ and producing nuclear detonators. No doubt he on-sold any secrets gained to the Russians. But this also has a more recent history to it.”
“If you went up the hill towards Eastbourne then took the alternative route through the gorse-covered hills to Wainuiomata at the back of Gracefield, there was a sign saying ‘Nuclear Research Facility’. This is where the firing devices for the nuclear blast at Mururoa were made.
New Zealand supplied the nuclear detonation gear to the French via the British. Yes, it was New Zealand that provided the detonation gear for the atmospheric nuclear tests at Mururoa Atoll from July 1966, and for the underground tests from 1975. "
“There was a big stink in the armed forces about the anti-nuclear protests because they violated secret military pacts that went back years. Labour wanted the military to act against the pacts and that’s why the military decided to take part in the killing of Prime Minister Norman Kirk."
“In 1981, the known gay and child sex abuser Colin Moyle was re-elected to Labour and became the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries from 1984–90. He assisted the Russians in placing submarine locator beacons for Russian nuclear-powered submarines for a nuclear strike against America."
“Helen Clark’s anti-nuclear policy only applied to ‘American ships’. Russian nuclear-armed vessels were never questioned. Such duplicity is consistent with those converted to an agenda-driven ideology from a foreign country for non-national purposes, in exchange for hiding their sexuality. This results in treasonous activities tantamount to war – and that’s what we got so very close to – nuclear war from NZ.”
"New Zealand is the only ‘Nuclear-Free State’ that fails to put to print it’s history of manufacturing nuclear material. As well as ‘heavy water’, New Zealand also manufactured detonators for nuclear bombs and Prime Minister Muldoon was set on testing a nuclear power station in at least three different locations."
Someone Else’s Country - The Neoliberal Revolution In New Zealand October 31 2016 | From: AlisterBerry
The Globalist's test case trial of Corporatisation: In the early 1980s a group of free market economists came to dominate policy at the New Zealand Treasury.
With the election of the Labour Party in 1984 and the appointment of Roger Douglas as finance minister, the new right elite took power and began relentlessly and ruthlessly turning New Zealand into their vision of the model free market state.
"A coherent and comprehensive account of the years which will define this country for a century to come." - New Zealand Herald.
Smoking Gun For Christchurch Killer Quake: Hillary Clinton Emails Show Advance Warning Of Christchurch Earthquake
October 7 2016 | From: MediaWhores / TheContrail Recently releases Hillary Clinton emails show US State Department advanced knowledge of the big Christchurch Earthquake on 22nd February 2011. This appears to be proof that the killer earthquake was a planned disaster "And on cue..."
The first email sent by the State Department to head of the department Hillary Clinton was sent a full 6 hours before the actual quake hit. Washington being 18 hours behind NZST. The second email was sent as the quake hit.
On the presumption the emails are real – this proves advanced knowledge by the US State Department of the Christchurch Earthquakes.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Clinton Christchurch Earthquakes Emails – Source, Wikileaks
Sources for these emails are being actively and aggressively blocked worldwide. It seems they even knew the size of the quake: 6.3 – a possible reference to the Freemasonic Kabbalah number 666. There is substantial evidence that the quake was in fact much bigger than 6.3 magnitude.
Interestingly – the US disaster relief team “FEMA” was also in Christchurch the week before the big earthquake, and they flew out just hours before the earthquake hit – leaving behind their head disaster coordinator…
If this all sounds unbelievable to you – you probably need to do some research on “HAARP” the radio wave technology being used to influence weather, storms and some say even earthquakes world wide – and nothing new, Tesla was using similar technology last century.
EMF conditions before the Christchurch Earthquake on 14/2/16
Bayer's Monsanto Deal To Be Closely Watched By New Zealand Farmers As Agri-Chemical Players Dwindle
September 22 2016 | From: NationalBusinessReview Bayer's US$66 billion acquisition of Monsanto, creating the world's biggest supplier of seeds and agri-chemicals to farmers, will be closely watched by New Zealand's rural sector as the latest in a series of deals that has shrunk the number of competitors in the market.
Bayer and Monsanto are two of the big seven companies selling agricultural chemicals in New Zealand.
Of the other five, Dow Chemical is in the process of a global merger with DuPont and Swiss seed giant Syngenta is close to being acquired by China National Chemical Corp, which already owns Adama.
Of the others, ASX-listed Nufarm had a distribution agreement with Monsanto for its Roundup glyphosphate products up until 2013, while Bayer rival BASF reportedly held inconclusive talks with Monsanto earlier this year
Bayer chief executive Werner Baumann has indicated the companies would need to file for clearance in about 30 jurisdictions for the deal and get antitrust approval in the US, Canada, Brazil and the EU, the Financial Times reports. The deal has stoked concern among US farmer groups that they may face price increases for agricultural products.
Federated Farmers arable farming chair Guy Wigley called it:
"A significant development for New Zealand farming. It's a very finely tuned marketplace and farmers are highly sensitive to pricing," he said. "The costs and benefits of using all their products are keenly understood."
Wigley likened agri-chemicals to the pharmaceuticals industry, where there was plenty of competition for older products that had come off patent while companies sought a premium to cover research and development costs for new products.
The Commerce Commission said it is unable to comment on whether the transaction would require its scrutiny. However, John Hampton, professor of seed technology and director of the Lincoln University Seed Research Centre, said it may require antitrust approval.
While Monsanto is the world's largest seed company, its GM crops such as Roundup-ready Canola, soybean and maize aren't sold in New Zealand and its local sales in that market are confined to vegetable seeds produced by its Seminis and De Ruiter units.
Bayer has a smaller seeds business but is mainly in the pest and disease product side of the agri-chemical market, including seed treatments, while Monsanto's chemicals were more in the herbicide and weed control side of the market.
All up there were about half a dozen major companies in the seed sector, "so I can't see there would be a major impact in what's happening in seeds in New Zealand," Hampton said, adding that he speculated that Monsanto's GM technology was a major driver for Bayer's takeover offer.
Globally, there was no new herbicide chemistry emerging and increased resistance and regulatory hurdles for some existing ones. At the same time growing demand "for more sustainable methods of weed and pest control," he said.
“Chemicals aren't the future. Now the industry is looking at interactions between microbes and plants - biocontrols," he said.
The past five years have been marked by a number of acquisitions of small biocontrol companies by big agri-chemical producers "being astute and looking to the future". Research was now focussed in two main areas - GM technology and the use of bacteria and fungi to control pests and diseases and to promote plant growth, he said.
Industry group Agcarm, which represents about 85 percent of the New Zealand agri-chemicals market, has 14 members listed as crop protection companies. It estimates the New Zealand market is worth $250 million to $300 million.
Bayer's offer for Monsanto of US$128 a share in cash is about 20 percent more than the last trading price of US$106.76. Bayer said the deal would create "significant value" with annual synergies of about US$1.5 billion after three years "plus additional synergies from integrated solutions in future years".
Race Relations In New Zealand
September 12 2016 | From: NZPCR Last week the Race Relations Commissioner Dame Susan Devoy wrote an open letter to all New Zealanders. She wants to hear your views on racism in New Zealand. The letter is part of the Human Rights Commission’s first nationwide anti-racism campaign.
Dame Susan says the That’s Us campaign, which asks Kiwis to share their own stories about “racism, intolerance and hatred” in New Zealand, is about “the kind of people we want to be”, and “the kind of country we want our kids growing up in”.
If you would like to reply to Dame Susan’s letter to you, her email address is SusanD@hrc.co.nz – or feedback can be provided through the special website www.thatsus.co.nz.
The Human Rights Commission has justified the campaign on the basis that New Zealand is an extremely diverse society, and since diverse societies elsewhere have become more racially intolerant, they expect it to occur here too. With around 400 formal complaints about racism received every year, the Commission wants public feedback: “if we’re going to better understand racism then we need to know what it is” – which in itself seems extraordinary!
In particular, they highlight “casual” or “quiet” racial intolerance – the type that they say occurs in everyday life and often goes unreported. As an example they cite the case of a woman registering students at a university, who “smiles at every other student but the brown ones”.
Clearly this campaign is an exercise in redefining racism to become substantially wider than what most rational people would assume it to be. It is a further example of the arrant nonsense emanating from the Race Relations Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, broadcaster Lindsay Perigo, who shares with us a speech he delivered at a recent debate with Dame Susan Devoy, believes the Race Relations Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission should be abolished:
“I’d abolish Dame Susan. Nothing personal! I’d just abolish the office of Race Relations Commissar and with it, the entire Human Rights Commission, to which I routinely refer as the Human Wrongs Commissariat.
This cossetted coterie of taxpayer-supported fascists of the left just want to impose their precious, prissy, puritanical Political Correctness upon all of us. They’re our Thought Police, prattling on about diversity when they’re attempting to outlaw the most important diversity of all, ideological diversity and make their Political Correctness compulsory.
Everything in their universe would be either illegal or compulsory. In my universe they’d have to find real jobs and the legislation that set them up would be repealed.”
The legislation under which the Race Relations Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission operate is the Human Rights Act 1993, which essentially enshrines the United Nation’s human rights agenda into our domestic law.
As a result, the Commission is now promoting the highly controversial United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Helen Clark’s Labour Government considered too radical to support.
While the National Government signed up in 2010 – at the behest of the Maori Party – Prime Minister John Key went to some lengths to assure the New Zealand public that it was “a non-binding aspirational goal”. Yet here we are with the Human Rights Commission now proactively promoting the Declaration, including through brochures which advocate Maori self determination and self government.
One of the Human Rights Commission’s main roles is to pursue those they claim are discriminating against others.
Dr Paul Moon, a professor of history at the Maori Development Unit of the Auckland University of Technology, explained how, as a result of the publication of his book, This Horrid Practice, in 2008 – which portrayed cannibalism as a violent and widespread practice among traditional Maori – he was the subject of an anonymous complaint to the Human Rights Commission.
But it doesn‘t even need a person to lay a complaint for the Human Rights Commission to act as the Thought Police – as a former Massey University Economist, Dr Greg Clydesdale found out.
The Commission got so worked up about a research paper he had prepared from Statistics New Zealand data, showing that Polynesian immigration was fuelling an underclass, that a 69 page report was compiled on his case – without a single complaint about his paper ever being received.
Such investigations, supposedly to prevent discrimination, can not only destroy reputations and careers, but they create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation that seriously undermines our fundamental right to free expression – a freedom, that is especially critical in an academic environment.
There also remains an on-going concern that these government officials are overly biased in favour of minorities. This was certainly the case back in 1988, when a scandal over a Maori activist’s call to ‘kill a white’, forced the government to change the law.
According to the Hansard of the Parliamentary debates at the time, the Race Relations conciliator refused to censure Hannah Jackson, who made her inflammatory statement at the University of Auckland marae – he only censured a newspaper editor for reporting the event.
The incident was considered to be so serious, that it caused Parliament to repeal section 9A of the Race Relations Act, which made it illegal to publish, broadcast or make public statements “likely to excite hostility or ill-will against, or bring into contempt or ridicule, any group of persons on the ground of their colour, race, or ethnic or national origins”, since it did not apply on a marae.
As Winston Peters, then MP for Tauranga, explained in the debate;
“The Race Relations Conciliator, when asked to consider an offensive statement – ‘Go out and kill a white and be a hero’ – did nothing.
He said that he had no role whatever to play. He then attacked the Auckland Star. A person in Auckland made a totally outrageous statement that offended 99 percent of New Zealanders, and said that someone should go out and kill a white and be a hero.
The Race Relations Conciliator could not be moved to say one word of opprobrium about it… The view and the myth that if one belongs to a minority one cannot be guilty of racist behaviour are being reinforced, and they are rubbish.”
As a result of that controversy, Section 9A of the Race Relations Act was eventually replaced by Sections 61 and 131 of the Human Rights Act 1993.
Section 61 addressed the “kill a white” issue by prohibiting the use of “words which are threatening, abusive, or insulting or likely to excite hostility against any group of persons on the ground of race”, not only in public places, but also in “any place” where “the person using the words knew or ought to have known that the words were reasonably likely to be published…”
In addition, the new law clarified the fact that the media can legally report on such matters.
Section 131 of the Act established the fact that inciting racial disharmony is a criminal offence – punishable by a fine of up to $7,000 or imprisonment of up to 3 months. As a safeguard, however, under Section 132, the consent of the Attorney General is needed before any prosecution can be instituted.
However, in spite of there being a high threshold for prosecution, the activities of the Race Relations Commissioner continue to have a chilling effect on free speech – especially their media monitoring project, aimed at naming and shaming news outlets critical of Maori rights.
Over the years, vested Maori interests have learnt to use human rights laws to seek advantage, by using accusations of racism or intolerance to close down the debate, whenever anyone speaks out against their agenda.
The New Zealand Centre for Political Research has been the subject of such accusation when commenting on important matters such as the government’s plan to establish iwi control of the country’s fresh water. More recently we have been criticised for publishing details of where local body candidates stand on the vexed question of unelected representatives with voting rights being appointed onto Councils.
As an independent organisation we remain undeterred, and congratulate our newsletter readers, who are also standing up to the racism being expressed by iwi and the likes of Dame Susan.
Our Local Government Election Project is a community service – thanks to the help of newsletter readers, the Vote 2016 index HERE provides details of which candidates around the country oppose the appointment of unelected representatives – who cannot be held to account by their local community – onto their councils.
With voting papers due to be sent out next week, we are encouraging readers to visit the website and vote for candidates brave enough to stand up against iwi control of councils. The direct link to this resource is www.nzcpr.com/local-body-elections-2016 – so please feel free to spread the word and help assist others in making their voting decisions.
Some iwi regard the notion that only elected representatives should have the right to vote on councils as “old world thinking”. They seem to believe that Treaty settlement money and resources gives them a supreme right to by-pass democracy and have their representatives appointed to sit and vote at council decision-making tables.
They are not only pressuring councils for this, but some are threatening them as well:
“If iwi are not valued by their local community and encouraged, rather than discouraged, to participate and invest in decision-making at all levels of council they will rightfully invest their economic and political influence in other regions.”
But in our view it is tribalism that is “old world thinking”, not democracy. A progressive society needs to respect cultural differences but move into the future as one society with one sovereign and common laws. That view will no doubt continue to attract the criticism of those who profit from a separatist agenda, and those like the Race Relations Office who are part of that industry.
Iwi are also pushing for seats on local councils through the Treaty settlement process – and central government is capitulating with legislation to that effect.
Probably the best known case is that of the Independent Maori Statutory Board, which was established during Auckland’s amalgamation in 2010. The legislation states that the nine member board was set up as an ‘advisory’ body – with “a maximum of 2 persons to sit as members on each of the Auckland Council’s committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources”.
The new Auckland Council however, appointed members onto many other Council committees and gave them voting rights.
The interesting question, therefore, is whether the candidates standing for the new Auckland Council would support a motion to return the Statutory Board to the advisory role envisioned by the Government when the legislation was drawn up. In other words, would they be prepared to take away the Board’s representation on many of the Council committees and their voting rights?
The reality is that New Zealand society does not want to be divided by race, even though this is being aggressively promoted by the Human Rights Commission – including putting increasing pressure on every local authority in the country to adopt Maori wards.
While this move might find favour with the iwi elite, it most certainly is not supported by the vast majority of communities, who simply want to keep race out of local politics.
So back to Lindsay Perigo’s question – should our Human Rights laws be axed?
It’s also question that is being asked in Australia and in Britain, where there is a growing recognition that there is no need to protect individuals from the actions of others through human rights legislation.
With New Zealand already having an established Bill of Rights to limit the power of the state and protect our freedom, surely it’s now time to abandon the legislative human rights approach, which is increasingly doing the opposite – expanding the power of the state and limiting our freedom!
Local Councils, Medical Trials And GMOs: Call For Nick Smith’s Resignation September 8 2016 | From: Scoop
The scaremongering and misrepresentation of the Auckland Unitary council’s long term plan shows that Dr. Nick Smith is deliberately twisting and misrepresenting the facts, and raising fears that important medical research will be banned. Yet he knows any such concern is false.
The AUP expressly excludes medical and veterinary applications stating “Potential GMO activities of relevance include GM food crops, trees, grasses, animals and pharma crops, but,exclude research within contained laboratories involving GMOs, medical applications involving the manufacture and use of GM products…”
In seeking to mislead the public, the Minister is following the lead of Federated Farmers of New Zealand. Federated Farmers challenged the right of councils, who govern under the Resource Management Act (RMA), to place precautionary GE wording in their plans, in the Environment Court.
The challenge was not upheld. They then appealed the Environment Court’s decision to the High Court, which has now dismissed the appeal.
The Minister's anti-democratic panicked response of introducing a new law that expressly prohibits councils to consider environmental and land use protections around GMO’s, shows a cynical contempt for due process and local democracy.
It is an indictment on Dr. Smith and shows that he is not working for the good of the country but is using his powers and influence to pursue an agenda outside of his responsibilities as a Minister.
This serious breach of conduct transgresses his responsibilities as a minister. He is apparently unable to avoid his conflicts of interest around the GE issue.
This terrible situation leads us to call for his resignation as a Minister of the Crown.
Local Councils, Medical Trials And GMOs
Medical trials involving genetically modified vaccines and other GM treatments will still be allowed under planning changes Auckland and three other local councils are making.
Auckland councillors this week agreed to a ban on the general release of genetically modified organisms under the city's Unitary Plan.
That has led to concerns that a medical trial involving genetically modified organisms would be stopped in its tracks.
Environment Minister Dr Nick Smith said that the Government would review the "appropriateness of councils being involved in regulating genetically modified organisms".
“A trial for liver cancer vaccine Pexa-Vec is being conducted at Auckland Hospital which involves a GMO. The new Auckland Unitary Plan prohibits the release of any GMO and would not allow any such future medical treatments,” Dr Smith said in a press release.
The SMC put together the following Expert Q&A with Dr Kerry Grundy, Team Leader (Futures Planning), Whangarei District Council. (Contact Dr Grundy on 09 430 4200)
1: Will existing and/or future medical trials involving GMOs be banned in these regions as a result of the plan changes?
“I can confirm that the GMO provisions in all planning documents do not affect medical applications involving GMOs including present and future applications. These are permitted."
"The plan provisions apply only to outdoor use of GMOs, i.e. GMOs released to the environment or outdoor field trial of GMOs. They do not apply to indoor use in contained facilities, laboratories, hospitals or to medical applications or most veterinary applications."
2. As part of the plan provisions, do the Councils require any additional notification of, or approval for, GM-related trials (medical or otherwise) than is currently required through the likes of the Environmental Protection Authority?
“The councils’ plan provisions make outdoor field trials of GMOs a discretionary activity under the RMA. This means they need a resource consent from council to conduct a field trial in addition to approval from the EPA."
"The resource consent will require strict liability from the party conducting the trial for any environmental or economic damage that may occur as a result of the trial together with a bond to cover any costs should they arise (HSNO does not require this)."
"This does not apply to medical trials as medical applications are specifically excluded from council provisions. In addition, the definition of field trials in the plan provisions refers only to 'outdoor' field trials."
3. Are there any specific provisions relating to patients involved in medical trials who are being treated with GM therapies - such as the Pexa-Vec liver cancer vaccine? For instance, relating to where the vaccines can be administered, or where patients are housed while receiving treatment?
“There are no specific provisions relating to patients involved in medical trials who are being treated with GM therapies presently or in the future. Medical applications are not subject to the plan provisions. They are treated as permitted activities under the RMA. They require no consent from council. Council has no role in relation to them."
4. Are there currently any outdoor trials of GMOs underway in any of the regions governed by the four Councils that have contributed to the plan?
“There are no outdoor field trials that I am aware of underway in any of the jurisdictions covered by the councils in Auckland and Northland who have or are in the process of putting GMO provisions in their planning documents."
5. What provisions have the Councils made for the possible future introduction of new genetic technologies, such as gene-editing techniques, and their evaluation and classification as GM according to the plan?
“Councils have made no specific provisions for possible future introduction of new genetic techniques and their classification as GM according to the plans. Councils only regulate GMOs as defined in the HSNO Act."
"The plans’ definition of a GMO is the same as the HSNO definition. If an organism produced by a new technique is included as a GMO under the HSNO Act it will be treated as such by the plans. If an organism produced by a new technique is not defined as a GMO under HSNO it will not be caught by the plan provisions."
*The GMO plan provisions that are in the Auckland Unitary Plan and in plan changes to the WDC and FNDC GMO plan changes are based on research and documentation produced by the Working Party.
1080: NZ Animals Killed For No Reason In $80m Yearly 1080 Drops September 6 2016 | From: Various
Over 80 million dollars, including farmers hard earned cash, is spent every year eradicating a disease, that by World standards, doesn't exist...
“The Agency considered that acute exposures to 1080 in humans and animals may give rise to irreversible adverse, target organ [heart and brain] effects. These effects are severe.”
"The recent post about 89 dead Kiwis that DOC didn’t bother to test for 1080 poisoning relates to this report of birds that actually were tested. Thanks to the person with a conscience who let the public know what is going on!"
More 1080 videos + If you have your pets, farm stock, deer, trout or eels, native wildlife (including birds), poisoned on or near your property or have any information to share with regard to aerial 1080 poison drops taking place near you, please let us know
At the recent local government conference widespread concern was expressed about the potential loss of “local democracy” if a revamped Local Government Commission (LGC) is authorised to amalgamate various bodies and require the establishment of commercial agencies with little if any elected directors.
Discussion almost entirely ignored the most radical proposal now before the House: to make the LGC a Crown agent (that is, subject to explicit direction by a minister) and to exempt from the Official Information Act any information from or about the process leading to a decision of the LGC, for example, to amalgamate.
Perhaps the bill is just provocative; perhaps fears of making local government a creature of the central executive are groundless. If not, this is a significant constitutional change.
Retiring Wellington Regional Councillor
I do not recall seeing anything in the HB Today about submissions which have, of course, closed. The bill is before parliament on its second reading before reaching a Select Committee.
This is of great concern because, once again, our democracy is being challenged BEHIND CLOSED DOORS and the unwanted result will be presented to us as fait accompli – too late for us to do anything, again.
"If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There’s no point in being a damn fool about it!" - W.C. Field, American comedian
Not content with the failure of the Local Government Commission to merge councils in Northland, the Hawke’s Bay, and Wellington, National is now proposing to put their amalgamation agenda into effect via the back door, by using a new local government bill to increase the power of the Commission, while removing important democratic rights.
The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) is now in front of Parliament’s Local Government and Environment Select Committee and is open for submissions until Thursday 28 July – full details can be seen here.
The Bill’s preamble explains that it aims to lift local authority performance, as part of the Government’s overall objective of improving public services and building a more productive and competitive economy. It does this by streamlining the process for combining and co-ordinating services, infrastructure and resources across regions and towns, through a greater use of Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs).
As the Local Government Minister Sam Lotu-Iiga explained in his first reading speech:
"Communities in Northland, Hawke’s Bay, and Wellington have told us that they do not want full-scale amalgamation, but this bill provides a middle ground. Communities will retain their elected councils; the councils, in turn, will be able to work more collaboratively to manage infrastructure and services across our regions. This will deliver more joined-up, cost-effective services and better value for our ratepayers.”
So while the present legislation promotes council amalgamations as the way to gain the scale required to combine services, the new Bill facilitates the sharing of services between councils, without the need for amalgamation – unless it is agreed by all councils.
While under the present law only individuals, groups, councils, and the Minister can propose amalgamations, the Bill extends that power to the Local Government Commission. To balance that, the Bill includes an automatic poll of citizens over any Commission-led re-organisation proposal, including the transfer of water, transport, or Resource Management Act functions from one local authority to another.
However, there’s a catch. The Bill removes an important democratic safeguard, namely the automatic right of residents and ratepayers to petition councils for a binding poll on any amalgamation proposal – if supported by 10 percent of electors.
As a result, under the new Bill, if a number of councils jointly agree on amalgamation, local citizens will have no right to call for a poll. This has already led to speculation that councils might be encouraged to collude in order to circumvent a public poll.
We strongly recommend that the ability of residents and ratepayers to petition their local authority for a poll on any amalgamation or reorganisation proposals should either be re-instated, or the provision for an automatic poll on Commission-led changes should be extended to cover all amalgamation and re-organisation proposals.
The point is that local ratepayers have a fundamental right to have a say in the structure of representative decision-making in their communities, since they are the ones who fund council infrastructure and assets.
There is also a concern that a central requirement in the current law, that there must be “demonstrable community support” for an amalgamation proposal to proceed, has been removed. Instead, the new Bill focuses on “the likelihood of significant community opposition to any reorganisation…”
In effect, this change in presumption from an amalgamation needing community support to proceed, to the lesser hurdle that it should go ahead, unless there is significant opposition, dramatically lowers the threshold.
We suggest that the old standard is the correct one – new local government re-organisation proposals should have to demonstrate that they have the support of their community in order to proceed.
When community support was used as a benchmark by the Commission in the last three amalgamation attempts, the results were conclusive: in Northland, 93 percent of submitters opposed a single council, in Wellington, 89 percent were opposed, and in the Hawke’s Bay, where a poll was held, 66 percent of voters were opposed.
In defence of the new Bill, the Local Government Minister explained:
"The projected costs of maintaining and building core infrastructure such as water, sewerage, flood protection and roading are growing exponentially faster than the ability of local ratepayers to bear.
The bill enables the development of shared infrastructure ownership and management across regions. This is essential for developing regions and communities”.
But this is also a key reason why communities should remain closely involved in the reform process – the creation of CCOs for the delivery of water and roading services, could remove a major part of the budget of many small councils, signalling their radical downsizing into largely regulatory agencies.
Further, since concerns remain that the Commission, on behalf of the Minister, could create CCOs, without the approval of the council or the community, it is imperative that community involvement and support remains a priority in the Bill – especially given the dreadful problems that are still evident in Auckland, where residents and ratepayers had amalgamation forced upon them.
Meanwhile, the Local Government Commission is wasting no time. Although their plans for Auckland-style super cities and Maori Statutory Boards in Northland, Wellington and the Hawke’s Bay were rejected, they are now informing councils that they intend to reconsider other restructuring options to promote greater efficiencies in the regions. They plan to progress their re-organisation proposals under the new law.
If you are concerned about the potential erosion of local democracy, and the failure of the proposed law to adequately safeguard public involvement in major council reorganisation decision-making, we would urge you to send in a quick submission on the Bill outlining your concerns by Thursday.
With local body elections just weeks away, local government reform is not the only thing being dumped on councils.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, Fiona Mackenzie, an Auckland-based political commentator, outlines how councillors in the region are having to battle against a power grab by tribal interests for control of the crucial Hauraki Gulf.
The Hauraki Gulf is a massive coastal area covering 1.2 million hectares from Mangawai in the North, to Waihi in the South, and Great Barrier Island in the East, encompassing Auckland, the Hauraki Plains and the Coromandel Peninsula. It includes the Ports of Auckland, shipping routes, marinas, fisheries, marine farms, and other commercial and recreational facilities.
At the present time, as Fiona explains, the area is controlled by the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act:
"Since 2000, the Gulf has been managed by the Hauraki Gulf Forum with Auckland Council as its administering authority. Its 21-member board includes Ministry bureaucrats, elected representatives of all the region’s councils, plus 6 self-nominated tribal representatives appointed by the Minister of Conservation.”
She outlines how, at their meeting last month, iwi tried to force through a re-organisation proposal for a new 16-member Board, constituted on the 50:50 Maori sovereignty co-governance model, whereby 8 members would represent Maori and 8 members would represent everyone else, giving tribes unassailable control of the Board and the Hauraki Gulf.
Under their scheme, the number of iwi representatives on the new Forum would be increased from 6 to 8. The number of councillors representing the vast Auckland region would be cut from 7 to 1. Representatives of the five other councils in the area – the Hauraki District Council, the Matamata-Piako District Council, the Thames-Coromandel District Council, the Waikato District Council, and the Waikato Regional Council – would be cut from 5 to 2.
And the number of public servants representing the Minister of Maori Affairs, the Minister of Conservation, and the Minister of Fisheries, would be increased from 3 to 5.
All in all, only 3 of the 16 representatives on the proposed new governance body would be elected to represent the public interest and the almost 2 million people who live in the area.
Under the proposal the new iwi-controlled Board would demand statutory authority to enact legislation over the entire area.
Why, in a democracy based on equal rights and the rule of law, such a racist proposal could have progressed to the point where it is being seriously considered, is hard to fathom – although it’s not altogether surprising, given that the long-term agenda of Maori tribal leaders is to gain sufficient status and power to control the country’s major resources.
According to Fiona:
"The meeting became rather acrimonious when some expressed concern at this attempt to shove the recommendations through. Understandably, they wished to have it reviewed by their respective organisations and obtain a mandate before voting. The inevitable claims of ‘racism’ were made.”
She is concerned that those in positions of power on the Auckland Council, who support the sovereignty cause, might manipulate the process so the proposal may not be decisively defeated, as it should be:
"At the time of writing, the Forum’s Auckland City Councillors did not yet know if this Report would be reviewed and voted on by their Council’s governing body. There’s a chance it could be directed to a sub-committee for an easier passage from carefully selected participants, plus the two votes from the unelected, unaccountable and totally conflicted members of the Independent Maori Statutory Board.”
It is clear that the group wanting control of the Gulf were pushing Forum members to approve their new governance model on the spot, ahead of the local body elections, as they clearly believe they have the numbers to get their proposal through and do not want to risk having their compliant representatives replaced by others who might oppose their plan.
If they succeed in gaining support for their 50:50 Maori sovereignty-style co-governance proposal, the next step in their march for tribal control of the Hauraki Gulf, will be to seek the approval of the Government for a change to the Act. With the National Party’s history of caving in to iwi demands, whether they would stand up against this blatant power grab is anyone’s guess.
This whole debacle shows only too clearly how important it is that our local body representatives are prepared to act on principle and stand up for the public interest against radicals.
By offering themselves for office, candidates are pledging to work in the best interests of their community. That means opposing anyone threatening the principle of one person one vote.
With an on-going campaign underway to pressure councillors to support the appointment of un-elected iwi representatives with voting rights onto local authorities, it is important that potential candidates are well prepared. Standing up to iwi and their supporters is not always easy, so we suggest the following questions should be asked:
If you are elected would you oppose iwi representatives being appointed onto your Council with voting rights?
If you are elected and a proposal to appoint iwi representatives with voting rights onto your Council wins majority support, would you propose that the final decision should be made by local electors through a public referendum process?
If your Council has already established iwi representatives with voting rights, will you move that the positions be disestablished so they can be reconsidered by the new council?
If you send email responses from candidates to us, we will add the details to our website here – as a public service in the run up to the elections.
New Zealand needs strong local government politicians. But be warned – as Fiona’s article indicates only too clearly, you need to be prepared to stick to your principles and not cave in to bullying or intimidation.
Most of all you must never forget that you are there to represent the best interests of your community – and those who voted you into office.
Why Are Prices So High In New Zealand? + Homeless In New Zealand - Thousands Living In Garages And Cars August 27 2016 | From: MediaWhores / Aljazeera
Dear Leader Knows Best – and the Stats (Satanists) don’t lie.
Luciferian Zionists are incapable of speaking the truth
The media today are ‘debating’ why prices are so high in New Zealand. They have decided to ask the experts. The experts are all pretty sure there is no inflation. The Government told us so. And the experts all work for the Government – or for the banks, who run the Government.
Sounds like a story out of Soviet Russia doesn’t it?
Prices in NZ have in fact risen by at least 200% since the 2008 Global financial crisis. 400+ % on my favorite cheese, and my honey for example. 200% plus on housing, and power bills some say also. Yet somehow the ‘Government’ and the corporate media all agree that there hasn’t really been any inflation at all in the past 10 years.
It should be noted that wages and salaries are almost unchanged in that same period – in economics speak, this translates to “lower real wages” or the amount of purchasing power of your money / pay.
If prices are 200% or more up, and your wages remain the same – you might be experiencing budgeting problems.
And the bottom 5% will all be living in their cars. Which is precisely the case under this Soviet like John Key regime – who pose as “capitalists”.
We need to explain why those prices have been rising (money counterfeiting by the banks essentially) but first, lets consider the other thing putting upwards pressure on our prices – exports.
New Zealand is now feeding upwards of 60,00, 000 people overseas. That is how much food we produce – a massive amount. One of the biggest food producers per capita in the entire World.
We are a giant farm really, with some traffic jams in the middle. All of the very best food is exported to the likes of 5 star hotels across Asia and Europe, and thousands of tonnes more to supermarkets and chain stores all over.
You can of course buy anything you want here – but you just have to pay the same price as top corporate executives are offering for it in Tokyo and London.
If that makes you feel a little queasy, also keep in mind that most of the corporates shipping all of our food and resources overseas, are paying almost no tax these days. They all have advanced offshore licensing fees and trusts to launder the profit through to.
Assholes like Graeme Hart (above) are held up for us as some kind of hero – when he is in fact one of the single biggest causes of poverty in our modern day history.
In fact - Kiwis are now not only dealing with 100-200 % lower real wages these days but are also paying around 65% net taxes on their salaries and wages. That includes 20-30% income tax, 15% GST, ACC rates, petrol taxes, tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes, local rates, and on and on. Then thanks to “privatisation” you have to pay for most “Government Services” anyway.
It is in fact beyond madness – it is looking more and more like some type of Corporate Fourth Reich. A corporate holocaust being run by our Government in conjunction with their Corporate partners.
The Corporate Fourth Reich is apparently well underway in New Zealand – and under a Prime Minister who claims to be Jewish oddly enough. Zionists I hear some people refer to them as. Which looks suspiciously like the word Nazi to me.
Turns out now “the experts” in the media want to tax sugar as well. The poor can only afford cheap foods full of sugar these days. So the new tax is clearly designed to make their lives even harder. Fact is, if they had any interest in keeping people healthy, they would simply remove taxes off fruit and vegetables.
That is the reality of New Zealand these days – a small handful of apparently very well connected and financed people are doing just great, overseas trips, baches, overseas homes, etc – and everyone else is being slowly killed off via a scientifically designed and deployed corporate extermination program.
‘The others’ have nice large distilled water (h2o) treatment plants for them and their family, and everyone else is drinking sodium fluoride and chlorine – if they are lucky – the unlucky rate payers are actually dying from preventable diseases in their water supplies. This is apparently the new standard.
Interesting to note that no one has been held responsible for the Havelock North Water Crisis – these ‘leaders’ are now poisoning everyone and still get to keep their jobs.
Hapless sellout idiot and Mr. Agenda 21 New Zealand, Lawrence Yule expects to be re-elected and he cannot even tell 5,000 + people why they are sick for weeks from a poisoned water supply
One wonders how bad it is going to get?
One thing is for sure – the amount of crap that Kiwis are prepared to put up with has increased exponentially in just 25 years. Probably at the same rate as the size of their TV screens.
And why do we have inflation on our remaining food ? Mostly due to the money printing / counterfeiting operations of the foreign banks – that money you sign for and they lend you, at interest?
Yeah, it came out of thin air... a very sophisticated magic trick, that only certain qualified magicians are apparently allowed to do.
Homeless In New Zealand - Thousands Living In Garages And Cars
Once a pioneer of the social welfare state, New Zealand now has over 40,000 people who are homeless, forced to live in their cars and in garages as a result of rapid house price and rent rises and a shortage of social housing.
Al Jazeera correspondent Tarek Bazley visits South Auckland and meets two families – one with six children living in a derelict garage, the other who lived with three teenagers for months in their car – and charts the country’s fall from and egalitarian society to one with deep divisions of wealth.
Megalithic New Zealand: Pyramids, Rabbits, And Megaliths Of Upper World And Underworld August 11 2016 | From: Priscilla Rawiri-Steele
Pyramids and megalithic monuments are everywhere in New Zealand, so often eroded or utterly huge they may, and have been explained away as natural rock formations, so people tend to fail to see them.
‘Little Pyramid’ Okia, Victory Beach, Otago Peninsula New Zealand
It is only in old photos like the one below of the Gorge du Fier in France, it is possible to see the men are looking down upon an enormous face of a pagan deity which has subsequently been carefully smoothed, as has protractedly occurred in New Zealand.
It is only in old photos like this one of the Gorge du Fier in France, it is possible to see the men are looking down upon an enormous face of a pagan deity which has subsequently been carefully smoothed, as has protractedly occurred in New Zealand.
Gorge du Fier at d'Annecy France – the yellow box contains the face that the men are looking down upon; sourced from an old post card in my personal collection
Little pyramid at Okia, Victory Beach Otago, in the South Island of New Zealand has long since been vandalized. Next to it is a half-buried sphinx; its face has been cut away. Why intentionally hide an ancient civilization by disguise / disfigurement / damnatio memoriae and then present the wreck of it to future generations as mysterious: Cui Bono?
Low tide reveals an ancient wall at Achilles Point Ladies Bay / St. Heliers, Auckland, NZ. This is clearly a construction - not a natural formation
Wall at Machu Picchu, Peru. The construction technique is an example of the dimensional knockover technique as decribed by David Wilcock in his research / writings
Elephant Megalith Heimaey Island south Iceland
Cape Brett, New Zealand carving of an African Elephant
Cape Brett, where the tourist ships pass through was long ago carved into the shape of a massive African Elephant. Like these massive carvings, black basalt columns with hexagonal / pentagonal tops were carefully explained away as natural rock carvings as early as 1772, by Sir Joseph Banks.
Having noticed them in New Zealand upon the Otago Peninsular, Banks hurried to Staffa Island to compare the black basalt columns there with the The Giants’ Causeway in Ireland, and to obscure their true nature and meaning by explaining them away as miraculous and natural rock formations (The Extreme Earth, Caves by Jeanne K. Hanson, and Geoffrey H. Nash p. 70 Staffa Island).
Canto XLi Ludovico Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso as translated by (Hieronymus)Jiminez de Urrea
Why would Sir Joseph Banks do such a thing? Honey bees make hexagonal cells in their hives, and the honey bee is the emblem of Minoans. Ubiquitous hexagon causeways, and pillar designs are an important key to understanding that, like a honey thief pillaging the hive for honey, the gold and riches stored in the castles / temples / pyramids of Minoans had been violently and protractedly extracted.
Ancient wall at Owairaka, New Zealand
At Don Heads Coles beach Devonport Tasmania are the same worn hexagonal / pentagonal rocks, and by 1802-4 the Tasmanian Aboriginal had been eradicated from the face of the Earth.
Was Banks covering up archaeological monumental clues? Was Banks complimenting with his dismissal of man-made edifices and megaliths, the damnatio memoriae practiced by academics over the last four centuries so that today, Hyperborea mentioned in my modern edition of Orlando Furioso, is referred to by just one short line stating that Hyperborea is a land that lies “in the extreme north”?
Lion Rock, Piha, West coast, Auckland,m New Zealand.
It is hard to escape the question: what would drive academics to so deface an original work so they might change the location of a whole country / domain spanning at least three continents, from south to north?
Photo below, imputed to portray Machu Picchu as it was found by the son of a Protestant missionary, Hiram Bingham. Under sphinx (with ancient ghostly outline of face cut away and lying crumped on left paw?
The same sawing marks are on this sphinx head, as on the cut away head at one of the two sphinx at Piha pictured above, on Auckland’s west coast) 1912. Overleaf are two photos of Paritutu, or what is called today Sugar Loaf at New Plymouth. Despite all the foliage and erosion, the sphinx face and flaring Egyptian crown is evident to the naked eye. In the water, paws may yet be discerned.
Machu Picchu, 1912
Why pyramids and Megaliths in New Zealand? Due to the towering stature of remains found, Flinders Petrie hypothesized that the first dynasty of Egypt came from Pa Swenet (Pwenet, Punt).
After the Reformation, those once clandestinely Humanist, but subsequent to and during the Reformation, openly Protestant countries, undoubtedly took what became known as the Flemish and or German Giant Rabbit, off the abodes they destroyed, at what is today called Auckland. I believe our rabbit of Pa Swenet (Pwenet or Punt) went on to carry his time piece, and run in haste before Alice in Dis.
Paritutu New Plymouth, New Zealand
Fairly central to The Triumph of Death, did Bruegel the Elder depict next to our beloved honey bee depicted as flying fecal matter, our beautifully preserved and treasured vases being lowered from our castles?
Today these ancient masterpieces are held in great Museums of the world such as The Getty and are given pertinent or profound attributions such as The Underworld Painter and too, bogus attributions like The Baltimore Painter.
Paritutu New Plymouth, New Zealand
In the late 18th century, the light bulb was also stolen from the Pa at what is today called Auckland, a place which The Royal (Naval) Society explorative scientists vouched was the receptacle of all the treasures and secrets of The Herculaneum (as mentioned in the Third Edition of my second book citing The Enlightenment and Why it Still Matters by Anthony Pagden).
Bruegel The Elder The Triumph of Death
Terrain for comparison with Bruegel’s The Triumph of Death from a View of Auckland from Mount Eden circa 1910 as sourced from a Post card marked Tourist Series B026 Printed in Great Britain. The zigzag of dark greenery follows the old canal
This almost two and a half thousand year old Red Figure Vase is attributed to The Underworld Painter, so does it form part of loot taken from Te Totara (said by the Ancient Greeks Tartaros – The Underworld)?
Francesco del Cossa (1430 – 1477) The Triumph of Venus painting held in Palazzo Schifanoia, Ferrara
The rubbing out of archaeological sites was carried out and recorded over centuries. At the beginning of the 20th Century, Ōwairaka Pa (later called Mount Albert) was forcibly taken down by half its mass. In the photo below, the quarry pictured is noticeably on the same proportions as Bruegel’s Tower of Babel.
Pieter Bruegel the Elder 1525 – 1569 Painting called The Tower of Babel
The beautiful Auaunga (Au as it is today, is short for Latin Aurum or gold) stream canal has been covered. (“….Quarrying stopped suddenly in 1928. The height of the mountain was reduced from 148 metres to 135 metres and most of the Maori terraces were destroyed. Today, less than half the original land mass remains.
Men posing on a ‘quarry’ at Auckland ca. 1900. Photograph originally sourced from Auckland War Memorial Museum
The ballast pit was levelled off to make the archery field and in 1961, the inside surfaces of the cone were smoothed off further removing archeological traces”. As sourced from ‘Destruction of the Mountain’ at Ōwairaka Mount Albert Heritage Walks, Neighbourhood Walks at Aucklandcouncil.gov.nz).
A rock climber at the base of the citadel Mount Eden 1967
Did the Hyperboreans survive the last Ice Age, and are those ghostly straight lines really the outline of pyramids hiding there under snow and ice in Antarctica?
Are there undiscovered pyramids in New Zealand filled with untold treasure? If these matters which stir every adventurer’s heart would be answered by the truth coming out about the fate of the Hyperboreans, it is also pertinent to ask; what is the long term social and political and moral legacy of covering up the truth about what happened to the Minoans of Hyperborea?
Philomel passing before Pyramid Coromandel 1946
Here, the twins with the Minoan flower central to the Phaistos disc are beautifully painted in Augustus Earle’s observation about the fate of the founders of the First Dynasty of Egypt. Are future generations of academics really going to allow the raft of lies and manipulation of truth to continue, and ultimately, at what cost to Humanity?
Megalithomania 2008: Hamish Miller - The Stone People of New Zealand
Published on Jun 26, 2012 The 2016 Megalithomania Conference is on 7th-8th May in Glastonbury, UK, with a top line-up of ancient mysteries authors and researchers including Julian Richards, Brien Foerster, Hugh Newman and more. Details here: megalithomania.co.uk.
Filmed at the Megalithomania Conference, Glastonbury, 17th - 18th May 2008. (Also available on a high-quality DVD from megalithomania.co.uk. An account of the extraordinary manifestations of the energy of the earth at sacred places in New Zealand, looking at many ancient pre-Maori megalithic sites.
Hamish co-authored 'In Search of the Southern Serpent' with Barry Brailsford about the pre-historic sites and earth energies of New Zealand and updates us on his research at Megalithomania. He discussed the cathartic communication through the Stone People which led to the creation of his new project, the Parallel Community 9includes 6 minute preview of the new DVD).
Hamish Miller is a dowser, metal sculptor and author. He read engineering at Edinburgh and through his books, talks and workshops his work on earth energies has earned him an international reputation. Book titles include The Sun and the Serpent, It's Not Too Late,
The Dance of the Dragon, The Definitive Wee Book on Dowsing, and In Search of the Southern Serpent (published in May 2006).
A new DVD, Hamish on The Parallel Community was released in November 2007 and is now available. Hamish has lectured widely in Britain, America, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand and has appeared in television programmes in Britain, Sweden, Holland, America, Australia and South Africa.
Currently working with the rapidly expanding Parallel Community (inspired by his cathartic 'meeting' with the ancestors in New Zealand), Hamish lives with his wife Ba, physiotherapist, dowser and researcher, on twelve acres of rough bracken, gorse and granite where they spend their spare time planting trees and trying to stop rabbits from eating them. Related:Russian Scientists Build And Study Pyramids: What They Found Could Change The World
In New Zealand, Lands and Rivers Can Be People (Legally Speaking) August 10 2016 | From: TheNewYorkTimes
Can a stretch of land be a person in the eyes of the law? Can a body of water?
In New Zealand, they can. A former national park has been granted personhood, and a river system is expected to receive the same soon.
The unusual designations, something like the legal status that corporations possess, came out of agreements between New Zealand’s government and Maori groups. The two sides have argued for years over guardianship of the country’s natural features.
Chris Finlayson, New Zealand’s attorney general, said the issue was resolved by taking the Maori mind-set into account. “In their worldview, ‘I am the river and the river is me,’” he said. “Their geographic region is part and parcel of who they are.”
From 1954 to 2014, Te Urewera was an 821-square-mile national park on the North Island, but when the Te Urewera Act took effect, the government gave up formal ownership, and the land became a legal entity with “all the rights, powers, duties and liabilities of a legal person,” as the statute puts it.
"The settlement is a profound alternative to the human presumption of sovereignty over the natural world,” said Pita Sharples, who was the minister of Maori affairs when the law was passed.
Personhood means, among other things, that lawsuits to protect the land can be brought on behalf of the land itself, with no need to show harm to a particular human.
Next will be the Whanganui River, New Zealand’s third longest. The local Maori tribe views it as:
"An indivisible and living whole, comprising the river and all tributaries from the mountains to the sea - and that’s what we are giving effect to through this settlement,”
Mr. Finlayson said. It is expected to clear Parliament and become law this year.
Visitors can still enjoy Te Urewera the way they could when it was a park. “We want to welcome people; public access is completely preserved,” Mr. Finlayson said. But permits for activities like hunting are now issued by a board that includes government and Maori representatives. A similar board will be set up for the river.
Could this legal approach spread beyond New Zealand? Mr. Finlayson said he had talked the idea over with Canada’s new attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould.
The Truth Is Possibly Out There August 3 2016 | From: NewZealandHerald
The following article appeared in the 'New Zealand Herald on Sunday', last Sunday 31 August. In the lead up to David Icke's visit to New Zealand the writer approached a number of New Zealand based people within the 'conspiracy' or 'truthseeker' community. The following is the online version of that article whch was published in print as an illustrated two page spread.
Does an ancient race of reptilian psychos run the world? Paul Little goes inside the world of conspiracy theorists. Confused? Feel like everything's falling part? Wondering why all this weird stuff keeps happening?
David Icke, the eminent conspiracy theorist - or truth seeker, as many who share his interests prefer to be called - is ready to help you make sense of it all, as part of his Worldwide Wakeup Tour, which plays at the Logan Campbell Centre in Auckland next Saturday.
He'll explain that despite the way things appear, our planet is run, as the New Statesman neatly summarised it, by the Archons.
“An ancient race of reptilian psychopaths who have ... blinded humans to the real world".
They are "creating a dystopian society" and an "inverted reality is being broadcast from Saturn via the Moon, which is hollow".
Which possibly raises more questions than it answers.
A conspiracy theory always requires, it should hardly need saying, some organisation. If, for instance, you believe in chemtrails, that's not a conspiracy theory. If you believe they are lines of chemicals laid in the sky for enigmatically evil reasons and there is an organised cover-up of the existence of chemtrails, that is a conspiracy theory.
Their impact can range from the relatively harmless - wondering if you'll bump into not-really-dead Elvis at the Ohope dairy - to downright dangerous [clearly has not read up on that] , such as not vaccinating children because you believe it causes autism.
The problem with conspiracy theories is so few have proved to be conspiracy facts. But enough have to make the concept plausible. Nicky Hager wrote a bestselling book about some.
There was a Watergate cover-up. US authorities did leave 399 African-Americans with syphilis untreated without their knowledge to see what would happen.
But why should we pay good money to listen to Icke and his foreign conspiracy theories when we have perfectly good ones of our own (see below). We're not short of local truth seekers.
Wakeupkiwi.com, contains details of numerous conspiracies, local and imported. Richard became interested in the area as a boy with an imagination fired by reading about dinosaurs and aliens. He started his now labyrinthine site as a repository for documentaries and links he thought like-minded thinkers might be interested in.
“But because of the sheer volume of things that are transpiring it's turned into something it was never meant to be," he says. "I get lost in it myself sometimes."
But he's no conspiracy theorist. That term, he says, was coined by the CIA to describe people who believed there was more to the Kennedy assassination than met the eye and "to make people sound like they were kooks before they opened their mouths".
Associate Professor Marc Wilson of Victoria University's School of Psychology notes that truth-seeking sounds active. Conspiracy theorist "could describe sitting in your mother's basement reading through dodgy websites for something nebulous like a conspiracy".
Wilson surveyed 6000 New Zealanders in 2008 and found people mentally put "conspiracy theorist" alongside "mental patient". "This is due in no small part to the centrality of paranoia as part of the stereotype of the conspiracy theorist," says Wilson.
There's no such thing as a typical truth seeker, says Wakeupkiwi:
“The only common denominator is that they are people who go, 'Why should we just believe everything we are told?'."
But, adds Wilson, people are also more likely to endorse conspiracy theories if they feel anomie, hostility, paranoia, have less formal education, lower income, poorer health, distrust of authority and less happiness.
Radio host Vinny Eastwood is happy to be called a conspiracy theorist.
“Everything is the opposite of what you think it is to a large degree," says Eastwood. "If you think it's a conspiracy theory it's a fact. If you think it's a fact it's made-up nonsense."
Since 2010, Eastwood, who sounds delighted to have been born in conspiracy-significant 1984, has been the Auckland-based host of an eponymous radio show that live-streams here and in the US on American Freedom Radio for two hours twice a week.
Topics in the archive include: "Elites in Fear of White Dragon Society & Gold Standard" and "Psychopaths Infest Every Major Institution! Can We Get Them Out?"
He got into the area in 2004, when introduced to "the comedy of Bill Hicks. And the usage of cannabis. And to conspiracy theories - the first thing I watched was Fahrenheit 9/11", Michael Moore's Bush presidency documentary.
But it was a 300-hour community service sentence for a minor cannabis charge that destroyed his faith in government and authorities and set him on a new course. Eastwood doesn't think issues here are very different from those elsewhere, which is why his show goes down well in the US, where similar challenges are being faced.
"For example, right now there's a big fluoride thing going on where local district councils will have the ability to decide whether we have fluoride put in our water taken out of their hands and put in the hands of the DHBs, which are more or less in the pocket of the Ministry of Health, which are more or less in the pocket of the big pharmaceutical industry, which is more or less in the pocket of the phosphate fertiliser industry which makes the fluoride."
A scarily small number of younger people think the Rainbow Warrior was bombed by agents of a foreign power.
Wakeupkiwi however, believes we are special because our size makes us an ideal testing ground, for example, with Eftpos. "That's why we had it 20 years before it was rolled out in the States."
Jonathan Eisen, editor of Uncensored, which proclaims itself "the best-selling English-language 'alternative' news magazine in the Southern Hemisphere", says New Zealand is like most other countries because we are built the same.
"I discovered a few years ago that New Zealand was a corporation much the same as the US is," says Eisen.
"If you go on the Securities and Exchange Commission website you can find the corporation is owned by another entity - Her Majesty the Queen in right of New Zealand."
The mainstream media, says Eisen, do their bit by self-censoring. When he worked with a flagship TV current affairs series and presented it with research showing the Aids virus was man-made, the journalist he was working with told him: "We can't touch that."
Eisen is 73 and has been seeking the truth from an early age.
"When I was a boy my father was the first one to connect smoking and heart disease and was censored essentially by the Journal of the American Medical Association. And he found out after he published in the Canadian Medical Journal that the AMA journal was financed in large part by the American Tobacco Institute."
Wilson thinks we have a fairly boring conspiracy landscape. Forty per cent have endorsed the All Black poisoning [at the 1995 World Cup], 45 per cent say New Zealand is manipulated by Big Business, and a scarily small number - about 60 per cent - of younger people think the Rainbow Warrior was bombed by agents of a foreign power.
He found rightwingers think there is a political conspiracy to advantage Maori and left wingers think there is one to disadvantage them. As for Icke, the likes of Montgomerie and Eisen are circumspect when it comes to endorsing his claims the Queen is a reptilian shape-shifter, among other things.
But, says Eisen
“Rather than disparage him I celebrate that he can open up new avenues for discussion that are sometimes way outside the dominant paradigm and our comfort zone, my own included, but that doesn't mean I don't take him seriously.
So much of his work, especially with regard to the power of the so-called elites, has borne fruit."
Writing in The Guardian, New York-based psychologist and science writer Rob Bretherton says Icke's view of things:
“As wild as it sounds, is kind of a hopeful message in that it is saying: 'Yes, there is a lot of stuff wrong with the world but we can put our finger on who's responsible and what's responsible for it and then we can do something about it'."
Frank (not his real name), a 33-year-old IT worker, whose conspiracy consciousness was raised by the documentary 9/11: In Plane Sight, worries that's not good enough:
“There's a subset of people within the truth-seeking community that will grab hold of anything with both hands," says Frank.
"They play into the hands of the elite. When those wacky theories get momentum it makes it easy to discredit the rest."
Nevertheless, says Montgomerie;
“The cat's out of the bag. A lot of people have put their lives on the line to expose the bigger picture. There is a big push for disclosure of everything. It's going to be messy for a while, but it's inevitable."
As well as the idea conspiracy theories offer hope things will be remedied, they also provide comfort by absolving us from feeling we should be in control. How can we be if we don't know what forces are secretly controlling that world?
But for some it's all too hard. Frank has stopped thinking about it so much.
“If you follow the money far enough you'll come to the people pulling the strings. And if you think about that too much and the decisions those people make and the world they've created. I got to a point where I was starting to get depressed thinking about this."
"Perhaps ignorance is bliss."
Made in New Zealand
An area of Northland's Waipoua forest has been sealed off by DoC because it contains megalithic structures that prove the existence of a pre-Maori civilisation, according to US-born archeo-astronomist Martin Doutre, who made the claims in his book Ancient Celtic New Zealand.
Prime Minister Norman Kirk was assassinated by the Trilateralist Commission - a shadow world Government. Part of a much bigger global conspiracy you can read about in The Opal File on wakeupkiwi.com.
The Rothschild cartel, a global banking organisation, attacked Christchurch with earthquake weaponry causing the Canterbury catastrophes, according to extensive exposition at thecontrail.com
Mind control through TV broadcasts was trialled through a transmitter in Hawkes Bay, according to Wakeupkiwi.
Rapper Tupac Shakur was not killed in 1996 but escaped to New Zealand where he lives undercover. This was a hoax a hacker group managed to get on to the website of US broadcaster PBS.
John Key wanted a new flag without the Union Jack because that would have concentrated more power in his hands by diminishing the authority of the Queen. See Due Authority: A Very Silent Coup at postmanproductions.org.
Welfare Cull 'Pushing Vulnerable Off The Books' July 30 2016 | From: NewZealandHerald
A welfare advocacy group is warning that thousands of Kiwis will suffer under newly implemented changes to the beneficiary system.
Auckland Action Against Poverty said the latest round of reforms, which require all sickness beneficiaries, sole parents and widows with no children under 14 to look for fulltime employment like other job seekers, would have a brutal impact on the wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of children and adults who are dependent on the state for survival.
The reforms, which came into force on July 15, represent the biggest upheaval in the welfare state since the Social Security Act was passed by the first Labour Government in 1938.
Other new obligations include drug-testing for jobseekers in relevant industries.
Auckland Action Against Poverty spokeswoman Sarah Thompson said the changes were aimed at decreasing the number of beneficiaries in New Zealand, rather than job creation.
“All New Zealanders who end up on welfare will have more hoops to jump through or face punitive measures as the Government attempts to push them into low-paid insecure work - no matter what the downstream cost.
This is not about getting people into decent work [and] it's not about job creation. It's about cutting costs by pushing vulnerable people off the books,'' she said.
The group will hold information stalls outside three Work and Income offices in Auckland today.
Ms Thompson said there had been an increase in the number of beneficiaries who had been "sanctioned'' for slip-ups in the last two months.
Some had also had their benefits reduced due to Work and Income errors.
What are the changes?
The reforms represent the biggest upheaval in the welfare state since the Social Security Act was passed by the first Labour Government in 1938.
All sickness beneficiaries, and sole parents and widows with no children under 14, are now subject to the same requirement to look for fulltime work as other jobless people, although sickness may be accepted as a valid reason to postpone work temporarily.
Other new obligations include drug-testing for jobseekers in relevant industries, which is expected to trigger benefit cuts for up to 5800 people, and a requirement for beneficiaries to clear outstanding arrest warrants.
About 8000 beneficiaries have arrest warrants outstanding for issues such as unpaid fines. Unless they clear them within 38 days, their benefits will be halved if they have children, or stopped completely if they don't, in what is likely to be the biggest single purge of the benefit rolls since the system was created.
Papakura case study
The co-ordinator of the Pikorua Community House in a low-income part of Papakura, Michelle Neho, said many people with outstanding warrants would go back to drug-dealing rather than pay their fines.
A Herald investigation into how the changes will affect people's lives in Papakura, as a case study of a high-welfare area, has found widespread fear of the reforms even among those who are supposed to be exempted from the work-search requirements.
“A lot of people are scared about the warrants to arrest," Ms Neho said. "There's a lot of people that have thousands of dollars of fines outstanding." Some would rather come off the benefit than pay all their fines.
The huge reorientation of welfare shifts the focus from the short-term unemployed, which largely left other beneficiaries alone, to a new "investment approach" aimed at finding work for those who are likely to stay on benefits the longest and cost taxpayers the most - mainly the sick, disabled and sole parents.
Work and Income chief Debbie Power said 85,000 people - mainly the sick, long-term unemployed, and sole parents and widows with no children under 14 - would move today into intensive "work-focused case management" with 760 personal case managers to help them find jobs and overcome barriers such as transport and childcare costs, addictions, debts and workplace attitudes to mental illness and other conditions.
A further 1000 sole parents and 1000 people with mental health problems will be handed over to contractors who will be paid from $2250 to $16,500 for each person they place in employment for at least a year.
From earlier in the month: Sallies' disagreement over homeless action
After the Prime Minister told reporters that people living in cars were refusing help, a rift has opened up between the government and the Salvation Army.
Peace Foundation Project To Get Peer Mediation In Every School In NZ July 26 2016 | From: NewZealandPeaceFoundation The Peace Foundation is the operating name of the Foundation for Peace Studies Aotearoa / New Zealand Inc. - Te Tuapapa Rongomau o Aotearoa.The Peace Foundation is a not for profit organisation working to build peaceful relationships among people of all ages and cultures, from personal to global through education, research and action.
The director of Platoon, Wallstreet and JFK was at Comic-Con 2016 in San Diego to discuss his new movie Snowden. Considering the topic of the movie, the panel were discussing the NSA, online privacy and government surveillance.
And could you let your network know about this too? Every small bit helps, and adding your name to that of Louisa Wall MP, Mayor Celia Wade Brown and Jeanette Fitzsimons helps to encourage others to follow your lead.
The work we do is the kind of educational training that a progressive Government should finance given it contributes to peaceful communities, whanau and schools, something that reaches into the very soul of Aotearoa New Zealand, does it not?
What else can we do to realise our target and help reduce crime, violence and aggression around our country?
With 24 days to go we have raised just over $24,000 with pledges made just recently. We won't get a cent of it if we don't raise $150,000 by14 August.
Our desirable goal is to raise $300,000 so that we can get peer mediation into a further 160 schools around the country and develop a project to get it to every single school, realising the peaceful Aotearoa NZ that drives you and me and so many others.
Latest update - With 23 days to go, 50 generous donors have pledged $24,399.50 And we have just received some FANTASTIC news!!! If we can raise further pledges of $125,603.50, a private donor has offered to TOP THIS UP WITH A PLEDGE OF $150,030 to reach our big goal of $300,033!
Which means we can roll out our peer mediation trainings to a further 160 schools AND develop a project with partners to reach every single school in New Zealand.
Please continue to share this initiative to your network, and ask your friends, your neighbours, the fellow passenger in the bus, or next to you in an Auckland traffic jam (or wherever you are in New Zealand or the world) to make a pledge for peace!
Who Owns New Zealand's Media? July 16 2016 | From: JMAD New Zealand Media Ownership Report / Throng / MadisonLevy / Various
The JMAD 2015 New Zealand Media Ownership Report observes that New Zealand media companies are now owned by a small number of private funds and investment banks. In the case of MediaWorks, financial ownership has intensified its profit imperatives, and led to the demolition of its news and currents affairs programmes.
In this context, it is encouraging that independent news organisations such as the National Business Review (NBR), BusinessDesk and Scoop, have continued to operate in the market.
In 2015, New Zealand media companies were implementing ‘digital first’ strategies, and integrating newsrooms across the print and online platforms. Unfortunately, this didn’t put ‘journalists first’, and newsroom layoffs continued.
The revenue structures of media companies continued to encounter difficulties, and new forms of partnership and collaboration emerged.
For example, Fairfax partnered with Sky TV, The Huffington Post and The New York Times; and APN with News Corp and The Washington Post in content delivery.
Additionally, NZME, TVNZ, MediaWorks and Fairfax joined forces in advertising against companies such as Facebook and Google.
In 2015, Rupert Murdoch returned to the New Zealand media market by acquiring a 15 per cent stake in APN, publisher of The New Zealand Herald. In contrast, mining billionaire Gina Rinehart sold all of her Fairfax shares. Consequently, the investment bank Morgan Stanley became the company’s largest shareholder.
Yet again MediaWorks became owned by one financial institution. In 2013 it went into receivership under its private equity owner Ironbridge Capital. In 2015, American hedge fund Oaktree Capital emerged as the biggest MediaWorks owner.
Key events concerning New Zealand media ownership
Billionaire Gina Rinehart exits Fairfax Media
Rupert Murdoch becomes the second largest owner in APN
MediaWorks becomes owned by Oaktree Capital
Scoop crowdfunds to become a not-for-profit outlet
From 2010 to 2015, the market structure of New Zealand media has not changed significantly. However, television broadcasting has become increasingly competitive with the arrival of on-demand and video streaming services.
During the past five years, the newspaper publishing, radioand televisionmarkets have been dominatedby the same major players: APN/NZME, Fairfax Media, MediaWorks, Sky TV, TVNZ, Radio New Zealand (RNZ), and Maori TV.
Additionally, independent news organisations such as Scoop, Allied Press, the National Business Review and BusinessDesk, maintained operations in an increasingly competitive media environment.
New Zealand Media and Entertainment (NZME) is owned by APN News and Media, an Australian media corporation headquartered in Sydney. APN is a publicly listed company owned by its shareholders, which operates both in Australia and New Zealand.
Similarly, Fairfax Media is headquartered in Sydney, and is publicly listed and owned by its shareholders. Sky TV (NZ) operates in New Zealand, and is also a public company owned by shareholders. Bauer Media, a privately owned, global media conglomerate, is headquartered in Germany.
It entered the New Zealand publishing market in 2013 by purchasing APN’s magazine staples such as The Listener, New Zealand Woman’s Weekly, Simply You and Simply You Living.
MediaWorks is privately owned, ow by American hedge fund Oaktree Capital. New Zealand has three Crown owned companies: Television New Zealand (TVNZ), Radio New Zealand (RNZ) and Maori Television. TVNZ is owned by the state, and it is commercially funded with no public service obligation.
Approximately 95 percent of its operations are funded by advertising, and its primary mandate is to pay dividends to the New Zealand government. RNZ is the only public service broadcaster in New Zealand. Its aim is:
“To provide reliable, independent and freely accessible news and information, and to give expression to New Zealand’s national identity and diversity”
Treasury states that “RNZ is an independent Crown entity with public funding, and has a mandate to operate in the broad public interest in accordance with the RNZ Charter”.
Maori Television, also funded by the government, is specifically required to revitalise the Maori language. According to Maori TV, its general objective is to be:
“An independent Maori television service that is relevant, effective and widely accessible”
The week commencing 9th May 2016 is likely to be remembered by journalists in New Zealand for a very long time. In another twist in the complex, uncertain and volatile media landscape the two Australian media titans, Fairfax Media and APN announced they were engaged in discussions with a view to merging their New Zealand media assets.
These assets are Fairfax NZ and NZME, a merger of which would result in New Zealand being left with one newspaper group holding an effective monopoly over the newspapers in the large cities, with the Otago Daily Times as the lone independent newspaper.
Loss of advertisng revenue as a result of both digital convergence and multi-platform media configurations is adversely impacting the traditional mass media operating model across the developed world.
However, these commercial realities and the frequent media ownership concentration that results have very serious potential implications for the quality of journalism.
Media ownership in New Zealand has been gradually concentrating over the past years, first moving to corporate ownership and then more latterly to financial ownership.
Nonetheless, given the relatively light media regulation by government, if this move to merger is successful the public will inevitably have less choice and the role of the fourth estate will be at risk of being weakened, at the very time when the worlds of politics and business appear to becoming less and less tranparent.
This has shown a staggering 12 point decline in viewing audiences across the combined TV2 and TV3 channels.
So where has that audience gone?
Has it migrated to other Freeview channels such as Maori Television, ChoiceTV and the timeshifted channels (TVOne+1,TV2+1 and TV3+1)?
Should advertisers be devoting more analysis to the audience and reach of these other channels?
Or has the audience shifted to the, as Throng would have you believe, anachronistic Sky?
This is highly important not just to stimulate discussion in television media in New Zealand but also highly important to the advertising community that essentially funds these channels. A one point movement in audience share in the $614million spent on television advertising in 2014 means $6.14m impact on profitability and the ability to acquire content in subsequent years.
Viewers have to go somewhere
Audience share, by its very nature, sums to 100%. So a double digit shift in audience share has to go somewhere. At this time the data for other channels (and the plus ones) haven’t been presented and this author doesn’t have access to the audience data that the administrators enjoy.
However it would be ironic to think that the audience has migrated to watching more hours of television on the platform that the administrators go to great lengths to harangue and ridicule.
Although the demographic is incorrect publically available data shows that over the 2010-2014 Sky TV and Prime have enjoyed a 4% lift in audience share. Something that must increase the bitterness of Throng. It still begs the question – where has 8 percentage points or $50 million worth of advertising share gone?
In 2015, NZME and Fairfax maintained their duopoly in New Zealand’s print newspaper market. The three leading newspapers, including The New Zealand Herald(NZME), The Dominion Post (Fairfax), and The Press (Fairfax), saw declines in their circulation numbers.
In June 2015, the circulation of The New Zealand Herald was 139,209, down 4.7 per cent from the previous year; the circulation of The Dominion Post was 64,851(-9.6%) and the circulation of The Press61,573(-7.8%).
However, The Dominion Post has increased its readership. According to Roy Morgan readership results, in 2015 The Dominion Post’s Monday to Saturday readership increased 3.8 per cent from the previous year to 274,000 readers, a gain of “10,000 readers per average issue”.
The readership of The New Zealand Herald was 589,000, down 3.3 per cent from 2014, but the paper remained “the country’s most-read daily newspaper”. The leading Sunday papers lost readers: the Sunday Star Times had 415,000 readers, down 1.4 per cent. However, the Herald on Sunday lost 11 percent of its readers having readership of 290,000 in the 12 months to June 2015.
In April 2015, The New Zealand Herald’s editor-in-chief Tim Murphy announced that he was stepping down.
In a media statement Jane Hastings, chief executive of NZME said: “Tim has guided The New Zealand Herald through some of the most dynamic years in the paper’s history including changing format from broadsheet to compact in 2012"
Murphy was appointed as editor-in-chief in 2001 at the age of 37, and he was the youngest person to edit the paper.
In 2015, New Zealand’s online news - in terms of unique audience - was dominated by Fairfax. Its online site stuff.co.nz became “the most popular” New Zealand based website as it overtook Trade Me as the one most visited.
In April 2015, Fairfax appointed the former nzhreald.co.nz editor Jeremy Rees as an editor for its national community titles in New Zealand.
Sinead Boucher, Fairfax Media’s executive editor, said that his role wasto develop “our strategy around communities - in print as well as in digital” as well lead innovation as Fairfax sought “to grow this very important and strong part of business".
In May 2015, stuff.co.nz had aunique audience of over 1.8 million. Boucher commented that in New Zealand:
“The digital world is now defined by Google for search, Facebook for social, and Stuff for content”, adding that “usage is the ultimate engagement metric”.
In 2014 nzherald.co.nz had a unique audience of 1.2 million, and according to NZME, in 2015 The New Zealand Herald had a “monthly digital audience of 1,383,000”, and a “total brand audience of 1,821,000".
In order to attract an even greater audience, and in preparation for digital subscriptions, The New Zealand Herald launched a new data-journalism website entitled Insights in November 2015. The paper noted that thelaunch was “a further demonstration of its commitment to in-depth journalism and new forms of storytelling".
NZME group revenue director Laura Maxwell said in a press release, that the site was “generating interest from advertising agencies which opens up opportunities for revenue generation”. In her view, by using data visualising tools, the new site “creates new immersive and creative opportunities for advertisers to align with these engaged audiences".
Another Local Paywall Goes Up, The New Zealand Herald Yet to Follow
In 2015, New Zealand media companies were driving newsroom and other changes to increase their digital and advertising income. Their need to find new revenue sources is clear, and APN illustrates the point. As mentioned earlier,its 2015 half-year profit shrank 67 per cent from the previous year. In this context,it is not surprising that NZME is contemplating paywalls.
In August, the company said thatit would introduce digital registrations for the nzherald.co.nz website by the end of year.
This move precedes introduction of digital subscriptions, or a paywall. Earlier in 2015 the company stated its intention to monetise online news with memberships, digital subscriptions, and pay as you click articles.
In May APN announced paywalls for its regional newspapers in Australia, and in August 2015 the Toowoomba Chronicle introduced charges for its online news.
In New Zealand, the National Business Review has digital subscriptions, and local newspapers Whakatane Beacon and The Ashburton Guardian have also introduced paywalls.
In October another local newspaper, independently owned The Gisborne Herald, announced that it would launch charges for its online content. The paper stated that “some important content on the site will be outside the paywall. Most critically, in a civil defence emergency all news will be freely accessible”.
The paper’s digital services cost“about two-thirds the price of a newspaper subscription - $1 for one day of viewing through to $200 for a 12-month subscription”. Fairfax introduced a paywall for the Australian Financial Review in 2011, and for its general newspapers The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald in 2013.
Its paywall revenue has gradually increased from AUD$4.8 million in 2013 to AUD$32.7 million in 2015. At the same time its income from digital classified advertising has increased from AUD$109 million to AUD$161.5 million.
In 2015, New Zealand’s independent media outlets included the National Business Review, a privately owned financial news outlet; privately owned newspaper publisher Allied Press; Scoop, which became a trust owned not-for-profit media outlet, and BusinessDesk, a privately owned independent news provider focusing on business and financial news.
In September 2015, Scoop, the 16-year old online news publisher, became a non-profit media outlet committed to public interest journalism. The publishing company was “embedded in an independent charitable trust” entitled Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism.
The trust owns the publishing arm of Scoop, called The New Scoop Publishing Company. Before this change, the company’s shareholders included Margaret Thompson (Mother of Scoop’s editor and publisher Alastair Thompson), Imarda chief executive Selwyn Pellett, who held 20 per cent of the shares, and journalists Gordon Campbell, Russell Brown and Pattrick Smellie.
However, in December 2014, Margaret Thompson took full control in the company. According to the National Business Review, the ownership changes meant that “several shareholders are short of hundreds of thousands of dollars”.
The 2013 JMAD New Zealand media ownership report found that the blogosphere was thriving in New Zealand.
As was then stated, the mainstream media was becoming increasingly commercially focused,and therefore there was “a gap in public interest reporting, which bloggers are now trying to fill”.
However, the 2014 JMAD report observed after the revelations in Nicky Hager’s book Dirty Politics, that “blogs are not necessarily a counterweight to commercial media outlets”. The report stated that there is “increasing evidence of unethical alliances among bloggers, politicians, PR companies and legacy media”.
In 2015, bloggers kept breaking news stories ahead of the mainstream media. In April, Martyn Bradbury’s The Daily Blog broke a story in which an anonymous waitress revealed that Prime Minister John Key kept pulling her hair against her wishes whenvisiting an Auckland café.
After The Daily Blog published an anonymous blog written by the waitress, The New Zealand Herald named her in its story “against her wishes”. However, Shayne Currie, editor of The New Zealand Herald, said that after the paper’s gossip columnist Rachel Glucina interviewed the waitress and the café owners, “no one was in any doubt that the article, quotes and photograph would be appearing in the Herald".
After the scandal broke, Prime Minister apologised to the waitress for any offence caused. The story was covered extensively in New Zealand media and abroad by news outlets such as the BBC, the Washington Post, CNN, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Japan Time sand The Hindu.
There is no publicly available, reliable data about blog readership numbers and rankings. When asked, Nielsen New Zealand failed to provide any information concerning blog readership and traffic, and therefore this report cannot discuss the visitor numbers of unique visits to these sites.
Some ofthe most well-known blogs in New Zealand include Cameron Slater’s Whale Oil blog, Martyn Bradbury’s The Daily Blog, Russell Brown’s Hard News, David Farrar’s Kiwiblog,The Standard and The Dim-Post. Other well-known blogs include Chris Trotter’s Bowalley Road and Politik, which was established by Front Page Ltd.
The company produces television news and current affairs programmes as well as television material for commercial clients. It is headed by the former TVNZ political editor Richard Harman.
New Zealand Media Ownership: Events and Patterns
The ownership structures of leading New Zealand media corporations have changed substantially in the past five years.
None of the commercial media companies are New Zealand owned, and APN is the only one with a media corporation as a substantial shareholder.
In all four commercially operated media companies ownership has concentrated in hands of financial institutions: private equity firms, investment banks, banks and managed funds.
In 2015, APN’s ownership changed substantially when long-term shareholder, the Irish Independent News and Media (INM), sold its shares along with telecom billionaire Denis O’Brien (he had substantial holdings in both INM and APN). In March, INM and O’Brien’s investment company Baycliffe Limited sold all their APN shares.
Before the sale, INM owned 18.6 per cent of APN’s shares, and Baycliffe 12.2 per cent. Following the sale, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp purchased a 14.99 per cent of APN to become thesecond largest shareholder.
APN’s Chairman Peter Cosgrove described this ownership change as a “defining moment for APN that also reflects a new era”. News Corp noted that its interest was due to APN’s “high quality portfolio of Australian and New Zealand radio and outdoor media assets and small regional print interests”.
Following the transaction, in June 2015, APN’s chief executive officer Michael Miller resigned from APN to become executive chairman of News Corp Australasia. He was followed by Ciaran Davis, who was previously chief executive officer of the Australian Radio Network (ARN) owned by APN.
In June 2013 MediaWorks was put into receivership, and consequently sold to a new holding company MediaWorks Holdings Limited; a syndicate of banks, hedge funds and private equity companies.
In April 2015, MediaWorks announced that American privately owned hedge fund Oaktree Capital owned 77.8 per cent of the company’s shares after purchasing them from Royal Bank of Scotland and Westpac.
Mark Weldon, MediaWorks chief executive officer commented that “Oaktree is an experienced, long-terminvestor into media businesses”, referring to the company’s involvement in Australian Nine Entertainment.
According to media reports, Oaktree Capital has increased its stake in MediaWorks to 100 per cent, but this hasn’t been officially confirmed.
In October, John Drinnan wrote that “in June, Oaktree took full ownership of MediaWorks, which has suffered low morale and ratings mishaps at its TV operations”. He also noted that after Weldon joined MediaWorks in 2014 as a chief executive officer, he “had a rollercoaster ride with disappointing results from TV amid a strategic shift that downgraded news and current affairs and made more use of reality formats”.
Earlier in April, Nick Grant commented that MediaWorks’ CEO makes “ruthless decisions on a financial basis. Most other people will take into account various personalities and issues and stakeholders, but Mr Weldon only has one stakeholder – money”.
During the past five years, New Zealand media has undergone some substantial ownership changes. The following table lists some of the major developments in the New Zealand media market from 2011 to 2015.
In general, it can be observed that the financial ownership of APN, Fairfax Media and Sky TV has increased, and their future is determined by management funds and investment banks which are the largest shareholders in these companies.
In 2015, 20 per cent of Sky TV’s shares were owned by three financial institutions; 32 per cent of APN’s shares were in hands of four funds; 44.7 per cent of Fairfax’s shares were owned by five financial institutions, and MediaWorks was owned by one hedge fund.
At the time of writing, it is clear that the New Zealand media sector has some major structural changes ahead. APN has indicated that it may still float NZME as a separate company on the New Zealand stock market. At the time of writing MediaWorks’s future seemed uncertain, and the company’s management has indicated that it was seeking to sell the company, or to list it onthe local stock market.
During 2015 it became evident
that media corporations need to pursue new partnerships and alliances while they are trying to recapture audiences, and revenues. In this context it is not surprising that ‘old enemies’ have started to find new ways to co-operate.
Competition in the New Zealand broadcasting market has become fiercer, and new entrants to the market have emerged. In 2015, American companies Netflix and Yahoo TV introduced their video streaming services in New Zealand to compete with existing broadcasters and services.
This report also notes examples of technological innovation among New Zealand media companies.
The National Business Review launched radio service; RNZ experimented with podcasts and video content; NZME introduced a new data-journalism site, and Scoop used crowd funding to help its transformation to a non-profit news organisation. Additionally some interesting new content providers, such as The Spinoff, emerged.
Comment: The consolidation of New Zealand media is no different in real terms than that which has been happening overseas. Such centralisation is not just about fiscal considerations, but power. We see consolidation happening in all industries and countries. It is far easier for those at the top to continue running the show, shaping the narrative and indeed in the case of the media - controlling the news and flow of information - when there are less strings to pull.
Elation As Ashburton Council Backs Out Of Controversial Water Bottling Deal July 14 2016 | From: Stuff The ditching of a deal to set up a water bottling plant in Canterbury has been hailed "a win for the Ashburton community.
The Ashburton District Council has backed out of negotiations with NZ Pure Blue to sell Lot 9 of its business estate, which came with resource consent to extract billions of litres of water from aquifers beneath the town.
The Bung the Bore group opposing the sale had threatened legal action, and was pursuing a judicial review of the resource consent. It is understood the decision to back out of negotiations was made at a public-excluded council meeting last week. Councillors had been sworn to secrecy until the council released the news on Monday.
Mayor Angus McKay said the potential purchaser failed to tell the council "how they intended to run a water bottling plant from the site".
“In particular, we wanted confirmation that the plant would be using bottles not water bladders ... [this] has given us enough cause for concern to cancel the Sale and Purchase Agreement," he said.
Jen Branje of Bung the Bore said the group was "elated" at the news.
“This decision is a testament to what can be achieved when communities band together to instigate change. We hope that the outcome of our efforts will encourage others to hold their councils to account."
Green Party water spokesperson Catherine Delahunty called the decision "a win for the Ashburton community.
Everything about this backroom deal was flawed – from the lack of consultation to the secrecy around who was to buy the land," she said.
"We're glad that the council has finally seen the light and have backed down from this ridiculous deal. If they have to sell public land, which is always debatable, it could at least be for something that is endorsed by and benefits the whole community, not just those who stand to make a quick buck.
Those who profit from the use of water, like those who bottle and sell it as a premium product, should pay for the privilege."
The consent, granted by Environment Canterbury (ECan) in 2011, allowed extraction of 1.4 billion litres of pure, artesian water a year until 2046. It amounted to 40 billion litres of water in total. All water taken would have been replaced with water from a nearby stockwater race.
Some residents of drought-prone Mid Canterbury - who at times can't hose their gardens due to water restrictions - said the water was desperately needed locally.
NZ Pure Blue had offered to pay for the relocation of Ashburton's rail siding from the township to a site next to its proposed water bottling plant. The sale was extended to September 30 so it could negotiate with KiwiRail.
NZ Pure Blue has two New Zealand directors, John Paynter and Roydon Hartnett, but its ownership is concealed through a trust. Both men refused to speak to Stuff but told a local newspaper the water bottling plant could create around 100 jobs.
The council has also been criticised for a lack of transparency. Some councillors were kept in the dark about details of the sale, which McKay led.
A previous attempt to sell the site to a Chinese buyer fell through.
McKay said the council was still considering the feedback from Ngāi Tahu and Arowhenua Rūnanga, the online petition and the community deputation from two lobby groups presented to council last month.
A report on community feedback to the proposed sale would be presented at the council's July meeting. Branje said the group was thankful for the support from people around New Zealand.
New Zealand Considers Taxing Sugar While New Zealand Government Invests $240m In Coca Cola And Fast Food Chains July 10 2016 | From: Yahoo
New figures reveal the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and ACC have invested millions of dollars of taxpayers' money into several global fast food and soft drink companies.
Releasing details of the large-scale government investments on Wednesday, RNZ News reported that, as of May 31, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and ACC had $110 million invested in The Coca-Cola Company and its global subsidiaries.
They also invested $70m in the The Coca-Cola Company's main rival, Pepsico.
Additionally, $38m was invested into McDonalds in America and Japan, and $17m into Domino's Pizza in Britain and Australia.
In New Zealand, the Super Fund has $5m invested in Restaurant Brands, which owns restaurant chains KFC, Pizza Hut, Carl's Junior and Starbucks.
Responding to the newly released figures, Labour Party MP Jenny Salesa reiterated the widespread impact obesity is having on the country.
"Oh c'mon why is ACC & the Superfund here investing Millions in soft drinks companies when NZ has the 3rd highest obesity rate in the OECD?," she said on Twitter.
Dental Association spokesperson Rob Beaglehole told RNZ News he was shocked to learn of the "inappropriate" investments.
"New Zealand is the third fattest country and has the third highest consumption of sugar in the OECD, after Mexico and the United States. The number one source of sugar for those aged 30 and under comes from sugary drinks," he said.
A Super Fund spokesperson told RNZ News that while it recognised nutrition was a public health issue there are no plans to introduce any divestment strategies.
"We have engaged with a number of companies on this matter and will continue to do so. We are not aware of any mainstream funds which are excluding companies on these issues," the spokesperson said.
The Ministry of Health currently injects $60m each year into obesity prevention programmes.
Global Interest In New Zealand Town With Too Many Jobs July 3 2016 | From: ChannelNewsAsia
A tiny New Zealand town that offered property for bargain prices in a bid to attract more people has been swamped with more than 5,000 enquiries from around the world, the local mayor said Friday.
Clutha District Mayor Bryan Cadogan said the South Island township of Kaitangata had more jobs than people, with a population of 800 but up to 1,000 vacancies, mostly in the thriving agricultural sector.
To boost its population, the town has been offering house-and-land packages for NZ$230,000 (US$164,000) - a good deal considering the national average is NZ$577,000, rising to NZ$955,000 in Auckland.
Cadogan said the response had been overwhelming, with global interest from people enquiring about moving to the town, which is set in a lush valley about an hour's drive from Dunedin.
"We've been smashed," he told TV3. "I think my PA's going to throttle me... there's over 5,000 messages on my phone, the council website's full. It's just phenomenal."
The town has a coal mine, sawmills and processing factories for the dairy industry.
"We've got so many jobs in the district, jobs aren't a problem," Cadogan said.
"We've got the jobs, we've got the affordable housing, we've got the beautiful lifestyle. We're pretty lucky."
He said the town had been searching for ways to attract new people for years.
"We did speed dating and a jobs fair last year," he said, admitting the latest promotion had overshadowed them all.
Cadogan said the initial offering of eight land and house packages looked set to be snapped up and the town "will just keep finding them" if interest warrants it.
"It's a neat wee town with some really positive people and I think it's a hoot of a story," he said.
The Historical & Current Situations In Aotearoa New Zealand June 30 2016 [Updated July 10 2016] | From: PeterCapper (Te Atiawa / Taranaki Tuturu / Tainui / Te Rarawa)
After 200 years of colonization many Pakeha and Maori feel they have very little knowledge of pre-colonial Aotearoa. Since the Treaty Of Waitangi signing on February 4, 1840 by over 200 mainly northern and central north island Sub-Tribal Chiefs.
The signing of the Treaty Of Waitangi led to a huge influx of foreign immigrants mainly from England hoping to start a new life away from abject poverty in their Motherland and with the penal colonies of Australia only 'across the ditch', many escaped POME's (Prisoners Of Mother England) also fled to Aotearoa / New Zealand for refuge and trade opportunities.
A major factor that led to the Treaty of Waitangi were the number of criminals escaping to Aotearoa New Zealand from New South Wales, Australia. The northern Chiefs wanted Queen Victoria to send a constabulary or some form of governance and control for the multitudes of drunken sailors plying alcohol, and the halfbreed children running everywhere. This concern came mainly from Chiefs around Russell, "The Hell Hole Of The Pacific".
Governor Hobson was sent here from NSW with the infamous treaty, where the treaty was for the Crown to create the New Zealand Government to then govern over their subjects and to govern Maori - with the 1835 Declaration of Independence and Treaty of Waitangi giving us Tino Rangatiratanga (self determination / governance) whereby the Maori maintain their sovereignty.
So Maori Sovereignty is self determination in maintaining all traditional and customary rights for all and allowing Pakeha to govern themselves. Moving forward, the Crown / New Zealand Parliament and Maori would develop 'Best Practices and Relationships' over time as a united country with two cultures that would respect each others differences so that we could assimilate together into a unique, well adjusted nation.
Whew, if only huh!
With an estimated population at that point in 1840; of 300,000 Maori and 1,200-1,500 colonial settlers, two thirds being English, Irish and Scottish and the rest a mix of mostly mainland Europeans such as French, German, Dutch, Dalmatian, Portuguese, a few Americans and quite a large contingent of Chinese (to build the railroads and search for gold in the South Island). It is today totally inconceivable that Maori ceded their sovereignty and governance of their GOD-given ancestral lands - to a handful of greedy Rothschild-owned East India Company agents, Spencer and Russell, land agents who founded The Bank Of New Zealand.
Pakeha New Zealanders know even less, if anything at all, about the far more important document signed 5 years earlier on October 28, 1835 between (again) northern and central Hapu / Iwi…
The 1835 Maori Declaration Of Independence, represented by The Confederated Chiefs Of The United Tribes Of Aotearoa, a sitting Parliament of Chieftain descendents of 1835 and 1840, and there are many today claiming this status that has basically turned the Confederated Chiefs into factions all vying for limited positions within the Confederation.
Add to this the fact that many Maori (estimated at 90%) also know very little if anything of the same founding document (The 1835 Maori Declaration Of Independence), it is no wonder many feel confused, uncertain and ostracised from their own culture and customs.
Furthermore, the fact that many Pakeha, also know very little if anything of the same founding document, (again, The 1835 Maori Declaration Of Independence) it is no wonder many feel confused about local hisotry.
So why are Maori in this predicament?
Well, being an avid war and military historian, one thing has struck me as obvious! Our Tupuna (ancestors) lie on the battlefields of South Africa, Turkey, France, Belgium, Greece, Crete, North Africa, Syria, Italy, Germany, Korea, Vietnam and throughout the Southeast Asian archipelago in there 1000's… and for what?
I can't help but recall how on their return how badly these heroes were treated after all these wars by the NZ government of the day, with many still suffering combat stress and fatigue and no mental healthcare available, menial laborious work on land no longer theirs with housing and education causing major setbacks causing many dysfunctional families that has decimated Maori whanau and communities nationwide!
These fine men who never returned from battle were to take the mantle of Tino Rangatiratanga (Self Determination) and Kawanatanga (Governance) of their respective Iwi and Hapu into a prosperous future and I can not help but remember stories from the returned veterans that it was common to see young under-age Maori recruits amongst their ranks, some as young as 14 years old, yet if an underage Pakeha tried to join up, he would be sent home immediately.
Therefore, I and others, have concluded that the government ‘intentionally’ accepted under-age young Maori recruits knowing it would devastate their future tribal Chieftain ranks as all knowledge was normally passed down to the Tuakana or eldest male who now sadly lie in the many foreign cemeteries.
Researchers worldwide are now revealing that all wars since The Battle Of Waterloo in 1815, were created and funded by the Vatican, Rothschild / Rockefeller Banking Empire, Masonic and Illuminati secret societies with the Vatican / Rothschild / Rockefeller Khazarian Zionist Transnational Criminal Cabal now infiltrated into every and endorsed by every mainly western government since - among many other secret and not so secret societies like The Knights Of Malta, The satanic Israeli Jewish Talmudic faith that Saudi Wahhabism is based and other horrors too unbelievably evil to be discussed in length here…
So did our Tupuna die in vein in some evil master-plan to rule the world by these satanic inspired sick individuals called the Cabal? It very much seems so!
Hopefully very soon all truth will be revealed to the world and with Maori language, traditions, (Tikanga) and customs (Kawa) experiencing a renaissance and exciting revival over the last 40 years, many Maori have begun their journey of seeking their whakapapa (genealogy) in order to find that missing link in their lives with multitudes of Maori of all ages taking to the stages to engage in their cultural waiata (songs), kapa haka (group performances) and haka (war dance).
The Confederated Chiefs Of United Tribes Of Aotearoa 1834 Flag
Ma pango ma whero ka oti te mahi (If Chief and worker unite together, the work gets done)
With the Waitangi based Confederated Chiefs Maori Parliament operating from the Te Tii Marae Upper and Lower House, those involved in the leadership of their respective Hapu / Iwi have found it very difficult to find consensus on many very important and pressing issues amongst those claiming the right to be on the paepae (oratory bench for elders).
The main priority of should be the implementation of governance, infrastructure and administration of their proclaimed sovereign nation recognized by King William lV himself back in 1834 being a co-designer of the 1834 United Tribes Flag. (above). However, this is not the case.
Sadly, The Confederated Chiefs Of United Tribes Of Aotearoa has become dysfunctional!
For the Confederated Chiefs of the United Tribes Of Aotearoa to continue on its present path does no one any good, and only creates friction and conflict amongst whanau that will endure for generations and impedes our long awaited prosperity and progress. THIS MUST STOP!
To reverse this, it would be advisable to firstly ensure the historical facts as to who has the right to sit in Parliament and on the paepae.
To do this one would have to sit with kaumatua and kuia (male and female elders) versed in the history of who were represented at the time of inception and have their signatures or mark on the Declaration Of Independence and / or the Treaty Of Waitangi, verified!
Without this confirmation, they have no claim to represent their Hapu / Iwi, especially without a mandate from their Hapu and whanau members.
If there are only 12 seats to fill, then others may need to be added to fairly represent their whanau, Hapu or Iwi.
Once chosen, elected or selected it is then up to the respective representatives to begin the process of governance and initiating the proper protocols and policies required to operate a nation and its governance successfully and as a full member of the Confederated Chiefs with a seat on the paepae and any other title that maybe bestowed upon them according to their constitution.
Another step in the right direction would be to proclaim independence and sovereignty though appropriate channels and begin alliances in trade, security and anywhere our new nation could be of assistance to the other including joining the BRICS alliance and the Asian Investment And Infrastructure Bank (AIIB)… in essence regaining some of the communal lifestyles and alliances of the past.
Therefore, it is also advisable to research the history of their respective Hapu / Iwi in depth as knowledge is not only power, it is a tool and a path to self determination, something every human being should aspire to!
To expect oneself to seek independence, sovereignty and self-determination alone is a very scary path due to the establishment not wanting us to be self determined in any way and it takes a thick skin to pull it off and endure that lifestyle until your time is up to ascend to the heavens. However, many are taking that path to total freedom from government interference anyway.
Maori now have a fantastic opportunity to proclaim sovereignty, either as an individual or as a collective, to be self determined and achieve the many things we know Maori are capable of!
The world is changing rapidly and many unbelievable opportunities for Maori exist NOW and many more are about to show themselves in the coming months and years. Maori must prepare and position themselves for this new paradigm and moves in this direction must be taken now.
Funding for major infrastructure and humanitarian projects are about to be released to well organized organizations with business and project plans available when the expected global financial reset occurs anytime in the very near future.
Neil Keenan and his organization, Group K, will be releasing these funds when Neil obtains access to The Global Collateral Accounts worth quazillions (thats 40 zeroes in just one account and there are up to 12) and each country will create a Non Government Organization (NGO) with no link whatsoever to the corrupt governments, banksters or even the Vatican that we are now seeing being exposed to the world.
Please ensure your Hapu / Iwi are prepared well to present to Group K their ideal project/s that suits the wishes of its people as Neil and his team are passionate about their mission to bring an end to the Cabal, release project funding and offer expert advice to bring our beautiful planet Gaia / Earth back from the brink of destruction.
A New Map Of New Zealand's Wireless Networks June 23 2016 | From: MarkHansen This map draws lines showing the links between antennae like the one shown in the image further below. You might have seen these towers on top of hills while driving. I always wondered what they were used for, and where they connected to. Now you can see where the links go, and who they're for.
It's not just huge antenna mast towers like the one shown below. Hospitals, big businesses, cell towers, weather stations, and offshore oil rigs are connected with these radio links.
Here's just a few interesting things I found exploring the data:
Lakes are awesome to transmit across! They stay flat, and usually have good hills on either side. Lake Rotorua demonstates this really well - here you can see how densely it's criscrossed with links.
The busiest place I could find, with the most links converging on one location, was the Skytower in Auckland. Here dozens, if not hundreds of wireless links converge from all over the Auckland region.
Hamilton's a very flat city, and there's not much in the way of mountain ranges nearby. I imagine this would make it difficult to transmit signals to the roofs of buildings in town. On the map, you can see how transmitting companies have dealt with this flatness - the few high buildings that do exist are used extensively:
The Hamilton Lake Water Tower (shown)
Signals spread all over town from these vantage points.
Taranaki Oil/Gas fields
You don't usually notice New Zealand's offshore gasfields on maps, but they really stick out on a map of wireless links. You can see the Maui A and Maui B platforms communicating through a host of links on the Taranaki shore, and the Kupe Gas field south of the mountain.
We even have a wireless link set up to an active volcano. Awesome!
Exploring the map, I realised that it inadvertently highlights the best views in the country. Antenna masts are specifically placed for great views in all directions. Lots of research must go into finding the places with these great views before spending vast amounts of money erecting a tower.
Why not take advantage of all this research into great views next time you're deciding where to go hiking?
Have a look, go exploring, and let me know in the blog comments if you find something interesting. Feedback is much appreciated.
The Government's Disregard For Evidence Is An Own Goal June 23 2016 | From: Scoop By casually dismissing research showing that 90 - day employment trials have not met policy goals, the Government is undermining its own big data initiative.
The New Zealand Association of Scientists (NZAS) is alarmed at the Government’s response to a recent study by Motu researchers , and asks John Key to consider the implications of undermining his Government’s own big data initiative for short - term political gain.
“The Government has invested millions of dollars to construct a database that tracks the performance of every business and every employee in New Zealand”, said the NZAS President Craig Stevens, ”but for New Zealanders to benefit from this investment, the Prime Minister needs to be prepared to listen to what the data says."
The 90 - day employment trials were introduced for all businesses after a pilot suggested that the trial periods “encouraged employers to take on new staff and helped those at the margins of the labour market, particularly young people, get jobs".
Using the Government’s database, Motu researchers Dr Isabelle Sin and Nathan Chappell were able to measure the impact of the trials on employment.
They found that it was very unlikely that either of these objectives had been achieved.
“By dismissing the results of Motu’s study as ‘academic’ and resorting to anecdote to justify the policy instead, said Stevens, “the Prime Minister undermines his Government’s stewardship of New Zealanders’ private data.”
"The Association calls on the Government to make responsible use of big data, and this includes ensuring that the evidence it provides is taken seriously, regardless of whether that evidence is politically palatable.
Stevens said “as a society and an economy we face challenges from many sides, to dismiss careful research is not helpful”.
The Royal Society of New Zealand has released a study claiming that, in the next
hundred years, New Zealand sea levels will surely rise by 0.3m and 1m is possible. It
strongly recommends that we should be taking action now to deal with this.
The RoyalSociety claim does not stand up to close examination.
First, the rise in sea level and New Zealand coast has been about 0.14 m over the last 100 years with no sign of a recent increase in the rate.
There is no solid evidence to indicate that this steady rate will increase rapidly in the future. The Royal Society's claims are based on dubious climate models that predicted that, by now, temperatures would be 0.5° higher than they really are and increasing faster and faster.
When they fed this dubious data into their sea level models, they predicted rapidly increasing sea level rise. How surprising!
A Russian climate model alone makes predictions that match recent temperatures. This model assumes that CO2 makes only a small contribution to global warming. Perhaps it is right!
Secondly, they have ignored the fact that, all around New Zealand the land is rising or falling at different rates. So it is quite wrong to assign a single value of sea level rise to the whole country.
The Royal Society’s conclusions are a serious matter because many Councils are now restricting building close to the sea and putting restrictions on existing houses that have substantially reduced their value.
So what do we really know about sea level rise?
The long-term record is from tide gauges spread around the world. The oldest records date back to the 1890s and the average rise for 225 tide gauges spread around the world is 1.48 mm per year.
These show that, for the majority of sites, the sea level rise since the mid-1990s was less than 2 mm per year.
The Pacific Islands record shows, for instance, that the sea level in Tuvalu has hardly changed since 1992. At the moment, as a result of the current El Niño, Tuvalu sea level is about 100 mm below the level in 1994 - 1997.
According to "Sea level rise –history and consequences” by Douglas there has been noacceleration of the rate of rise during the 20th century.
Data is available is from satellite observations since 1993. These show a rise of about 3.2 mm per year with indications of a recent decline in the rate.
Nobody seems to be able to explain why it is about twice the tide gauge rate. Many “climate scientists” have adopted the dubious practice of substituting satellite for tide gauge readings post 1993 so that they can claim that the rate of rise is increasing.
Predictions of sea level rise from the more realistic of the IPCC computer models range from about 150 mm to 600 mm by 2100. In 2011, NASA’s predictions range from 200 mm to 700 mm.
The Ministry for the Environment and NIWA seem to have used an Australian prediction that cobbled the satellite record onto the tide gauge record and predicts a sea level rise of something like 0.5 m to 0.8 m by 2100.
The Royal Society of New Zealand leads the pack with a projected rise of 0.3 m to 1 m. More than anybody else and much more than the 0.125 m we would expect if sea level rise continued at its present rate!
So there we have it. All the observational evidence indicates that the sea level is likely to rise 0.1 to 0.2 m by 2100.
But the government, the Royal Society and other public bodies ignore this evidence and, instead, choose to believe the predictions of the climate and sea level computer models that have never made an accurate prediction.
On the basis of this dubious evidence they are devaluing coastal properties, preventing development in places where, in all probability, there would be negligible risk for hundreds of years and, on Auckland's north-western motorway at least, spending millions of dollars on extra raising of the existing road to a level far above the likely sea level rise within its lifetime.
So blind belief in flawed computer models overrules the evidence.
Taxpayers and coastal communities bear the cost.
What we need is an independent study by people with open minds and practical experience of the New Zealand coastline and sea level rise rather than a group of academics.
It should be noted that many of these academics have careers devoted to supporting the increasingly dubious hypothesis that man - made carbon dioxide causes dangerous global warming that, in turn, causes rapid sea level rise.
Riding Roughshod Over Middle New Zealand - Fiona MacKenzie June 12 2016 | From: BreakingViews
Our politicians, bureaucrats and journalists are struggling to stay in touch with Middle New Zealand. Many of them think it’s unnecessary. After all, they hold the power to tell us what we ought to think and what we should endure.
The system usually works well for them. The Middlers keep to themselves, too busy with the day-to-day.
The problem arises when the people are actually allowed a voice. Referendums must be so frustrating to those who think “they know what’s good for us”.
Thanks to the binding nature of a couple of recent ones, New Zealand rejected a tea-towel flag and the New Plymouth Council won’t have race-based wards. If only citizen-initiated referendums didn’t have to jump so many hurdles and had the same binding status. The country might then get a few other things right.
Let’s Hear from Middle Maori
Another group we don’t hear much from are ‘Maori’. We certainly hear them referenced by those who want unquestioned control over government, natural resources and taxpayer funds, but it is hard to know who (other than themselves) these articulate and manipulative spokespeople actually represent.
Herald columnist, John Roughan, recently railed against Middle New Zealand for not getting with the programme and accepting that ‘Maori’ should be granted easy access to government power and control.
So again I ask, who are these ‘Maori’ who are entitled to unearned privilege and want to be separated out from the rest of us?
In photos from the latest family wedding, she’s fair and beautiful, he’s dark and handsome. So do they want to be separated within our very blended country? Their marriage suggests not.
We are bombarded with what the politically devious, the self-serving and the disaffected think, but is it possible that Middle Maori could want and believe much the same as other Kiwis?
Mix of World Views
In New Zealand, ethnic-based differences are less obvious than economic ones. Our many skins tones mix and mingle. People classified as Maori (by themselves or others) range widely − from very dark brown to red haired and blued eyed! There are those who work hard, those who never lift a finger.
There are those who help their families, their communities and New Zealand to prosper. Then there are others who prefer to obstruct, intimidate and bully. Some want to embrace opportunities to create regional jobs; others resist any change or cooperation.
Yet we’re constantly told that ‘Maori’ have a superior world view to the rest of us and are more entitled. Sure, we could just take this as gospel (which it’s fast becoming), but such a mantra can be difficult to fathom.
Is the superior world view that of the guy throwing litter from a car, or of the bloke claiming to have a guardianship role over the environment? Is it that of a parent who neglects or abuses a child, or that of the dad coaching his kid’s sports team?
And are the world views of New Zealanders volunteering to plant trees, deal to possums, save Kiwis or provide community services any less valuable because they have no Maori blood?
There are all sorts in our country and while our politicians, bureaucrats and journalists only listen to the noisy activists, they may just be missing out on what the people in the middle really think.
Term Limits & Referenda
People in the middle tend to be the steady voice of practical reason – those who keep a country functioning and growing good future citizens. They know how things work and what goes on in real life.
They’re not so easily persuaded by the latest trends and propaganda, being more interested in what people do than what they say. If only, the politicians, bureaucrats and journalists would listen to them and work in their best interests – rather than ride roughshod over them.
Perhaps term limits would facilitate this. Imagine if all our politicians and bureaucrats had to give up their day jobs after so many years at the trough. What a great leveller that would be! They could hit the streets, get an ordinary job and live on an ordinary income – anything that helps them reconnect.
More binding referendums on really important matters might help too. How about the fundamental issue of who should control water?
Or whether investors should be able to create city housing crises? And whether all references to race and culture should be removed from the statute books?
If this could be achieved, we might well start living in a true democracy, where every person is equal to his/her neighbour.
MP Nick Smith Hires Lawyer To Silence Child Abuse Ring Rumours May 14 2016 | From: RealNewsNZ
He was apparently upset about the post below which states that 5 sitting MP’s have name suppression for child abuse, and features a picture of Nick Smith.
If you read the full poster, it does not actually say Nick Smith is one of them, it simply highlights the fact that Kiwis do not know which MP’s it is.
Five sitting / current New Zealand Members of Parliament have name suppression for child abuse convictions.
The problem is obviously - the public have no idea who.
But is there more to this story?
Facebook whistle blower Justin Davis has also stated publicly that Nick Smith is in fact involved in a child abuse ring being operated from his Nelson office.
Justin Davis’ allegation is posted below – and is taken from a total of 58 pages of allegations Justin has made about child abuse rings operating across various NZ Crown agencies with the full protection of the NZ police and judiciary.
"Make no mistake the pedophiles have police and CYFS in there pockets.
M.P. Nick Smith got a child rape club running right out of his office by a guy called Dan Dolejs, who has links to the most powerful pedophiles in this country.
If the head of the wellington hospital emergency department Dr Paul Quigley is getting away with drugging and raping children, which is filmed , what else do you think might be going on ?”
Please visit Justin Davis on Facebook- add as friend – read his posts – check out his photo album – ask him questions- and show your support- his life is in danger.
It seems astounding doesn’t it? Is it possible that those in the highest positions of power and prestige in our little Nation are in fact pedophiles?
Yet if we look over to the UK at the recent Westminster Scandal we in fact see that their Government has been run by pedophiles and pedophile rings, which have operated for at least 40 years with the apparent full protection of the UK Judiciary and power structure.
Over 100,000 children have come forward and claimed they were raped (or worse) by British Lords, judges, celebrities and MP’s, and yet there has still not been one arrest. In fact, NZ Judge Lowell Goddard has been put in charge of that “investigation” – which is of course just another cover up.
It seems that this is the way that our Governments are controlled, by promoting then bribing and controlling pedophiles into positions of power.
John Key pictured feeling up Ponytails at every opportunity.
We should make it clear here that we have no hard evidence that Nick Smith or anyone else named in the Justin Davis files are directly involved in NZ pedophile rings – but if you read the document, the level of detail is astounding. It is almost impossible to think it is all made up, in our opinion.
Perhaps one clue as to this alleged situation, is to look at the portfolios these MP’s are given to manage. Nick Smith has of course been put in charge of Auckland Housing and we have seen that market destroyed by foreign buyers and immigration since the Key regime came to power, leaving almost an entire generation of Kiwis out of the market.
Smith has been kicked out of parliament because of his screw ups, but as in the case with others such as Judith Collins - after a few months in the dog box (or more to the point when the sheeply have forgotten about their past crimes) they get shoe-horned back into parliament!
Nick Smith has been fronting that entire scam - possibly one of the biggest scams of any NZ government in history, and Nick Smith is there in front of the cameras making excuses and telling lies day after day. How do you make someone do that?
His other portfolio is the Environment, as we have seen our lakes and rivers be destroyed by intensive dairy farming to feed Chinese babies.
Again, there is MP Nick Smith on the news telling lies and helping cover up the extent of the damage. How does the shadow government convince someone to make such a complete asshole out of themselves day after day? And could that be related to the allegations above?
We have also seen at least one MP stand down suddenly in recent years, in a swirl of allegations, that being Northland MP Mike Sabin. The public were left guessing what that was all about.
Then there is PM John Key’s numerous pedophilia gaffs – from pulling little girls ponytails at primary schools up and down the Nation, to making “jokes” about escaped pedophile and murderer Phillip Smith at the G20 meeting in Brazil a couple of years ago. “John Key’s killer pedophile joke disgusts family” .
John Key’s own daughter Stephanie Key is now doing soft porn in Paris, which looks very much like a cry for attention and help in our view.
In our opinion- the question must be asked, are we governed over by an elite group of child sex offenders and perverts who are all being bribed and controlled into taxing us all to fund the Rothschild bank debt we have been laden with in recent years?
Are we indeed Governed by a Global gang of inbred Rothschild pedophiles? Many across the internet seem to agree that we are. just chuck “Rothschild pedophiles” into Youtube and Google and read the evidence all day long.
And hugging Bill Clinton, a serial rapist named in the Epstein pedophile ring court documents. Also Stephanie Key’s “art” or cry for help?)
Related Research and Docos:
NZ author Greg Hallett alleges the NZ judiciary is a pedophile movement:
"The judiciary shows itself to be a paedophile and crime creation movement whose primary goal is fatherless families.”
Brendon O’Connell exposes pedophile Freemasons in the Australian Government and Councils:
Foreign Control Of New Zealand: Key Facts May 13 2016 | From: CAFCA
Foreign direct investment (ownership of companies) in New Zealand increased from $15.7 billion in March 1989 to $110.6 billion at March 2015 – over seven times.
As a proportion of the total output of the economy, Gross Domestic Product, it has risen from 22% to 46%.
Ownership of overseas companies by New Zealand residents has not grown as fast over that period (over five times) so net foreign direct investment has grown eight and a half times from a net liability of $8.8 billion to $74.6 billion, and as a percentage of GDP multiplied two and half times from 13% of GDP to 31%.
Foreign Direct Investment from International Investment Position, National Accounts, Statistics New Zealand, InfoShare series IIP088AA. GDP from National Accounts, Statistics New Zealand, InfoShare series SNE038AA.
Foreign owners controlled 33% of the share market in 2015. In 1989, the figure was 19% and it was estimated to be below 5% in 1986.
At March 2014, they owned an estimated 29% of all equity (shareholdings) and 37% of privately owned equity, including shares not listed on the stock exchange.
Foreign investors owned 27% (or $355 billion) of wealth in New Zealand whose commercial net value totalled $1.3 trillion at March 2015.
This comprised housing, land, other property, plant, equipment and financial assets owned directly or indirectly by households, government and foreign investors. New Zealand residents owned a further $202 billion of investments abroad. (These totals exclude wealth held by non-profit organisations, shared natural wealth such as rivers, and human and social capital.)
In 2015, the OIO approved the sale of 75,008 hectares of freehold rural land and 4,889 hectares of leases and other interests in land to foreigners. About 43,000 hectares of the freehold land and 4,000 hectares of the leases and other interests in land were from one foreign investor to another.
In the decade 2006 to 2015, the average was 124,012 hectares of freehold and 42,044 hectares of leases and other interests in land approved for sale. Statistics on sales of land to overseas interests are poorly recorded and incomplete.
Our best estimate is that in 2011 at least 8.7 percent of New Zealand farmland including forestry, or 1.3 million hectares, was foreign-owned or controlled and it could have reached 10 percent.
In 2014, the OIO approved the sale of 38,120 hectares of freehold rural land and 2,671 hectares of leases and other interests in land to foreigners. About 12,000 hectares of the freehold land and 1,000 hectares of the leases and other interests in land were from one foreign investor to another.
In the decade 2005 to 2014, the average was 131,488 hectares of freehold and 43,162 hectares of leases and other interests in land approved for sale. Statistics on sales of land to overseas interests are poorly recorded and incomplete. Our best estimate is that in 2011 at least 8.7 percent of New Zealand farmland including forestry, or 1.3 million hectares, was foreign-owned or controlled and it could have reached 10 percent.
Overseas Investment Commission and Overseas Investment Office.
"Overseas Ownership Of Land: Far Greater Than The 1% The PM Claims", by Bill Rosenberg (www.converge.org.nz)
Statistics NZ figures, as of March 2015, list the biggest foreign owners of New Zealand companies as being from, in decreasing order: Australia, US, Hong Kong, UK, Singapore, Japan, Canada, Netherlands, British Virgin Islands, Ireland, Cayman Islands, China, Switzerland, Norway and France.
All had over $160m in foreign direct investment in New Zealand. These accounted for 96% of foreign direct investment in New Zealand and Australia alone accounts for 52%. British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands are tax havens, and a Statistics New Zealand study showed that in 2010, large proportions of the foreign direct investment from the Netherlands, Singapore, Hong Kong and tax havens was in fact from other countries, led by the UK, US, Germany and Canada.
In 2015, Other tax havens with investments in New Zealand companies include Vanuatu, Channel Islands, Liechtenstein, Bermuda and the Bahamas, but for all except Bermuda, the value of their holdings has been suppressed as “confidential”.
Bermuda has shown a negative investment in New Zealand companies since 2009 (negative $1.8 billion in 2015). So has Germany since 2013. Negative investment suggests that the companies may have been loaded with debt to their parents or are technically insolvent.
International Investment Position, Statistics New Zealand: Directional basis stock of direct investment by country (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series IIP081AA. Note that these statistics are compiled on a different basis from those also from Statistics New Zealand above, so the total, $97.4b, does not match. These are compiled on a "directional" basis, based on ultimate nationality of ownership; the above are on a "balance sheet" basis, based on residency of the company. Industry statistics below are also compiled on a directional basis.
Mallika Kelkar. (2011). "The ultimate sources of foreign direct investment (p. 19). Presented at the New Zealand Association of Economists (NZAE) Conference, Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from stats.govt.nz
The Financial and insurance services sector, which includes the four big Australian owned banks, accounted for by far the biggest part of foreign ownership of New Zealand companies by industry in March 2015, with $32.1 billion. Next was Manufacturing at $14.7 billion.
Other industries having more than $1 billion of foreign investment were in decreasing size, Agriculture, forestry, and fishing; Retail trade; Wholesale trade; Electricity, gas, water and waste services; Rental, hiring and real estate services; Professional, scientific and technical services; Mining; Information media and telecommunications; and Health care and social assistance.
$16.6 billion was unable to be allocated to an industry because of the way foreign direct investment is estimated, or was suppressed as being confidential.
Source: International Investment Position, Directional basis stock of direct investment by industry (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series IIP080AA - Statistics New Zealand. See note regarding country statistics.
Transnational corporations (TNCs) make massive profits out of New Zealand. These can truly be called New Zealand's biggest invisible export. In the year to March 2015, they were $9.0 billion. Over the last decade they have averaged more than the combined exports of seafood and milk powder.
In the decade 2006-2015, TNCs made $77.5 billion in profits from New Zealand, an average rate of profit after tax on their shareholdings of 12.5% (12.0% in the year to March 2015). Only 26% was reinvested (only 15% in the year to March 2015). Profits have averaged twice the increase in foreign direct investment holdings each year.
Balance of Payments: Current account primary income (Annual-Mar), InfoShare Series BOP058AA; Current account investment income by sector (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series BOP059AA; and Balance of payments major components (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series BOP055AA – Statistics New Zealand.
Another $7.9 billion left New Zealand in the year to March 2015 made up of investment income from debt and smaller shareholdings (portfolio investment), making a total $16.9 billion. Over the last decade this has averaged more than the combined dairy and forest product exports.
Related: International Ownership of New Zealand Banks
More than two out of every five dollars of the $16.9 billion went to the owners of New Zealand's banking sector: $6.9 billion. The investment income from overseas ownership of the banking sector ("Deposit taking corporations") after taking account of its small investment income from abroad, accounted for four out of every five dollars of New Zealand's current account deficit in the year to March 2015: $6.5 billion compared to $8.1 billion.
The investment income deficit (income on New Zealand investment overseas less income on foreign investment in New Zealand) has been greater than the current account deficit for all but two years since 1989, which further increases New Zealand's foreign liabilities.
Exports: Key Statistics Table 7.04 - Value of principal exports (excl re-exports), InfoShare series EXP005AA - Statistics New Zealand.
Foreign investors are not great for employment - they only employ 17% of the workforce (down from 21% in 2000), despite owning a large proportion of the economy. Foreign ownership does not guarantee more jobs. In fact, it quite often adds to unemployment. TNCs have made tens of thousands jobless.
Business demography statistics: Enterprises by industry and overseas equity 2000-15, Statistics New Zealand, available in NZ.Stat.
Foreign ownership does nothing to improve New Zealand's foreign debt problem. In 1989, total private and public foreign debt stood at $47.5 billion, equivalent to about two-thirds of New Zealand's Gross Domestic Product, and worth $86.4 billion in March 2015 dollars.
As of March 2015, it was $246.2 billion (or $270.9 billion including derivatives), equivalent to 102% of New Zealand's Gross Domestic Product despite being helped out temporarily by $20.2 billion of insurance claims for the Canterbury earthquakes and all of the asset sales and takeovers.
Source: Statistics New Zealand as follows: International investment position (IIP) (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP088AA; External lending and debt by sector and relationship (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP078AA; International non-equity financial instruments by sector (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP074AA;
New Zealand's A&L - Level 3 Components (Discontinued March 2000) (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP007AA; GDP(P), Nominal, Actual, Total (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series SNE038AA; overseas reinsurance claims from the Canterbury earthquakes – http://tinyurl.com/j9kmree
Graphs to accompany the Key Facts information shown below are available to download in Microsoft PowerPoint (.PPT) or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF) format.
Each page of the Adobe Acrobat version has a small square in the top left corner. Hovering the mouse over this square shows the source of the information in more detail.
Note that there are often revisions to official data, leading to some changes to reported data for past years.
100 Days - Claiming Back New Zealand April 20 2016 | From: 100DaysToDemocracy Horrified and shocked-she isn’t the only one: This isn’t the New Zealand our parents and grandparents lived in* - and we’re certainly not the better for it.
So isn’t it high time we started holding to account the politicians who’ve been so very largely responsible for this, and for the fact that many New Zealanders are now finding it difficult to afford living here in what is – (or was?) – our own country?
It’s not a good sign when those returning from the UK, for example, comment on how much more expensive everything is now – food, electricity, very basic living costs.
Even more crucially, we now have the least affordable houses of any country in the world in relation to income – although we all remember Prime Minister John Key blatantly denying there was even a housing shortage in Auckland. How could he have not known?
NZ Herald: Home truths: Can you afford to buy in New Zealand?
So perhaps it’s not surprising that PM John Key has been so very keen to get rid of the flag that they* and we have long lived under…the one flying over us all. John Key wanted the Union Jack removed, and apparently, the politicized Chinese with whom he gets on so very well agreed with him. Of course.
But not Hong Kong Chinese, fighting for basic freedoms against their predatory neighbour. Hong Kong Chinese apparently value the Union Jack, saying it represents the freedoms they had under the British and no longer have, and that it expresses the difference in values between Hong Kong and its over-authoritarian Communist government.
All the nonsense talked by Key and parroted by the inner circles of government about New Zealanders “needing to discover our national identity” and “our own place in the world” is basically manipulation.
How many of us go to sleep fretting about our national identity?
Mind you, as it’s increasingly not being seen as our own country any more, this question is going to be raised – but not as the PM apparently wants. We pretty well knew our own place in the world – in fact we owned our own place. But do we now?
Increasingly New Zealanders feel that we don’t. Nor will many of us have been impressed by learning that Key also sent a text to former All Blacks captain Richie McCaw (whom we’ve recently seen in an advertisement for an Australian-owned bank) and his team-mate, Dan Carter, asking them to watch his video promoting a flag change.
Whether this is appropriate behaviour for a Prime Minister, and whether sporting figures would be wiser to refrain from being lured into looking too close to powerful politicians is another issue.
The PM, of course, has his devoted cheerleaders among the media, so perhaps it’s not so extraordinary as it would otherwise be that we can guarantee many of them are managing not to look too closely at the essentially vulgar antics which have been his trademark at a personal level.
However, more worryingly, what should be a proudly independent fourth estate manages to pretty well look the other way and to barely, if at all, mention happenings which are so extraordinary that they should have us all shocked and horrified – not just the individual who heard, second-hand, of the one below.
It has been, culpably, so little reported that we should be doubly grateful to Senior Herald reporter, David Fisher, for making us aware that the Prime Minister was the guest of honour at a private fundraising lunch held at an Auckland Chinese restaurant.
The point is that it was hosted by the Change the Flag lobby group to raise cash from wealthy Chinese donors who supported the flag change. A small handful of National’s MPs were there, too.
It was all to fund a last-minute push for votes, including a pamphlet to send out just days before the voting started. This small, exclusive lunch was not publicly advertised, and the Change the Flag chairman, Lewis Holden, confirmed not the names of the donors, but that over $100,000 was raised for the entire campaign.
He admitted that some was donated by the Chinese donors who wanted the Union Jack gone from the New Zealand ensign, Mr Holden commented – naively, some would say.
In January, Taiwan elected its first female president after a furore“We knew there was support in the Chinese community because of the Union Jack" just before Election Day when a 16 year old Taiwanese singer for a girl band was forced to give a forlorn apology for holding a Taiwanese flag on a TV show. China has refused to allow the 7.2 million people of Hong Kong a free vote next year on deciding who will lead the city.
And reportedly, an uproar in Hong Kong over the disappearance of five dissident booksellers believed to be in the hands of the Chinese security services has also understandably a had huge impact on public opinion in Taiwan.
This of course, is typical behaviour from a brutal Communist régime which imprisons, tortures and even executes dissidents (let alone its continued opposition to Chinese Christians, and its appalling record of “farming” the Falun Gong to forcibly remove their organs for live transplants organs.
Not that New Zealand ever officially and publicly protests – any more than many countries similarly turned a blind eye to the appalling and barbarous treatment that Nazi Germany showed to its Jewish population, in World War 11.
And yet, does or does not a country have a moral responsibility to make its views publicly known about a trade partner’s oppression of its own people? Is it okay to just look away, to pretend it isn’t happening or doesn’t really count?
Mr Holden should have specified that he was referring only to the increasingly large Communist Chinese community in this country.
Other long-settled Chinese in New Zealand would not only disagree (including a highly respected academic who protested in his youth at the butchery of Tiananmen Square) but are deeply concerned at the influence that Communist Chinese interests are apparently having on our National Party government, dominated by its acknowledged authoritarian leader.
In fact, Mr Holden admitted he was pretty surprised that John Key agreed to come. Concerned New Zealanders who have been asking what is happening to this country, and why we have the state we are now in, are not all surprised. After all, the buck stops at the top.
Interestingly enough, too, back in November, 2015, a Facebook user John Miller spotted another flag design – one of those proposed – appearing on the labelling for New Zealand apples in Shanghai. He asked, “Do the Chinese know something about the outcome of our flag referendum that we don’t know yet?"
The same flag was reported as being flown at a butcher’s shop in the United Arab Emirates. Somebody must have been pretty certain that the flag change was a done deal.
Three cheers for the New Zealanders who got the whiff, from somewhere, of a decaying rat, and put a stop to this attack on a heritage we can be proud of, in spite of all the unfair, and highly suspect, disparaging of colonialism.
As Hong Kong can testify, and as other African nations show us, it’s a wise observation that there are far worse things than colonisation, and that post-colonisation is apparently one of them.
Similar to the Prime Minister’s former denial of any problem with the Auckland current housing market has been his repudiating any connection with the uncontrolled immigration flooding the country.
The migration influx is breaking all records with, as reporter Hamish Rutherford informs us, the net gain last year being equivalent to a city the size of Nelson. In one year alone…
John Key’s simplistic assertion that unrestricted immigration is of economic benefit to the country has long been disproved. So why does he keep repeating it?
As Westpac senior economist Anne Boniface says, record immigration:
"Is helping to maintain a semblance of strong economic growth but the preponderance of people in the labour market is keeping wage growth lower than would otherwise be”.
And of course it is the unprecedented demand for housing from those flooding into the country, plus the ability of far more wealthy immigrants to outbid New Zealanders for our own houses, which has us at crisis point – although the government of course is not acknowledging this.
Nor is the building of new houses anywhere near able to compensate for the extraordinary demand, not with virtually 68,000 in the year ended in February this year.
The result is not only a dramatic shortage of houses but of decent jobs (some now observably preferentially offered to Chinese workers paid less by Chinese business owners and employers).
The flow-on effect includes shortages not only of housing – and of wealthy property investors outbidding New Zealanders to rent back what should be their own houses to them.
There’s now an unprecedented exodus to the provinces with a leap of house-buying driving house prices outside Auckland up beyond the reach of local residents.
Pressure has increased on land, on hospitals and all other social services
So the questions are being asked:
Why is National, under its leader, John Key, more interested in protecting the interests of potential NZ migrants and offshore investors – over and above the large and growing number of Kiwis priced out of the market?
The comments keep coming… that National has been in Government for 9 years and it has the power to effect change, but that it wilfully does not because John Key thinks that rising house prices are good politics.
But if it isn’t being brought home to more and more New Zealanders that it is shameful for our government to protect the interests of people who don’t even live here – above those of New Zealanders themselves -then it should be.
But is there more to all this than a seemingly naïve National Party leader having his own way? In the real world, where the uber-wealthy are looking for bolt-holes to escape the increasing scrutiny of their governments, New Zealand has long been viewed as a ripe plum ready for the picking.
Super-rich overseas owners, with obliging specialists lawyers to hand, have already hoovered up our high country sheep stations and farms, some owning multiple properties, including our scenic assets and, seemingly whatever takes their fancy (in spite of the OIO’s supposed scrutiny of the value of these land grabs to New Zealanders).
It doesn’t take anything more than commonsense to take on board the fact as more and more of our farms, our land and our houses are bought up by immigrants or pass into overseas ownership, more and more New Zealanders are being squeezed out of owning these.
It’s a depressing scenario for the dairy sector as banks face possible billions in write-offs. John Key admits that low dairy prices may see banks facing losses with farmers forced to sell, but, in a cavalier fashion dismisses the prospect – “as normal for businesses”.
This sort of pragmatism, an indifferent approach to those facing the devastating prospect of losing their family farms and homes, walks past the point of who is going to be in a position to actually buy the land – particularly when the Reserve Bank states that under its severe scenario it is unclear whether there would be sufficient cash among buyers to absorb the added number of farms which would inevitably be put up for sale.
Unclear in relation to New Zealand buyers, perhaps, but there is no shortage of finance from Chinese sources.
While a number of foreign nationals have been busy acquiring what they can, more or less under the radar, it is the very real threat to our sovereignty from Communist Chinese interests underpinning Chinese investment which is most ominous.
A Financial Times article of March 2016 by Lucy Hornsby – The Great Land Rush: China’s Pengxin hits overseas hurdles – points to the marketing of “Theland” with “where cows gaze on emerald grass below white clouds shaped like New Zealand”.
It makes the point that Pengxin;
"A little-known Shanghai real estate developer that owns Theland, will become the world’s largest private landowner if Australia’s authorities clear its most ambitious bid yet, to gain control of the grazing lands of the S Kidman & Co cattle empire. That, plus holdings in New Zealand, makes Pengxin the boldest of Chinese corporations investing in land, and has helped trigger a backlash."
It continues: “The financial Times, in a series of reports, is examining governments’ and private investors’ increasing interest in grand scale land deals. With the commodity supercycle ending, land – the ultimate resource – could either become the next big thing or the source of cross-border disputes… In November, Australia blocked the A$350 million sale on security grounds”. But there are further complications.
Pengxin’s bid for Kidman draws on its experience as China’s largest land investor in New Zealand.” However, (reportedly) “its expansion there has reached a limit only months after it announced plans to double its Kiwi assets to NZ$1bn, or 50 farms. In reply to written questions from the FT, Terry Lee, the president of overseas investment for Pengxin, wrote that “investing in New Zealand farmland…has been more challenging than we thought. “
This is excellent news and is no doubt due to those very few reporters and columnists to whom New Zealanders owe a great deal for their spotlighting of these issues – as well as to those who have been asking the questions that our government would apparently prefer not to answer.
What the Financial Times also noted was the understandable rising resentment in this country;
"After property documents, leaked to New Zealand media, showed buyers with Chinese surnames accounted for half the purchases of Auckland homes worth more than NZ$1m.”
Meanwhile, in Australia. Canberra is reviewing foreign investment rules, and has cut the threshold for approval of foreign acquisitions of rural land from A$252m to A$15m.
Moreover, a new registry of foreign-owned agricultural land goes public this year. Already, in Australia, there is much more scrutiny of foreign investors wanting to buy Australian housing stock, and each application must undergo appropriate review.
The paper further states that “as China’s urban sprawl consumes and pollutes farmland, Beijing has given tacit blessing to agricultural investment overseas.”
This is a considerable understatement. As a 60 Minutes programme pointed out, Chinese investors are being financially equipped by the Chinese government to buy up as much in the way of productive farmland, stock, and business fed by this industry – as well as means of transport, including shipping – for the benefit of China alone.
"Australia and New Zealand are top destinations because foreigners can own land outright, but resentment over Chinese investors buying residential property has curdled the political environment.”
In the eyes of New Zealanders it hasn’t curdled it enough, given that the government has not moved to protect New Zealanders from being disadvantaged in our own land.
Moreover, as one of the three primary obligations of government is the defence of the realm, it can be legitimately argued that the government is failing in its responsibility to defend New Zealanders from these takeovers.
Why, it is increasingly asked, can foreigners still buy up own land outright? Why is it is still being allowed to happen?
Reportedly, wooing Maori sellers and flying well-heeled Chinese tourists around New Zealand has paid well for those promoting sales of our assets. It can also be legitimately argued that enthusiastically promoting Chinese tourism may be working to our own disadvantage, for obvious reasons.
The fact, too, that Pengxin is reportedly building its own integrated dairy business, is a direct challenge to our already struggling Fonterra, our major dairy exporter upon whom thousands of New Zealand farmers depend.
No wonder that global market forces are coming into conflict with local populations, given the fact that nobody is making more land (except, in fact, the Communist Chinese, arousing disquiet through their aggressive military expansions – as well as through attempts to circumvent legal requirements within a host country) .
Yes, this comes from another political party. But don't let that fool you - notice how it doesn't matter which party is in power, they all follow the same agenda. And so while Labour is critical as the opposition - nothing would change under their leadership
Kerry Brown, Professor of Chinese studies at King’s College London, points out that China is a real problem for Australia and New Zealand – with its huge markets growth potential and very real needs. His warning is timely, namely, that underneath;
“China remains alien in terms of fundamental values and political beliefs."
The implications are clear, and as has been well stated, those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. The lesson of the Trojan horse – Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes…
I fear the Greeks, especially when they are bringing gifts is to all intents and purposes ignored by the John Key government enthusing over a damaging flood of immigration and a level of foreign investment which threatens our own productive economy.
A recent National Business Review editorial points out Chinese companies have so far this year bought more foreign companies than during the whole of last year.
“In the past few years, most of the interest has been in agri-business. Recent deals in New Zealand have included dairy farms and factories, meat companies and horticultural ventures as well as companies such as PGG Wrightson…
The Chinese are also seeking high technology companies but this is proving difficult…the wave of purchases has spread to the hospitality sector and entertainment.”
An additional NBR editorial, discussing the revelations of the Panama Papers, notes that a third of the business of a law firm involved has been in helping Chinese clients ship their money overseas and out of reach of the Communist regime.
A BBC report “How China’s wealth is sneaked abroad”, implicates New Zealand “as a major target for a property-buying spree totalling US$ 32 billion around the world last year.
A featured comment will have resonated with many:
“The government should be embarrassed by this – not only have they turned a blind eye to the Communist Chinese money coming into NZ (despite the anti-money laundering rules), they have allowed the Auckland property market to be grossly inflated by a Chinese investors.”
Where to from here? The lesson from all this is that China is trouble. Not only are its Communist values in direct contrast to those of the democratic West, it is notorious for its electronic spying, including attempting to hack into government and defence security systems.
This of course, will predictably, include our own – a fact which raises the question: What was former left-leaning Prime Minister Helen Clark thinking when she allowed, in fact welcomed a procession of top-ranking Chinese military officials coming to be shown around New Zealand – inspecting our military bases, our equipment and familiarising themselves with our obvious inability to defend this small country?
Does anyone really believe she was simply ignorant of Communist China’s ambition in this area? If not, what was her motive in doing so?
And now, at the very time when concern about Chinese military aggression in the Pacific has America considering setting up military bases in Australia, it needs to be far more widely known that that late in 2015, National ’s Defence Minister, Gerry Brownlee, farcically lectured our giant, predatory neighbour, exhorting it to behave “like a big country” in the South China sea (where it is causing tension with other regional powers, and with the USA.)
Sent of course by our Prime Minister, he thought it fit to sign a five-year military defence alliance with this Communist country, while clumsily stating “that New Zealand’s relationships with Chinese and US defence forces are not mutually exclusive.”
But in fact they are. It’s almost incomprehensible that we should have signed such a military defence pact with this aggressively confrontational country. China’s Communist leadership, with its natural affinity for North Korea, is, for all its trade alliances, no friend to the West – a fact that most New Zealanders perceive – even though Key’s National government is apparently determinedly avoiding facing this fact.
As a consequence, and given the weakness of what should be our major Opposition party, New Zealanders are well and truly on the way to becoming tenants in our own country.
For this reason, even those who do not support the left-wing Chris Trotter’s political views, may well agree with his statement that New Zealanders’ disengagement from the political process (“in which we were once among the world’s most enthusiastic participants”) has been accompanied, and justified, by the widely held belief that “politics has become an almost entirely disreputable profession.”
His vague assertion that – “the answer lies with, and in us – the New Zealand electorate” suggests no concrete solution.
But there is one. It does not matter that it would be a most unwelcome one to by far the majority of our politicians, and to those with the money and influence “to assist” the government in its decision-making. And here I recall former Finance Minister Ruth Richardson thanking millionaire Doug Myers, then Chairman of the New Zealand Business Roundtable for his valuable help to her in her portfolio…)
We all know that we have moved a long way from being a far more democratic country that we once were. The loss of our freedoms has been gathering pace – even freedom of speech – let alone the ability to be genuinely involved in the decision-making of our governments – although this very much affects us.
Reforms are undertaken from time to time – as with the now signalled, but well overdue simplification of our tax system. Too little, too late for so many. But apart from our ability to routinely throw out governments which have caused perceivable damage to our country, in the interval between our elections the government elected as the lesser of two evils inevitably claims a mandate for actions for which it has no genuine mandate at all.
The solution? It is what the highly intelligent Swiss have long insisted on – the reform of our political system so that any legislation passed by Parliament, no matter what party is in power, nor what deal-making has gone on behind the scenes, has to wait for 100 Days.
This mandatory stop on all proposed laws gives the people of the country time to examine it for fishhooks. If satisfied, they allow it to pass. If they are not, it takes a very small proportion of their electorate (50,000 in a county with double our population) to call for a special kind of referendum, the results of which are binding on their government.
The fact that this provision is there puts a stop to constant trade-offs, in contrast to the never-ending passing of legislation which pours forth from our own government – whereas Swiss parliamentarians meet only once a week, and are able to hold down day jobs.
For more information on how the Swiss govern themselves, visit our website at www. 100days.co.nz
Above all, we need to remember that there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come – and there is nothing more effective than individuals joining together to achieve a tipping point to insist on being genuinely part of our country’s decision-making.
Controlling our politicians though the eminently achievable 100 days initiative, now well under way, is available to each of us.
Each of us – not everybody else. If you are concerned about what is happening to our country, please support us! We need you all.
Hypocrisy And The Water Debate April 19 2016 | From: NZPCR The water debate is heating up, with orchestrated attacks on water bottling companies. Maori leaders want a price on water.
With the resource estimated to be worth $35 billion a year, they know that once National give them control of fresh water, they will be able to claim royalty payments for future use and compensation for lost revenue.
As the Maori Council chair Maanu Paul said on Tuesday;
“Any commercial operation will have to pay a fee, and that is the issue as far as the council is concerned – because these people are profiting from the use of a common good that belongs to Maori.”
Previous governments have rejected such opportunistic claims by Maori leaders. But in an astonishing act of hypocrisy, the National Party MP, who is advancing the current attempt by Maori to control fresh water, led the campaign against their attempt to control the foreshore and seabed.
While Nick Smith is now turning a blind eye to New Zealanders’ concerns over Maori control of water, in 2003 he stood up for the public. During a protest march down the main street of his Nelson electorate, he said;
“Ordinary New Zealanders, who have shown a huge degree of tolerance to treaty claims and spending on Maori issues, have had enough.”
Dr Smith claimed that while senior Labour Government ministers were negotiating with Maori over the ownership of the foreshore and seabed to find a “win-win” solution, the answer was “very simple”:
“The Government should pass legislation confirming the Crown as owner on behalf of all New Zealanders. Anyone who wants to divide up the shoreline for one exclusive group of citizenship must be stopped”.
In 2004, the National Party published a newspaper advertisement opposing the Government’s bill to give Maori control of the foreshore and seabed, calling on the public to send in submissions.
Their ad criticised the Government for giving Maori special rights:
“Labour’s basic message to Kiwis is: if you’re not Maori, then no matter how long you live here, you can never love this land as deeply – or care for it as responsibly – as Maori. Provisions like these will disempower your family forever…”
National opposed Labour’s plan to give Maori ‘the power of veto’ over resource consent applications:
“You know what that means. You want to build a boat ramp. But the local iwi says ‘Not so fast. Your ramp will have a significant adverse effect on our customary rights’. You then have two choices. A court case (bound to be long and expensive). Or a bribe (merely expensive). You pay the koha. Nothing’s changed. New name, same old scam.”
The ad opposed Maori being given ‘joint management’ rights, saying the new law would “give Maori strengthened ability to participate in decision-making processes. Strengthened ability? That means only one thing. Joint management.”
They complained that Maori claims to the foreshore and seabed would be ‘hard to oppose’:
“The Government has created a situation where these orders will be rubber-stamped by the Maori Land Court – a judicial jack-up. Say an iwi applies for an order. You can bet no-one will object. Why? Because they won’t even know about it… No hearing. No debate. No comeback.”
National warned that under Labour’s new bill, “The koha racket will continue. Part-Maori descendents of signatories to the Treaty of Waitangi will still be able to hold up any development … until their terms are met. There’s only one word for that. Extortion.”
And they claimed the new law was divisive: “This legislation will divide our country, not bring it together. This is not the way to build a better future for all of us. National says the foreshore and seabed is Kiwi property. Not iwi property.”
National’s present position, as outlined in Dr Smith’s consultation document on fresh water reform, reeks of double standards.
Maori tribes will be given joint management rights and the power ofveto over councils – the very things National objected to in Labour’s foreshore and seabed legislation.
Their plan to pass the responsibility for rubber stamping iwi claims to fresh water onto local authorities, will make such deals hard to oppose – again something National complained about in their ‘fish hook’ ad.
And with multiple tribal groups involved in the control of freshwater in any catchment, iwi consultation and the whole koha racket will skyrocket.
Comment: The 'racial divide' call is made often. The truth is however that the corruprtion is equally represented on both sides. Whether referencing political parties, Iwi, Maori, Pakeha - there are those on both "sides" who are more than happy to screw over their "own people" in the interests of themselves and / or their globalist handlers.
Back in 2003, with local authorities spending $3.4 million a year consulting with iwi, and the Corrections Department alone spending $2.2 million consulting iwi over three new prisons, National spoke out strongly against the rising cost of iwi consultation.
Nick Smith also objected to the inclusion of Maori spiritualism in the RMA:
“It is political correctness gone mad when key decisions on infrastructure are made on the basis that… it will adversely affect Maori spiritual beliefs and self-esteem. This decision is an invitation for backhanders…”
“There can be no certainty of property rights when the fantasy world of Hollywood starts being given credibility by our courts. This example follows previous rulings by the Environment Court about diverted waters adversely affecting Maori self esteem, and motorways and prisons being diverted or held up over taniwha. It shows just how politically correct and stupid the Resource Management Act has become and highlights the desperate need for reform.”
He made a promise:
“National is committed to a thorough cleanup of the Resource Management Act to remove any references to the spiritual world. This sort of hocus pocus has no place in the courtroom.”
After eight years in government, not only has the “hocus pocus” not been cleaned up, but Dr Smith is about to make it a whole lot worse. Through sweeping co-governance rights and the power of veto over democratically elected local authorities, the radical Iwi Participation Agreements proposed for the RMA will condemn councils into endless consultation with multiple tribal groups.
The result will be more and more abandoned projects as property owners decide it’s not worth the hassle.
Bob Jones explained what it was like consulting with iwi in 2014, when he wanted to restore a window in a commercial building in central Auckland that had been removed by a tenant.
Since the building was within 50 metres of one of thousands of new designated Maori heritage sites introduced by the Auckland Council’s Maori Statutory Board, under the Draft Unitary Plan, it needed a resource consent. To gain that consent, Sir Bob had to seek the approval of 13 iwi, ranging from Taranaki to Whangarei. Letters were duly written.
“Five replied stating they had no concerns while others said they were considering the matter, presumably calling huis to weigh up this window crisis. One respondent bearing that fine old Maori name of Jeff Lee, representing something called Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki, contacted the planner…
After advising the planners verbally that no Cultural Impact Assessment Report was required for the window, he nevertheless asked them to consider it – brace yourselves – given his ancestors, centuries ago, gathered in the vicinity. Lee then wrote, outlining his terms for ‘assessing the window’s cultural impact’ which, he said, would take him ‘a total of six to eight hours’. For this he sought $90 per hour plus GST and ‘travel expenses of 0.77c per km’.”
Unsurprisingly, Mr Lee was told to “get stuffed”.
Treaty Settlement Acts are now littered with requirements to involve iwi in decision-making. Anyone wanting resource consents in the vast number of areas where statutory acknowledgements exist must consult all iwi individually – with each no doubt charging substantial fees for their pro-forma cultural assessments.
In fact, stories of RMA rorts are everywhere – and National knows it has become legalised corruption. But rather than taking a principled approach and removing race-based requirements from the law – to create a much-needed level playing field – they clearly intend making the problem a whole lot worse.
Further, instead of fulfilling his promise to take spiritualism out of the RMA, Nick Smith embedded it, through “Te Mana o te Wai”, in the 2014 National Policy Statement on Fresh Water.
Dr Smith should know only too well how inappropriate it is to include cultural spiritualism in water quality controls – but such is his hypocrisy that he intends strengthening the concept in the forthcoming reforms:
“When Te Mana o te Wai is given effect, the water body will sustain the full range of environmental, social, cultural and economic values held by iwi and the community.”
In his fresh water consultation document, Dr Smith proposes “to require regional councils, when setting freshwater objectives, to identify the values of the iwi and hapu that have associations with those freshwater bodies.
Hand-in-hand with recognition of their association with water bodies, there needs to be ways for iwi and hapu to participate in decision-making about those water bodies. This decision making occurs through development of regional policy statements, regional plans, catchment plans, and consenting.”
His approach will result in Maori tribes controlling waterways throughout New Zealand, clipping the ticket whenever anyone applies for consents – and, if a price is put on water, pocketing a royalty every time a tap is turned on.
The Northland Regional Council has spoken out against plans to give Maori authority over “freshwater bylaws, consents and other statutory responsibilities”. They are adamant that decision-making is the job of elected councillors.
Chairman Bill Shepherd also explained how “the government’s use of the word ‘iwi’ in consultation documents was problematic for Northland, where the landowners were primarily hapu – and there were 190 of them.”
Imagine having to negotiate with 190 tribal groups every time you want to make a decision! National’s approach highlights the absolute hypocrisy of the claims by Minister Nick Smith, that their RMA reforms will bring consistency into local government.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, former Judge and law lecturer Anthony Willy, has been examining the powerful forces behind the fresh water reforms:
""Nick Smith the Minister responsible for the government’s fresh water policy said at a recent public meeting in Auckland called to discuss the matter, ‘There would be an obligation on local councils to consult with iwi about the use of water in which they might have a special interest, but there was to be no suggestion of co-governance…’”
Anthony refutes these claims, quoting from “a memorandum filed by the government’s lawyers in the Waitangi Tribunal Registry should there be a need for a resumed hearing”.
He concludes, “This puts it beyond doubt that the government is open to discussing both co governance with the Iwi Leaders Group and the allocation of fresh water to persons of Maori blood on a race basis.”
The document confirms that the Crown worked closely with Iwi Leaders throughout 2015, developing fresh water policy proposals “to be included in the public consultation process”. It states their priority for 2016 will be “Economic Development”.
They intend “developing a range of mechanisms to enable iwi/hapu to access fresh water in order to realise and express their economic interests”.
He concludes, “This puts it beyond doubt that the government is open to discussing both co governance with the Iwi Leaders Group and the allocation of fresh water to persons of Maori blood on a race basis.”
What this means, is that once National gives iwi control of fresh water, they intend to develop mechanisms to generate economic returns. As sure as night follows day, there will be an iwi levy on water.
If you haven’t put in a submission opposing all race-based proposals for fresh water reform, then please do so as numbers really matter on issues like this. A simple email to email@example.com stating your position is all that is needed.
Click on the image above to open a PDF version in a new wondow
And why not send it on to all National MPs (their addresses are here), as they are the ones who are responsible for these dreadful proposals, and they really need to hear what the public thinks.
If you believe that other New Zealanders should be informed about what’s going on, so they too can send in submissions and contact MPs, then please support our ad here. It’s not too late. The ads will start running this weekend – and if we have enough support, next weekend as well.
For Sale: 40 Billion Litres Of Canterbury's Purest Water April 7 2016 | From: Stuff A council in the drought-prone Canterbury plains is selling the right to extract 40 billion litres of pure, artesian water to a bottled water supplier.
The Ashburton District Council is selling a section in its business estate, known as Lot 9, for an undisclosed sum. It comes with a valuable resource consent that allows abstraction of water from aquifers beneath the town.
The council has refused to publicise information about the deal, which is understood to be with an overseas company.It has outraged some residents, who say water is desperately needed locally.
The area's artesian water is increasingly popular in overseas markets such as China, with its New Zealand origin often featuring in branding and marketing.
The consent allows the holder to take 45 litres of water a second from local aquifers, totalling more than 1.4 billion litres a year. It expires in 2046, meaning the buyer will gain access to more than 40 billion litres of Ashburton's pure water.
It was approved in 2011 by Environment Canterbury and includes a recharge consent, meaning all water taken must be replaced from other sources.
In a statement, the council confirmed it was in the process of selling the site;
"The parcel of land includes an existing consent for water abstraction from local aquifers," it said.
"The prospective buyer is interested in setting up a water-bottling plant."
Council chief executive Andrew Dalziel would not answer questions about the sale, citing commercial sensitivity. Standing orders prevented councillors from discussing the sale, which is expected to be finalised in June.
It is understood there has been no consultation with ratepayers or other interested parties, such as iwi, about the deal.
Sir Mark Solomon, chairman of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, said it was "disappointing" the iwi had not been informed.
"Twenty years ago the Ashburton region had reasonably good water quality, but it is now an over-allocated catchment and faces some of the most pressing water quality challenges in our takiwa [tribal region]," he said.
"It seems incredible that the council wouldn't think more broadly about the future of its existing consents."
A premises in the Ashburton Business Estate, where the Ashburton District Council is in the process of allowing a bottled water company to extract 40 billion litres of water.
Ashburton resident Jen Branje is leading community opposition, and said the lack of transparency raised alarm bells.
"We live in a drought-prone area - farmers aren't given consent to bore for water for their crop-growing, so why on Earth are we selling it off-shore?"
The Ashburton groundwater zone is over-allocated, meaning water allocated to consent holders exceeds the amount available for use. New groundwater consents are difficult to acquire, making existing consents more valuable.
Branje said a lack of consultation did not give locals faith the sale was in their best interest.
"This whole thing has gone on behind the ratepayers' backs. No-one has any clue about it whatsoever.
It's a blimmin' lot of water, and it shouldn't be allowed to go off-shore. If anything, that water should be sustaining our own economic backbone."
Ashburton often has issues supplying water during the summer. In some areas, water restrictions banned residents from using hoses to water their gardens.
When applying for the consent, the council came to an arrangement with meat processor Silver Fern Farms, allowing it to deepen its bore if Lot 9's water abstraction caused groundwater levels to reduce.
Reports have filtered through about the $1.2 billion blowout by Auckland Council on IT since the supercity was formed in 2010.
This level of overspend is phenomenal and it is unclear whether the council has anything to show for it.
What is clear is the council has failed in its governance responsibilities to Aucklanders and ratepayers.
Last year, the auditor-general raised some serious concerns around the project – NewCore – which has received attention for its $100m overspend, saying the project carries “an almost certain” risk with a “major impact”.
At the time the council responded by saying all was under control citing the following reasons: “this includes quarterly reporting to the finance and performance committee, project steering group meetings held each fortnight in line with best business practice, and independent ongoing quality assurance reporting from EY to identify issues.”
So I took a look at the reporting mentioned, and while shocked, wasn’t surprised at what I found.
A review of the finance and performance committee meeting agendas and minutes show just how badly our leaders have failed us in governance.
In 2015, the same information on the IT transformation programme was regurgitated four times when updating this committee (in February, May, September and December). A quick review of the minutes of each of those meetings shows no overview of any discussions, except in September when the public were excluded for reasons of commercial confidentiality.
There is no mention of how investment is turning up in actual operational savings, except broad statements around targeting savings. Any type of rigorous risk reporting framework is completely absent.
Additionally, I find it astounding there was no mention of the vast gaps in governance highlighted by the auditor-general in 2015. This is a complete failure not just by council staff accountable but the governors of Auckland.
Having worked in the IT and communications sector in senior management and governance positions during my 20-years in business, I have never seen such gross negligence at all levels of project management and people must be held accountable for this, including the cost blowout and lack of governance oversight.
For $1.2 billion, you would not only have transformed your IT systems and processes, migrated your whole staff to modern-day computing solutions, such as cloud-based communications, and have built new network infrastructure, such as a mobile network. The fact the council is attempting to combine systems is an inaccurate justification for this level of investment.
We need strong leadership focused on delivering results for Auckland. There’s quite a few steps that need to be taken in order to address this level of incompetence.
Here is where I would start:
Demand the appropriate level of reporting from those accountable in the council to governance. This includes updates on benefits realised, milestones and gating which decides whether the project is moved to the next phase, rigorous risk assessment and monitoring, and a thorough update on scope changes driving costs and benefits, as a start;
If governance reporting is not addressed satisfactorily in a short time frame (i.e. 3-6 months), then replace those individuals to get the level of accountability that is a fundamental tenet of large capital investments like this;
Ensure the risks highlighted by the auditor-general are taken onboard by council staff accountable for this programme and risk mitigation strategies are embedded not just in the programme but governance reporting;
Ensure the benefits, outcomes, project scope, business and technical requirements were aligned and reported on regularly at both an operational and governance level;
Not take at face value that management is doing this. It’s clear from the significant gaps in what the council says it is doing and what is turning up at the committee meetings that the most prudent assessment would be to assume the appropriate levels of reporting and risk management are just not in place; and
Ensure management is running an incredibly strict capital prioritisation process around scope changes required.
This blowout is completely unjustifiable, especially when residents in Riverhead and Maraetai can’t even afford decent footpaths in their communities.
The irony of reading the committee meetings is the talk about deferring millions of dollars of desperately needed investment that has been put on hold while the IT funding goes unmonitored and ungoverned.
I will provide strong leadership, fresh ideas, and deliver real results for Aucklanders. I have the governance and operational experience to ensure Auckland has the right level of reporting and questions in place to avoid debacles likes this.
River Stance: Water Pollution In New Zealand February 26 2016 | From: Listener
Ecologist Mike Joy’s unsanitised views of the sorry state of our fresh waterways make him a target of vitriol. But he’s not about to change his tune.
The cool water flowing around Mike Joy’s legs looks clear and clean. If it wasn’t for a stiff southerly blasting over the Canterbury Plains and across the bed of the Selwyn River, it might even look good enough for a quick dip.
But looks deceive. If the pollutants that leach through our intensively farmed soils and into lowland rivers such as the Selwyn made the water run red, we’d quickly grasp the scale of the problem, says Joy. Instead, the water at Coe’s Ford – a spot where he spent blissful days as a Christchurch schoolboy in the 1960s and 70s, and where he now stands as one of New Zealand’s loudest environmental whistleblowers – is polluted by invisible toxins.
It’s high in nitrogen, which fuels the growth of slime and algae, and there are regular spikes of E coli, meaning the swimming water quality is ranked as “poor”.
Trout used to run in their tens of thousands up this stretch of the river. Christchurch anglers could knock off after a day’s work and half an hour later be casting their lines into a fishery that rivalled the fabled Turangi. But these days Fish & Game rangers count just dozens of trout.
In the middle of the river bed there’s a tell-tale black streak. “It’s Phormidium,” says Joy. The naturally occurring algae thrives in rivers that have been altered by vegetation clearance and enriched by excess nutrients. It can quickly grow into a toxic mat across an entire river bed.
Within a fortnight of the Listener photographing Joy here, Environment Canterbury had issued a fresh alert warning people to stay away from the site, reporting “significant quantities” of the potentially toxic algae, which can cause rashes, nausea, cramps, tingling and numbness around the mouth and fingertips.
And which can kill. There are instances in New Zealand of dogs dying after drinking contaminated river water and licking algae-covered rocks. “It seems it will only be a matter of time before a child dies after ingesting some of this,” Joy predicts.
Typical Joy – focusing on the negatives, looking past the postcard images of crystalline alpine rivers to shout about the ailing state of streams that flow through farmland, publicly undermining our clean green image.
He became a household name three years ago after he was quoted in the New York Times on the eve of the release of The Hobbit saying the pristine environment portrayed in the film was at odds with this country’s poor showing against many international benchmarks.
Previously, an article he’d written saying that New Zealand was “delusional” about its environmental performance was used to embarrass Prime Minister John Key in a high-profile interview with the BBC’s Stephen Sackur.
After the New York Times story, political lobbyist Mark Unsworth emailed Joy, accusing the Massey University ecologist of economic sabotage and describing him and his cohorts as “the foot and mouth disease” of the tourism industry.
“Most ordinary people in NZ would happily have you lot locked up,” he wrote.
Political activist Cameron Slater blogged that Joy ought to be “taken out and shot at dawn” for his treachery.
[Comment: Oh how the truth hurts. And shoot the messenger?]
The New Zealand Herald accused Joy of overstatement, and scolded that his damaging analysis had reached an international audience. When challenged by Sackur, Key shrugged off Joy’s critique as merely a “view” that could be easily countered by other scientists, and insisted that “for the most part” it’s possible to “jump into any New Zealand river” for a swim.
Looking back on the backlash, Joy says he was hurt but undeterred. “For every one Unsworth, there are 20 people who randomly email me or ring me and thank me for what I’m doing.”
A $1.27m clean-up to reverse environmental damage in Levin’s Lake Horowhenua began in 2014. The Listener had labelled it a “lake of shame” in 2013 when it was ranked 107th out of 114 lakes for water quality. Photo/Hagen Hopkins
The Way He Sees It
He’s carried on putting his head above the parapet, increasingly abandoning the language of academic restraint to tell the story of what he sees as an environmental “crisis”. In the past two years alone he has delivered 102 public talks to environmental, farming, community and school groups. And this month, he has published the story in a long essay, “Polluted Inheritance”.
Referencing monitoring reports and studies that normally lie beyond the public gaze in scholarly journals and the archives of regional councils, Niwa and other crown research institutes (CRIs), the essay is effectively a Mike Joy “state of the environment” report – one that paints a far bleaker picture than the official version published a month ago by the Ministry for the Environment.
Of 112 monitored lakes, a 2010 Niwa study found 44% are eutrophic – so burdened by excess agricultural nutrients that they have become murky, smelly and inhospitable to many fish, reports Joy. Almost all (90%) our lowland wetlands – the “kidneys of our waterways” – have been destroyed.
Three-quarters of our native freshwater fish are threatened with extinction (up from 20% in the early 1990s), yet only one – the grayling, which has been extinct for decades – has legal protection.
Digging through the data on more than 300 monitored river sites, he reports that more than two-thirds of those surrounded by farmland exceed Australasian guidelines for nitrogen levels in water, beyond which aquatic life starts to be affected.
That’s up from 40% in 1990. Phosphorous – the other key agricultural pollutant, carried into rivers by soil erosion – exceeds guidelines in most intensively farmed areas (although levels have been slowly falling since the late 1990s).
And then there are the tiny creatures whose presence signals the well-being of rivers – invertebrates such as mayflies and stoneflies, which are measured by the Macroinvertebrate Community Index (MCI).
Niwa has mapped MCI scores around the country, painting in red where low insect life denotes serious pollution: the map burns bright red throughout the intensively farmed regions of Canterbury, Southland, Auckland, Waikato and Taranaki.
We’ve squandered our environmental riches, argues Joy, and ended up with a pattern of degradation that places an inequitable burden on the poorest communities.
Yes, the pristine rivers and lakes still exist, but they are largely in national parks where people with time and money to drive or fly long distances can enjoy them, whereas the worst effects of intensive agriculture are concentrated in lowland rivers and estuaries close to where people live – places which, in the past, have been available to those with limited income for food gathering and cheap recreation.
Mike Joy inspects Phormidium on the gravel bed of the lower Selwyn River, in Canterbury. The felt-like algae can quickly take over a river bed, and can be toxic to animals and humans. Photo/Martin Hunter
How has it come to this? Farmers, claims Joy, have been “incentivised to pollute”. The dairy-cow population has doubled since 1992 without there being regulation controlling the volume of nutrients and pathogens that flow from their free-range excrement through the soils and into waterways.
This intensification has been enabled by new inputs such as palm-kernel expeller (PKE) and a 420% increase in nitrogen fertiliser use since 1990, leading to stocking rates than wouldn’t otherwise be possible. The ability of catchments to absorb the effects has simply been overwhelmed.
Twenty-five years after the dairy boom began, the Government has belatedly written environmental “bottom line” standards for freshwater into the rule book. But in Joy’s view (one shared by many others in the freshwater field), the proposed limits are so weak they would allow for further pollution, and crucial measures of aquatic health, such as the MCI index, have been left out altogether.
The underlying problem, he says, is that those who pollute don’t pay to clean up the damage. Instead, the cost falls on the public in the form of a degraded environment and lost opportunities.
In his most controversial offering yet, earlier this year he co-authored a paper (with masters’ student Kyleisha Foote and Massey University colleague Russell Death) that extrapolated from a raft of published research on the cost of environmental clean-ups to conclude that if the pollution caused by the dairy industry was properly accounted for it would exceed the industry’s total economic value.
The farming sector was scandalised, and academics including Waikato University’s Jacqueline Rowarth and Frank Scrimgeour criticised Joy and his colleagues for naivety and sloppiness.
It's not our fault bro, all we did was turn up
But if it confirmed Joy’s reputation as a stirrer and a troublemaker for the dairy industry, it seems not to have affected his standing with New Zealand’s biggest farmer, Landcorp. Suddenly, Joy – just three years ago condemned as a traitor and saboteur – has found himself inside the room with the leaders of the most influential agri-business in the country. How did that happen?
Landcorp chief executive Steven Carden says the strategy of the state-owned enterprise is to achieve both an economic return and environmental sustainability. Joy is one of six paid members of an environmental reference group to advise it on how to achieve that. “We thought we could take the safe path of finding experts who would tell us what we wanted to hear, or we could challenge ourselves and bring in people who are outspoken on the environmental impacts of dairying.”
Other group members include veteran environmentalist Guy Salmon, innovative farm consultant Alison Dewes and maverick water campaigner and businessman Angus Robson. Carden says debate in the first couple of meetings was “ferocious”, but the search now is for farming solutions that will work. “We will listen to them … It’s not a green stamp.”
On The Inside
Inside the room being listened to by influential people is a surprising place to be for a late-starting scientist who still sees himself as an outsider. Joy’s academic career didn’t begin until he was 33. He ditched school at 17, by which time his policeman father’s job had taken the family from Christchurch to Wellington. He was academically average and a bit of a bogan. “I was a hoon at school, always off chasing girls at lunchtime.”
Dogs are known to have died after contact with the algae on the Hutt River and the Ashley in North Canterbury
His first job was in a bottle recycling factory in Petone. “It was rough as guts. I went from school to a full-time job there employing people coming out of jail, overstayers …
I became the foreman at 17, running these guys driving trucks and forklifts.”
He moved to Palmerston North in pursuit of a girlfriend and got a job on a 65-cow dairy farm, which he ended up managing. “I loved it – loved the cows and the job.”
He moved on through a succession of jobs – labouring, truck driving, building. He did a stint driving taxis all night and spending his days doing up a 100-year-old yacht.
He bought an empty section up 74 council steps in the Wellington suburb of Wadestown and built a kitset house on it, which is still there.
He and his partner, Allie Hewitt, sailed across the Pacific to Tonga, and later found work on a remote outback farm in Australia.
The place was owned by two estranged brothers who lived at opposite corners of the 40,000ha property, and it hadn’t seen rain for four years.
“We killed 6000 ewes,” recalls Joy. “The farmers had $2 a head in their wool fund to get rid of them. The market was shot.” At night, he and Hewitt would go spotlighting for kangaroos, legally, to sell for dog tucker, which brought in enough cash for the farm to pay their wages.
When they returned to New Zealand in 1993, jobs were scarce, and both decided to enrol at Massey. By the third year Joy was enrolled in Death’s freshwater ecology lectures, and he became immersed in the field of biomonitoring – using animals as a measure of ecological health.
That interest became the basis for a PhD using artificial intelligence to develop predictive models of fish populations, drawing on a raft of environmental variables including climate and geology.
The models describe, with a high level of accuracy, the freshwater fish communities that ought to be present in any given spot, which can then be used as the benchmark from which to identify the reasons the actual population may be depleted. The work was published internationally and, according to Death, was globally “ground breaking”.
Up to this point, Joy had no particular concerns about farming or the effect of land use on water.
“I was a fan of farming. I’d been a farmer.” But that started to change.
“It was so frustrating, day after day, going to streams, setting up kit and finding the same old suspects – the three species that can handle any conditions instead of the 20 species that ought to have been there. At hundreds of sites, all you ever found were upland bullies and short-finned eels and a few trout.”
He started getting angry at the degradation he was seeing. Then he got angry about the failure of regulators to act on it.
Fifteen years on, that anger has driven Joy onto the podium and into the media with a frequency and stridency that have attracted both respect and resentment from his peers.
University of Otago ecologist Marc Schallenberg, president of the Freshwater Sciences Society, says for the most part Joy is simply reporting on publicly available data, and “the message he’s putting out there is right”.
Schallenberg says in his own field work on lakes and estuaries he sees the same decline in water quality that Joy describes, and the cause:
“Couldn’t really be anything else [other than agriculture], unless there is a climate-change signal that none of us has picked up yet… But when you see what’s going on the land and the sheer amount of waste that’s put onto the land – it’s not rocket science.”
But he says most scientists have no appetite for the advocacy role Joy has assumed.
“Scientists often are dispassionate people because part of our training is really just to look at the data and not get passionately involved in any particular outcome or finding …
[Joy] has taken a lot of flak and that’s one of the reasons some of us would be reticent. But I appreciate what he does, and more than anyone he has brought these issues into the public perception.”
Given what’s at stake for New Zealand’s agricultural economy, Schallenberg says there’s a tendency among vested interests to “spin” the environmental data;
“So you need people to come out and call a spade a spade and engage with the misinformation that’s out there. I’m quite grateful that Mike is that person for us.”
Waikato University ecologist Kevin Collier vouches for Joy’s scientific credentials and says the message he communicates resonates with him.
“But people make contributions in different ways. Some are more comfortable doing the science through more conventional means and some are more comfortable being a bit more outspoken. Certainly Mike has taken a lot of hits where other people would have given up because it was too hard.”
Others are affronted by Joy’s methods. He has come out swinging against scientists from Niwa (the agency whose monitoring data he widely cites), accusing them, in the midst of the stoush over the proposed Ruataniwha irrigation scheme in Hawke’s Bay, of providing advice on nutrient limits in the Tukituki River that was biased in favour of the client:
“If you were working for Niwa and all your work came from these councils or the Ministry for the Environment … You’ve got to feed the kids and pay the mortgage. Are you going to say it’s a bad idea?”
Joy had breached a cardinal rule of scientific decorum – don’t slag off your peers in public. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council strongly rejected his comments, and Niwa rejects the allegations as well. Ill-feeling between Joy and the CRI remains. When the Listener approached John Quinn, Niwa’s chief scientist (freshwater and estuaries) for comment on Joy, he politely refused.
“The behaviour we would like to see is where we talk about each other’s work in the context of [conferences and personal communications], not in the media …
Having public spats is not helpful for the credibility of science.”
Waikato University’s Professor David Hamilton, immediate past president of the Freshwater Sciences Society, damns Joy with faint praise, calling his academic work “steady”. “He’s productive but he is not at the top of his field. If he was, he’d be a full professor.” Joy, he says, has raised the profile of water issues, but upset peers by casting aspersions on their independence and strayed beyond his core discipline by commenting on issues such as environmental economics and soil contamination.
The Cost Of Speaking Out
Death says his former student and long-time Massey University colleague has taken up the mantle of environmental advocate at considerable expense to his academic career. Joy is a senior lecturer and was declined for promotion to associate professor recently.
The university promotion system works on rewards for publication in scholarly journals, not for talking to community meetings or writing op-eds.
“Traditional science is meant to be about helping the wider public and communicating, but in reality there are so many barriers to doing that, that you have to make a conscious decision to do it.”
“New Zealand scientists tend to want to be like most Kiwis and not antagonise people, but if you go to conferences in the US it’s the complete opposite. They get up and criticise you – not personally – but the science. And that’s what science is meant to be. But New Zealand scientists tend not to want to do that.
They tend to want to stay among the crowd and not speak out and upset anybody …
The other unfortunate thing is funding. Most of the funding in New Zealand, in contrast to other countries, is very much tied to the Government directly or indirectly, and for whatever reason the Government is quite tightly linked with many of the industry lobby groups, particularly dairy, and dairy is certainly not very keen on us outlining that water quality in New Zealand is degrading as a result of what it is doing.”
Joy’s boss, Massey University vice-chancellor Steve Maharey, has backed the scientist through the various controversies, provided he can support his claims. (Maharey says he can.)
But for Joy, there is more at stake than tenure and job security.
There’s a fight to be had with the Government over what he sees as bogus bottom-line standards for freshwater; there’s a battle to be won in boardrooms such as Landcorp’s to bring the true cost of environmental degradation to account; there’s a public to be enlightened.
“I’ve decided that this problem is more important to me than my career. This job is the longest job I’ve had in my life. I’m sure I’ll get by if I lose this job. I can go sailing or truck driving.
It means far more to me to put guys like [Environment Minister] Nick Smith in the spotlight than it does to keep paying the mortgage.
Maybe if I’d been a career academic I wouldn’t be like that … I’m looking for my next opportunity to tell New Zealand about this.”
The academic has become an activist, he says, “not because I chose to be, but because I have to be”.
Mike Joy was awarded the Reo mo te Awa award at the Morgan Foundation NZ River Awards on November 26, which Rebecca Macfie helped judge.
Radio Station George FM Warns Staff About Max Key February 12 2016 | From: NZHerald
Radio DJs at George FM have been warned they will be taken off air if they say anything negative about the station's newest host, Max Key [son of Prime Minister John Key].
Key's new role at the station was unveiled last week, hosting a one-hour show on Tuesday nights. He will unveil his debut single Forget You on his first show next week.
Obviously Max Key becoming a night time host for a show on George FM has stirred up some controversy. I know I sent them an email saying what a stupid decision it was and that I would never listen again to heir station as long as he was on it. It seems their management (Media Works owned by Rupert Murdoch) have instructed all their staff to stay mum about this on air and on social media. What are you scared of George? The truth?
An unverified email reportedly sent to all George FM staff warned staff that "all social media relating to the new night George FM Night time residents must be positive.
"We will not tolerate any negativity relating to any of our new roster," the message continued. "Anyone who cannot adhere to this requirement will be taken off air instantly."
Mediaworks didn't respond to requests for comment about the statement.
When contacted by the Herald last week, Max Key said he "wasn't doing media" and didn't want to comment.
George FM founder Thane Kirby
But George FM DJ Aroha Harawira spoke out in support of Key, saying he should be judged on his musical ability and not his father's politics.
"I haven't met Max Key yet myself, I've never seen him DJ, but I heard him on George FM last night and I thought he played a pretty sweet set," Harawira wrote on her blog site.
"I value my friends' opinions and I'll give the guy a chance. I think you should too ... Say what you want about John Key, but leave his kids out of it."
Max Key's first show on George FM is on February 16, where he'll unveil his new single, Forget You, rumoured to be about his recent split from Amelia Finlayson.
In an interview on the station, Key said he'd been working on his material on his own, and he was "super excited" to release it. Co-host Jay Bulletproof said he had heard the song, and it was an "absolute banger".
"I'm proud to say I'm releasing my first single Forget You. Previewing on my first show on George fm nights, Tuesday the 16th at 10pm ... I can't wait to drop this," he wrote on Instagram.
Maori Elder Kingi Taurua Sends TPPA Partners, Queen A Formal Notice Of Veto Of Trade Agreement February 4 2016 | From: NZFoodSecurity
Kingi Taurua, a prominent Nga Puhi elder at Waitangi’s Te Tii Marae, has sent a formal notice of veto of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to the embassies and trade departments of its proposed partner countries, and has requested that the Queen intervene on the issue.
The document cites the Treaty of Waitangi and the 1835 Declaration of Independence of New Zealand, and states that the New Zealand government does not have “due authority” to sign the TPPA without the agreement of Maori elders, “which [agreement] has not been given”.
The public release of the document comes just as the TPPA is due to be signed in Auckland, New Zealand on February 4 by visiting politicians from countries around the Pacific.
Mr Taurua is currently meeting with other Maori elders at Te Tii Marae in preparation for a visit by John Key, prime minister of New Zealand, and other government officials on Waitangi Day, February 6, after the scheduled signing.
He has previously stated that Mr Key would not be allowed onto the marae if the controversial trade agreement was signed, although a trustee for the marae stated on February 2 that Mr Key would be allowed onto the land.
It is thought that the notice sent to the partner countries of the TPPA is being discussed at the marae in anticipation of the visit, as the document asks the Queen to stand in opposition to the agreement with Mr Taurua “and those other Rangatira o Te Whakaminenga o Ngā Hapū o Nu Tireni” – referring to the other chiefs gathered at the marae – that “agree to … my position”.
The document says that he “requests and requires” the Queen to intervene and act as “Protector” of New Zealand’s sovereignty from “attempts on the sovereignty of our Independent State” by “overseas corporate interests”. At least one other elder has already countersigned the document.
The language of the document echoes that of the Declaration of Independence, which was signed by Mr Taurua’s ancestor, Pareha of Ngati Rehia. He says that another ancestor of his, Te Kemara, was a signatory of the Maori version of the Treaty of Waitangi 1840.
Last year the Waitangi Tribunal found that Maori did not cede sovereignty when they signed the Treaty of Waitangi, and it is apparently this sovereignty by descent – or tino rangatiratanga – that Mr Taurua is claiming he is able to use to formally veto the trade agreement.
The document closes by stating that Mr Taurua “does not give [his] permission to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement being signed in Auckland” by the visiting officials from overseas “which position I take to the full extent of my right to regulate trade in that district.”
The Declaration of Independence, which was approved by the Queen’s predecessor King William IV and ratified by the British government, states that Maori elders would gather at Waitangi each autumn in order to regulate trade.
A Porirua family took in a baby so neglected he showed no emotion. Now he's full of life. They also took in a baby born at 25 weeks and turned her into a happy, healthy wee girl who's off to school soon.
And because they've taken on the children permanently - giving both them and the children the security of knowing they have a family for life - they lose all Child Youth and Family Service (CYFS) support and allowances and receive just $19 a day per child from Work and Income.
They can't change the children's surnames, they can't take them out of the country without permission and, if their birth parents want contact, they have to make it happen.
"So why would anyone sane do that?" carer Jude Pointon says.
"The only people who would do that are people who have had a background like mine [Jude was fostered and adopted as a child], who have gained through having a background in fostering or adoption."
Jude and her husband have first-hand experience of that culture.
Before they became permanency carers, they fostered children and Jude tells of having siblings aged one and three in their care for two months, who then had to go back to their parents for a few days because CYF didn't have its court documents in order.
"I said 'what do I tell them? They need to know what's happening,' and they said 'tell them they're going for a ride in the car'.
"So I had an absolute hissy fit ... and said 'that's not okay, the system is making me into a long line of adults who have failed these children and we're creating this country's future criminals and they have been let down over and over and over again'."
Jude told the social worker they would have the kids back when the situation was sorted, but, she says, because she had spoken her mind the children were sent to another home.
So it was a three-year-old's fourth foster home and it was a one-year-old's second foster home.
And that happens over and over again," she says.
Jude's sister - a social worker and CYF emergency care foster parent - recently had two children arrive in the middle of the night. They were with her for a few days but then weren't returned after school one day.
"She was told 'they've gone to another placement' and she said 'well that's really not okay because they were told they were coming here, they've had an unsettling time and suddenly they're not coming here, they're going somewhere else they don't know, again and all their precious belongings that they've managed to take from their home are here'."
Those belongings might just be a teddy bear or a book but to a child with nothing they are everything.
We have a serious
national problem here in New Zealand with child abuse and satanic paedophile organisations. It is hideous to comprehend, but the reality has to be faced - and those responsible, and even those that have been commiting these crimes for over 50 years - should know that they will be held to account for their heinous actions.
Social workers shocked. Jude's sister arranged a meeting with about 20 Porirua social workers and she, Jude and another foster parent told them what was wrong with the system.
"Some of them were actually shocked to hear from a carer's perspective how it feels to the carer and the children," she says.
"It makes me annoyed because the foster carers and the permanency carers are the experts. Sure, the children who have been who've been through the system are the experts but often they're too young to put across coherently their point of view.
We know what's wrong with the system. We're happy to tell you. We're happy to tell the policymakers. I'm happy to talk to the minister. Listen to us."
And that, simply, is Jude's message to the powers that be who want to fix the care system.
"Listen to the foster carers and ... the permanency carers, because we are here every day dealing with it every day, and we know what can be done to try and fix the situation and make it work for these vulnerable children.
It really infuriates me when I hear on all media people talking about CYFs looking after these children. CYFs don't have some big warehouse somewhere with all these children slotted in it, it's actually families who are looking after these children who are often damaged, going out of their way to try and help these children have as normal a life as they can given the neglect they've had to start with.
It's like we're these invisible people."
The "Minister" Must Step Up
Former ward of the state Tracey said the State care system was broken beyond repair.
Tracey was removed from her family in the late 1970s when she was 11 because of abuse and said she lost track of how many foster homes she lived in.
She told Checkpoint nothing has changed.
"They've lost track of over 1000 children - they don't know where they are, what's happened to them.
"How can you lose 1000 kids? The Minister of Social Welfare is their guardian, is their parent, so that person has better step up and look after these kids."
Tracey said society would have to live with the consequences if children in care were not properly looked after.
Another former ward of the State, Tupua Urlich, said more support was needed for people when they left care.
Mr Urlich said although he felt like a prisoner when he was in care, he had no support when he left and developed alcohol and drug problems. He also tried to take his own life.
People needed a home environment to fall back on well into their 20s.
"The average age of leaving home in New Zealand is 23. You have the luxury of being at home, parents helping you out," he said.
"I know some people will hear this and think 'I didn't do that for my children' - sure but at least they knew they had the option of going home, getting their washing done, getting given a meal or support, real important things."
Mr Urlich now works with child support group the Dingwall Trust.
A Constitutional Timebomb: Is New Zealand’s Government And Court System Unlawful? January 27 2016 | From: InvestigateMagazine
It could be the most fundamental New Zealand issue of the century: if a group of Australian lawyers and researchers is correct, the Treaty of Waitangi ceased to be valid on January 10, 1920, and the New Zealand Government does not, lawfully, exist. In an even bigger potential crisis – nor do the laws. As Ian Wishart reports, even New Zealand constitutional lawyers can’t rule out the possibility they may be right.
If it sounds like the Coalition Government’s worst nightmare multiplied by a factor of ten, you’d be right. Every three years for more than a century, New Zealanders have gone to the polls to elect governments believing, for lack of any reason not to believe, that this was how democracy worked. You elect a government, they make your life hell, you vote them out again.
We were told, as a nation, that the Government’s powers derived from our status as a constitutional monarchy. But now, important new legal research is threatening to turn our perception of who we are, as a nation, on its head.
The establishment view of constitutional law is that New Zealand, lacking a written constitution, is a country where the Government holds the ultimate power to make laws and regulations.
Just how entrenched that establishment view is, can be demonstrated in a current debate in New Zealand legal and judicial circles about the powers of the Courts to rein in bad Government. Lord Cooke of the Privy Council, formerly New Zealand’s Chief Appeal Court judge, has suggested the Courts do have some power to control the Government. He argues that if the New Zealand Government re-introduced slavery, for example, that the Courts could strike it down.
Unfortunately for those who believe the judiciary is a check on Government power, Lord Cooke is a lone voice in New Zealand’s legal community. Other judges and lawyers have indicated they have a constitutional duty to uphold legislation passed by the Government, however damaging that law might be.
Even so, there is evidence from Australia that the mainstream legal and judicial view may be totally wrong – not because the Courts have special powers to ignore legislation, but because New Zealand and Australia’s governments are not lawfully constituted.
Leading academics and judges in Australia are lending their support to research showing that both countries failed to constitutionally validate their legal sovereignty when they became independent from Britain early this century.
If it sounds impossible that the laws of New Zealand and Australia are invalid, read on.
The Australian Government has based its current lawmaking powers on the Australian Constitution Act of 1900. That Act was passed by the British Parliament while Australia was still a Dominion.
The important fact to remember is this: the Australian Constitution is a British law.
New Zealand was granted Dominion status in 1907. The title Dominion meant nothing significant, in British law and legislation the term was synonymous with colony. It wasn’t until January 10, 1920, however that Australia became a sovereign nation in its own right when both Australia and New Zealand became foundation members of the League of Nations – the forerunner to the United Nations.
Membership of the League of Nations was restricted only to sovereign countries, and Article XX of the Covenant of the League of Nations required the extinguishment of any colonial laws applying to a member state pre-Sovereignty.
That meant the Constitution Acts in New Zealand and Australia passed prior to independence became legally void under international law. It was a condition of membership of the League of Nations and later the United Nations. But no new constitutions were ever forthcoming in either country.
It continues to be a founding principle of the United Nations charter that the laws of one state cannot be used in another unless ratified by a mutual treaty, so while the Australian Government has relied on a colonial act passed by the British in 1900, Britain has said otherwise, saying the Australian Constitution Act (UK) is null and void.
“No Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, or an Act that looks to the Parliament of the United Kingdom for its authority, is valid in Australia or its territories in accordance with the laws of the United Kingdom and the Charter of the United Nations," wrote British officials responding to an information request.
For decades, Australians have obeyed federal laws seemingly passed with full legal authority on a raft of issues from law and order to taxation. In all cases the Australian Government has claimed its powers from the 1900 Constitution Act.
That fundamental reliance took a knock however, when the United Nations’ International Law Commission ruled that Australia could not rely on Section 61 of its Constitution to provide the power to enter into international treaties, because the Constitution was a British law, not an Australian one. Instead, said the UN, Australia needed to look to its membership of the League of Nations in 1920 as providing proof of its sovereignty.
An Australian group calling itself the Institute of Taxation Research has used that ruling and others to mount a serious challenge to the constitutional authority of the Australian Government, saying that if the Constitution Act did not give the Government power to sign international treaties because it was void, nor could it be used as the basis for domestic law.
In 1992, the Australian High Court held that:
“The very concept of representative government and representative democracy signifies government by the people through their representatives. Translated into constitutional terms, it denotes that the sovereign power which resides in the people is exercised on their behalf by their representatives.
"In the case of the Australian Constitution, one obstacle to the acceptance of that view is that the Constitution owes its legal force to its character as a statute of the Imperial Parliament enacted in the exercise of its legal sovereignty; the Constitution was not a supreme law proceeding from the people’s inherent authority to constitute a government."
In other words, the Australian Constitution does not establish the sovereignty of Australians or their government.
That ruling has been enough for the Institute of Taxation Research to hit the Australian Tax Office right between the eyes, point blank. In what began as a Freedom of Information request to the ATO, the group pointed out:
“For the Constitution to make the transition in status to that of a ‘supreme law’ as mentioned by [Chief Justice] Mason, mere opinion is not enough.
"Some legally recognisable instrument is required such as a Memorandum of Transfer from the UK Government, or the record of a referendum in which the Australian people have given informed consent to the new arrangements, or some other form of document recognisable under international law.
Since the ATO is claiming this has occurred would their counsel, who as a practising barrister must know of this document and where it can be found, please produce it. In the presence of such documentary evidence I would be quite happy to acknowledge the continued existence of the constitution and the laws deriving from it."
Despite the request, the ATO could not produce any documentation proving its lawful authority to levy tax on Australian citizens.
“Firstly it was asked to present us evidence of the documents setting up the ATO," explains ITR spokesman Ian Henke from the organisation’s Melbourne headquarters. "We’ve finally got a document that says ‘the documents do not exist’ signed by Erin Holland, Deputy Commissioner, on behalf of the Commissioner."
That letter was sent on 27 October 1999.
"There are several issues here," says Henke. "We also searched the Commonwealth Gazette, and there was no evidence at all of the ATO having been gazetted into existence. Finally in a court on the 20th of October, counsel for the ATO finally admitted that it wasn’t."
It is ITR, a group of lawyers, the occasional judge, business executives and researchers, that is making all the running on the issue, and it’s an issue whose repercussions will be felt not just in Canberra, but Wellington and Ottawa too.
“The point is, under international law once you get a change in sovereignty then there is a break in legal continuity. The best example we can give you is Hong Kong. June 1997.
On 30 June there was still British police, British law, British taxes, British Army, British Queen and so on. On the 1st of July, one minute past midnight, all of those things still existed – but they no longer had authority in Hong Kong."
In the United States, the transference of sovereignty from the King of England to the American people was also marked by a break in legal continuity – the War of Independence – followed by the establishment of the Constitution.
The Australian Government, allegedly realising its difficult constitutional position, passed the Australia Act in 1986 to repeal a range of Imperial laws and shore up its status. New Zealand, in the same boat as Australia, did likewise with the Imperial Laws Application Act of 1988. However ITR argues that both Acts are also void, as it is impossible under international law and the UN Charter for one nation to pass legislation repealing the laws of another nation.
So could there really be a major constitutional crisis facing New Zealand? Or is it a technical "tilting at windmills" that will lead nowhere?
New Zealand’s Constitution, like Australia’s, arose from Westminster in 1852 to provide authority for the colonial administration to govern on Queen Victoria’s behalf. New Zealand was accorded "Dominion" status in 1907 and was therefore still a British colony when the Land and Income Tax of 1908 was passed.
Like Australia, NZ signed the League of Nations Covenant in 1920 and, like Australia and Canada, was given legal separation from Britain in 1931 with the Statute of Westminster. However, New Zealand chose not to ratify the 1931 Statute, falsely believing that it could still function as a British colony despite having signed the League of Nations Covenant.
This was despite this speech from British Prime Minister Lloyd George at the Imperial Conference of 1921:
“In recognition of their service and achievements during the war, the British Dominions have now been accepted fully into the comity of the nations of the whole world. They are signatories to the Treaty of Versailles and all other treaties of peace.
"They are members of the Assembly of the League of Nations, and their representatives have already attended meetings of the League. In other words, they have achieved full national status and they now stand beside the United Kingdom as equal partners in the dignities and responsibilities of the British Commonwealth.
"If there are any means by which that status can be rendered even more clear to their own communities and to the world at large, we shall be glad to have them put forward."
The last paragraph should have sent clear signals to New Zealand that a change of constitutional status had taken place, whether the New Zealand government liked it or not. Colonies could not sign treaties, only sovereigns could.
But it wasn’t until after World War II, and the formation of the United Nations in 1947, that New Zealand formally severed its colonial ties from Britain by ratifying the 1931 Statute of Westminster in a ceremony on November 25, 1947.
Britain then drafted a new Constitution for New Zealand, again passed in Westminster, authorising its colony to change any provisions of the old 1852 colonial constitution.
Except, as the Australian Government has already learnt at great cost, no laws passed by Britain are valid in New Zealand or Australia, nor have they been since 1920.
The British confirmation to Australia that:
"No Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, or an Act that looks to the Parliament of the United Kingdom for its authority, is valid in Australia or its territories in accordance with the laws of the United Kingdom and the Charter of the United Nations," could equally be applied to the 1947 New Zealand Constitution Act passed in Britain for use in New Zealand.
“What principle of international law lets the parliament of one sovereign country amend the law of another sovereign country? It doesn’t," argues Henke.
One to disagree, however, is University of Canterbury constitutional expert Philip Joseph, who says the gentle devolution of power from Westminster to the three colonies of Canada, Australia and New Zealand was legally effective, even if not as definitive as more traditional transfers of sovereignty.
Joseph believes international law, as set out in treaties signed by Australia and New Zealand, does not define how a nation must deal with sovereignty issues at a domestic level.
“Unlike all the other more newly emerged Commonwealth countries which have become sovereign, these three old colonies acquired full powers of legal continuity through an ongoing gift of legal powers from Westminster to the countries concerned."
This, of course, puts Joseph somewhat at odds with Henke and others who take a more fundamentalist view of constitutional law, and even Joseph admits that his views – shared by other mainstream constitutional lawyers in New Zealand – may be wrong at the end of the day.
The reason for that is that it places an enormous amount of faith in Britain’s legal ability to devolve power that way. Ninety-nine percent of countries have achieved independence either by physical revolution or by declaration of independence. The fact that only the three Dominions didn’t, and are now facing major constitutional challenges, illustrates how the "gentle" way may in fact have failed miserably to deliver lawful government.
"It never properly tells us when we exactly became an independent sovereign nation, and insofar as we trace our powers through this continuity line back to Westminster yes, it is a problem," says Joseph.
The question of whether New Zealand’s Government has been passing laws since 1920 without pure Constitutional authority to do so now lies open for legal debate and challenge, raising issues about the possible illegality of major policy decisions like state-asset sales or Waitangi Treaty settlements, not to mention the tax laws.
The problem is even more volatile, as an unconstitutional parliamentary system would mean New Zealand has an unconstitutional court system, bringing more headaches over whether any New Zealand court has jurisdiction to hear such a case.
Some lawyers suggest the New Zealand Government had the power, during the transfer of sovereignty, to ratify by legislation the earlier colonial constitution as remaining in force.
"If you wanted to argue the case," says Victoria University constitutional law expert Tony Angelo, "you’d say that on that date, 1920, when the cut off comes, that there has been an implicit affirmation or re-affirmation of certain rules as the laws of this ‘newly independent state’."
Ian Henke doesn’t buy that argument for a second.
He points out that in the recent Australian referendum on becoming a republic, the voters were asked to vote on a specific question that would also have provided a break in legal continuity. And they were asked to ratify it because there was no legal authority for the government to simply rubber-stamp it.
"We, the Australian people, commit ourselves to this constitution," was the referendum issue.
"By 61% to 39%, the people of Australia said ‘no’," says Henke. "so they can’t just ‘ratify’ it. The people said no."
But doesn’t a government have the lawful authority, while it is becoming independent, to simply ignore its population and say ‘We know what’s best because we’re the Government’?
"Of course not, because ‘lawful authority’ in independence, comes from the people. It’s the only place lawful authority can come from."
Canterbury University’s Philip Joseph agrees, saying the Government cannot claim a constitutional mandate simply because it was voted in during an election.
"That’s too mechanistic in a sense. You’ve actually got to go back to the fundamentals: what gives them the right to be there to begin with, to actually put policies to the people?"
At a point during the interview, Philip Joseph acknowledges that what is being challenged is not whether an individual statute is constitutional or not – which has been ruled on many times in the past – but a much bigger challenge: if the entire system has not been lawfully constituted, no national court can possibly adjudicate on it.
"I take your point on what you are saying," says Joseph, "and at this point you do step beyond the ‘safe’ parameters of constitutional analysis. You are actually asking now: what are the bases of a people, of a state, of a constitution."
The ramifications are huge. After all, you are asking lawyers who you may seek advice from to accept that their admission to the Bar and expensive law degree may not be valid.
Mainstream constitutional thought in this country has always been that sovereignty did not come in a definable moment as it has in other nations, but that the slow legal transition from Britain to New Zealand over a period of decades was lawful.
To ask lawyers, judges and politicians to accept that the core of their constitutional beliefs and their power base is wrong in law is like asking the Titanic to stop on a dime. It is still a foreign concept in New Zealand legal thought that "the people" hold sovereignty in anything other than name only.
The New Zealand and Australian people, when independence from Britain came in 1920, were never asked by their Governments what laws they wished their new nations to operate under. Yet only the people can be sovereign, not the Government.
"Every country in the world has a constitution which is its law," stresses Henke. "The key about your constitution, and the key about our constitution, is that they are Acts of the British Westminster Parliament. They have never been passed by the domestic parliaments down here. They are not the will of these peoples."
In essence, he argues, the moves by Australia, New Zealand and Canada to simply continue their existing government systems without asking the citizens of the new nations for their views, were akin to building a skyscraper without getting a building permit or planning permission.
Sovereignty, whether the governments realised it or not, had not passed from Britain to the former colonial governments, but instead had passed directly into the hands of the people by virtue of the international covenants that all three countries signed. Yet the governments acted as if they now had the power.
There are still lawyers who argue that international law has no domestic force. Again, the lawyers at ITR vehemently disagree.
"Certainly, in the early part of the century, sovereign states’ rights were the only thing that was important. There was no such thing as individual human rights," says Henke.
The reason for this was simple. Until World War I, the world was essentially a collection of imperial powers – many of them controlled by monarchs with absolute, divine right of kings, power. Sovereignty rested with the monarchs, and was exercised via their governments.
But the first world war brought that state of affairs to an end, destroying the Austro-Hungarian empire, Prussian aspirations and the Ottoman empire of Turkey that had once stretched from India to Spain.
From the wreckage of the war, new nations emerged where the people were suddenly free – sovereigns in their own right. The idea of absolute government sovereignty died in the trenches of the war, and this is the background that led to the League of Nations being formed – a group of free countries, each respecting the others’ sovereignty and their citizens rights to shake off colonial shackles.
"Now probably the major development of the last half of the 20th century has been the swap from the emphasis on sovereign states’ rights, to individual human rights. At this point in history, that’s the dominant shift that’s occurred," opines Henke.
"In Europe – and this is the problem that the people in Australasia have – human rights, the 1966 Covenant, the 1947 Universal Declaration, and the European Covenant on Human Rights, are all by treaty part of European law and are binding on all of the parties to the European Union, including England.
So human rights are now binding, under international law and international agreement, on the United Kingdom. Yet we have governments in Australia who claim they operate on the basis of British law, namely our Constitutions, but at the same time want to not be bound by the sections relating to human rights.
In fact, the remarkable thing is that two countries [Aust & NZ] whose governments speak so loudly about other people’s abuse of human rights are very careful to avoid having human rights, of the international variety which are universal, being applied to their citizens."
Henke says the bizarre situation has arisen where Australia has sworn to uphold the international declarations on human rights, but where Australian courts have ruled the declarations do not apply domestically.
New Zealand too, is guilty of the same action by virtue of Government policy. According to Philip Joseph, the New Zealand Government, like Australia, has not allowed our domestic law to automatically recognise international law even if NZ is a signatory to it.
"There is this dichotomy between the international legal order and our national legal order. It is still one of the foundation principles of our constitutional law that an international treaty which we sign and ratify – does not become part of our domestic legal system unless it is specifically incorporated by an Act of Parliament."
Which, as Henke argues, makes it a lot easier for two constitutionally unlawful governments to continue in power, without giving their subjects any rights of appeal under normal international legal channels.
"We actually had a judge say on the weekend, in discussion with a QC, that he didn’t give a damn whether individuals were hurt – his job was to uphold ‘the system’ – the system as opposed to the law.
Now that’s the second judge we’ve heard say that. Justice Haine of the Australian High Court said this back in December of 1998. His job was to ‘uphold the system’. I was in court when he uttered it."
But ITR admits there’s another problem: if, as the evidence now strongly suggests, the Australian Constitution is invalid and the government has no powers to pass laws or enforce them, then the Australian courts also lack jurisdiction to hear such arguments.
By failing to consult their citizens – their new bosses – about what kind of system of government they wanted from 1920 onwards, and simply assuming that the laws that existed the day before were still legal, Henke’s researchers believe the Governments acted illegally.
When America gained sovereign nation status, the new Constitution expressly provided that British common law precedent would continue to form the basis of American law, except where it was inconsistent with the principles of the Constitution. In this way, Americans ensured that they still had access to a code of laws.
But New Zealanders and Australians were not asked if they wanted British common law dating from the Magna Carta to continue as their legal basis.
And without that permission, it is constitutionally possible that the New Zealand courts have no power to draw legal precedent from colonial times or earlier. In effect, there is a solid argument that virtually no laws exist in New Zealand, and that even the 1688 Bill of Rights protecting MPs from being sued may have no effect, as ITR points out.
"The only constitutional authority for British legal precedent is the authority on which the British courts rest: the legal authority of the British people as expressed through the British parliament. Now that lawful authority does not apply in Australia. It doesn’t apply in New Zealand.
"So all of the court decisions made in relation to that, unless we choose voluntarily and explicitly to take it into our laws, is no more valid for us than laws used in France, the United States or China."
Again, looked at objectively, there is no constitutional reason that British colonial law should have any more force in New Zealand, than Ottoman law from last century should have any force in modern Turkey or Egypt.
The only way this legal crisis could be dealt with is for the New Zealand Government to seek a mandate from the voters to be granted temporary emergency powers whilst a new Constitution is drafted for public approval.
Unlike Hong Kong, freedom downunder was not marked by a break in legal continuity while one side relinquished power and the other took command. Instead the former colonial governments did not understand the constitutional issues facing them.
As New Zealand constitutional law expert Tony Angelo, of Victoria University, points out, sovereignty up until that time had normally been transferred only at the point of a gun, usually after agitation. In contrast, British colonial citizens were loyal and not actively seeking independence.
"The British constitutional pattern, particularly for the old Commonwealth, was normally an evolutionary rather than revolutionary process, so the idea that there is a specific date before which you are ‘dependent’ and after which you are ‘independent’, as I understand it, was not part of British constitutional thinking.
It is certainly a feature of some constitutional systems in continental Europe. In other words, if you wanted independence from France, everything would stop and start on a given date."
As you saw earlier, Britain had told Australia and New Zealand on many occasions that they were now fully independent, but it appears the colonials were not listening.
In Resolution 9 of the Imperial Conference of 1917, the colonies were told "there is a necessity to alter the constitutional arrangements of the empire. The conference feels it must put on record that such rearrangements will be on the basis of equality of nationhood."
Australia’s Prime Minister Hughes tried, in 1921, to draft a new Constitution for Australia to reflect the new nationhood. But his plans were torpedoed by British-owned commercial interests lobbying politicians against it. Hughes was voted out soon afterward, and the idea of a new Australian Constitution never arose until the Republican Referendum last year.
New Zealand politicians were even more backward, failing to realise they were legally independent for 27 years, and failing to implement a Constitution right up to the present day.
Although the Lange government did pass the 1986 Constitution Act, it was an Act of Parliament not a people’s constitution. It is also strongly arguable that the Constitution Act is void because the Government had no sovereign power delegated to it by the New Zealand people.
Leading British constitutional law expert, Professor D P O’Connell, a recognised international expert, says transfers of sovereignty must be marked by a break in legal continuity. But the former Dominions, thinking stability was the most important factor, ignored the need to re-codify the laws and constitutional basis of the government.
"There is a law called the Law of State Succession," says Henke, "which is basically the mechanics by which those breaks are overcome to ensure that you don’t end up with total chaos. But nothing was ever done.
"All they’ve done is ignored the existence of the break and run a PR job on the people telling them everything is fine, deliberately made sure they never told them the truth, and just let it run from there."
The issue is so grave, that even New Zealand constitutional law expert, Victoria University’s Tony Angelo, doubts that New Zealand courts would have any powers to even hear legal argument if their jurisdiction was challenged.
He cites the case of Simpson v Attorney General, a New Zealand case from the 1950s where Simpson alleged the Government was unconstitutional because he discovered the electoral writs had not been issued within the timeframe required for the election.
"The court said ‘well, this is all very fine, but we’re not in a position to re-establish a parliament. We can say yes, everything’s invalid because the process wasn’t followed as it should have been, but we’re not in a position to re-start the machine’.
"The judges said ‘actually, if what you say is true, none of us have been lawfully appointed and therefore we can’t validly decide your case’."
To get around the problem, the court opted for a novel solution, ruling that the word "must" in the Act could also mean "may". Whether the verdict was legally correct was irrelevant, as Philip Joseph points out.
"They managed to find a way around that, because it would have brought the system crashing down on its head, otherwise. That was a pragmatic response to a pressing constitutional challenge."
It is issues like this, Joseph concedes, that demonstrate how the sovereignty of the people of New Zealand has arguably been usurped by Parliament and by the Courts.
Both institutions will attest to the constitutionality of the other if either faces a challenge, whilst the people must accept their verdicts or actions.
"That is an argument that you could put, but ultimately if you test it in the courts you won’t succeed, I can tell you that, because our Court of Appeal would simply say ‘we can trace our authorities back’."
As for the arguments by other New Zealand constitutional experts that the Government’s power to make statute law overrides everything else, Henke’s attitude is "prove it".
"The question is: where does it get its power from? A very simple question. Every Government has to get its power based on something. It can’t be based on the divine right of kings, because that ended when they chopped Charles’ head off. The current Royal Family will be sovereigns only if they obey the specific requirements of English statutory law.
Now try and think about this one: the courts have tried to push the idea that it’s like dual citizenship – you can have the Queen of New Zealand and the Queen of the United Kingdom. But if you have dual citizenship you can surrender either one without affecting the other.
However in this case it’s an a priori requirement that to be Queen of New Zealand, somebody must already be the Queen of the United Kingdom. They could not abdicate as Queen of the United Kingdom and remain Queen of New Zealand, so trying to separate the British authority component is an impossibility. You can’t do it."
Which raises an even more dramatic possibility, according to Tony Angelo:
"May we still be a colony? I mean, the person of our sovereign is in the UK. Our final court of appeal is in the UK. We have not localised those two things. Internationally we would say we are independent and we have a Queen of New Zealand who is different from the Queen of England, and the Privy Council advises the Queen of New Zealand not the Queen of England, but that is a total mystery – it is an act of faith to accept that."
"He could be absolutely right," says Henke. "That’s one of the possibilities – that we are all still colonies of Britain and not independent. Now if that is so, then every one of the treaties we have signed, and in Australia’s case that’s about 4000, are null and void. And we’re all British citizens again, except that British law says we’re not, so we become stateless people.
"As you can see, it’s a fascinating series of twists. And we did not believe when we started out that we would find anything like this."
The problem now facing citizens of New Zealand, Australia and Canada is how to regain constitutional control of their governments.
The only previous attempt at drafting anything close to a real constitution in New Zealand was Sir Geoffrey Palmer’s Bill of Rights, which codified a number of basic rights but said "notwithstanding" those rights, nothing in the Bill could remove the Government’s statutory powers.
Ian Henke says attempts to draw up lists of rights are futile.
"Look, the issue is very simple. Once you become a sovereign nation, all of the rights belong to the people. And they delegate to a parliament and a government so much of their rights as are necessary to keep government going. And that’s all. Anything that is not so delegated remains the rights of the people.
"In other words, you don’t have to draft a Bill of Rights to say what rights the people have got. All you have to draft, in any decent democracy, is a Constitution that says which of the rights, belonging to the people, the government is allowed to exercise."
So New Zealand’s new Constitution could say, "We the people retain all rights, but we delegate the following powers to the Government…"
Allowing for the fact that future Governments could face some unforeseen problem and require extra power, Henke suggests that the Government should be forced to ask its citizens, via binding referenda, to vote on constitutional amendments if necessary.
Such a constitution could even provide for the Government to be allowed to exercise emergency powers, for a maximum of six weeks, in order to deal with an unexpected crisis. The time limit allows enough time for the issue to be put to the vote.
"The Government doesn’t need all our rights to do things. It only needs some. So the Government must have no rights over the freedom of individuals, and so you just never give it to them. Then, in order to enforce something, the Government has got to prove that what they’re trying to enforce falls under the context of what they have been granted by the Constitution.
It puts the onus of proof on the Government to prove that they are acting lawfully, rather than as it currently exists where individuals must prove that the Government is acting unlawfully."
Angelo believes the recent push by New Zealanders for more control over their governments is driven by a subconscious realisation that we’ve been flying blind, in a constitutional sense.
"We have only one protection, and that is the semi-entrenched requirement of elections every three years. Intuitively, why people have consistently said ‘we’ll keep the term short’ is, I think, because they’ve realised that it is their only hold on the system. Because logically you’d look for a four or five year term, but if you look at those referenda the populace consistently say ‘no, don’t change it’.
"The Ombudsman came out of that desire for greater control, Official Information came out of that, MMP came out of that, but the basic issue is not being addressed and that is because it is not part of the Anglo-Saxon constitutional tradition to do things this way.
"The fact is that now we’re probably the only nation that thinks like that, Britain is now so caught up with the European Union that even if it hasn’t set its own constitution it is falling within other people’s structures. It seems we’re closest to the ‘pure model’.
"But until you can get some popular groundswell, no politician is going to run with it."
In Australia, however, it’s a different story. The Institute of Taxation Research is playing hardball with the Australian Government.
"An application for the appointment of an International Criminal Tribunal has been submitted to the UN, for Australia. We have forwarded copies to every single country who has a delegation to the UN. No country has returned the document to us.
"Copies went to the Secretary-General as well as the Security Council. A number of countries have offered active support in bringing the matter to a head. It is currently being worked through by the [UN] Human Rights Commission. It is currently being worked on by a number of the other countries who were signatories to the treaties that gave Australia and New Zealand their independence. They have indicated to us that as signatories to those treaties they are duty bound to push the matter before the International Court.
"We are, despite what the politicians here are saying, moving down the track to a declaration by the International Court that this current government is nothing but an illegal offshoot of the United Kingdom Government.
"Even the UK Government is saying now ‘It’s not us! It’s them. We’ve given them the legislation saying they’re independent. If these people are doing it it’s them, they’re doing it wrong. We’re actually asking the International Court, amongst other things, to have the United Kingdom repeal the Constitution Act, just to strike it right out so there can be no pretence any longer that it still exists."
What Investigate expected when we began this research was to find strong and forceful legal opinion that this constitutional timebomb claim was wrong – that it was merely the ramblings of a few cranks. Instead, of all the leading New Zealand constitutional lawyers we spoke to, both on and off the record, one comment sums them up:
"It is very problematic, and there is no clear answer to these questions you are posing."
That such an admission carries with it the possibility that our courts are invalid, our government has no constitutional right to pass laws, that the Waitangi Treaty became null and void on 10 January 1920 when we signed the League of Nations Covenant, that the new drivers licence laws are invalid – pick any issue you like – all of this means New Zealand faces some very serious decisions in the very near future.
This question is likely to get a major airing when constitutional experts meet in Parliament’s Legislative Chamber in April to debate whether New Zealand needs a written constitution. At this point, one might be tempted to say the question is not "whether", but "when".
On the 4th of February 2016 two days before Waitangi day. John Key intends to sign the TPPA. The treaty will allow international corporations to usurp most of New Zealand’s sovereignty. It will deregulate the financial industry, allow corporations to sue our government for loss of profit if we don’t let them run rough shod over what is left of our fragile ecological systems and destroy what is left of our social support systems.
It will also destroy one of the most important social documents and contracts of this country: the Treaty of Waitangi.
And John Key knows this. The ruling elite knows this and they like the idea! What is more, most Pakeha who identify with the ruling elite rather than face reality and realise they are part of the 99%, like that idea too!
And it’s an easy fault line for the 1% to aggravate the 99% into an all out civil war between Maori and Pakeha and here is what is being done to make sure they get what they want.
Releasing information about riot police being trained to deal with political unrest to inflame emotions.
People inciting violence in comments on political blogs to make sure the people who own those blogs can be arrested or made redundant as part of the aggressive political fringe loonies when they try to inform people.
So what can you do to help the people in Waitangi to speak truth to power and make sure this can not be pinned on Maori being obstinate?
For starters if you are Pakeha, Chinese, Indian, European, Muslim ,Christian, in short not Maori and against the TPPA, you can go to Waitangi in support of the refusal of The Waitangi Marae Kaumatua to receive government officials in protest of the signing. Show them you won’t be played against each other and that New Zealanders of any creed and background are against the corporate take over of New Zealand!
Do so in peace and respect for the treaty and the people there.
Maori or otherwise: prevent anybody from becoming violent or aggressive and keep it dignified and silent and allow the sheer number of people to speak rather than individual voices. Even if they sign the TPPA they have to implement it and that will only happen if we let them.
Take mirrors and let the trained government thugs have a goo long look at themselves! It works in Ukraine! We need the people authorised by the banker usurper John Key to commit violence, to realise that they are also part of the 99% being sucked dry by the banksters!
And remember all of us living on these Islands: This is our home! We can make it heaven or hell. The international banksters are hell-bent on making it hell. Let’s not give it to them! Let’s commit to make peace and abundance for all!
Disinterest In Pre-Maori History Stuns January 25 2016 | From: BreakingViews
Official disinterest in pre-Maori New Zealand history stunned Australian-based researchers Peter Marsh and Gabi Plumm in Part 1 of their new documentary series titled Skeletons in the Cupboard.
Episode 1 The Redheads assembles evidence that Aryans from India migrated to the islands of the Pacific, including New Zealand.
The idea is not new. Edward Tregear's 1885 book The Aryan Maori had the same suggestion at a time when ideas about Aryan (or Caucasian) migrations became popular and were applied to New Zealand.
Mainstream historians like Richard Hill, Vincent O'Malley, and the late Michael King, dismiss the theories as lacking evidence, not bearing scrutiny, wild speculation, racist, or seeking to discredit Waitangi Tribunal claims.
Substantial evidence collected in 1988 that showed human occupation of New Zealand pre-dated Maori occupation by thousands of years was hidden in National Archives for 75 years. This includes carbon dating collected by 37 government-funded archaeologists in a one-year survey of stone structures in the Waipoua Forest near Dargaville.
Plumm interviewed one of those archaeologists, Noel Hilliam, who said that the initial dating showed the structures went back to 2225BC, which is about 3150 years before Maori history began in New Zealand.
Why the cover-up? Hilliam said:
“The Maori guy in charge of the Waipoua survey closed the operation down the day after the initial dating came through”.
The survey was deposited at National Archives in Wellington with a note requiring approval of the Te Roroa-Waipoua Achaeological Advisory Committee or other appropriate Te Roroa authority for release of any of the data.
There was a significant noticeable change in Maori culture after they arrived in New Zealand 800 years ago, Plumm said.
“They built planked houses with decorative facades, used single-hulled canoes instead of outriggers, fashioned terraced village sites with amphitheatres, and created complex art forms not seen in the Pacific. What made them change?” Plumm said.
New Zealand was inhabited when the first Polynesian canoes arrived, according to Maori oral tradition, which includes accounts of blond-haired, green-eyed flute-playing small people, the Patupaiarehe, as well as red-haired giants.
Plumm showed photos of skeletons in coffins less than 1.5-metres long.
Hilliam obtained DNA analysis of material found in the caves where the skeletons in coffins were located. The forensic pathologist in the United Kingdom who did the analysis confirmed they had the DNA identical to that of ancient Celtic people from Wales, and were 3500 years old.
Where did the light-skinned, blond-haired, green-eyed people go? They are still among us. Monica Matumua, who grew up at Rena on the Wanganui River 27km from Taumarunui, has a family tradition that their ancestors 165 generations ago migrated from India to escape a war.
If a generation is 20 years, 165 generations goes back 3300 years, to 1285BC, which coincides with the end of the Indus Valley civilisation in northwest India.
Matumua says her ancestors sailed across the Atlantic to Central America, relocated to South America, sailed to Polynesia, and sailed further to New Zealand 74 generations ago around 535 CE, landing in the Bay of Islands near Russell.
The name Ngati Hotu was given to her ancestors with the arrival in New Zealand of Kupe, the supposed first Polynesian to arrive in New Zealand from 925 to 1215 CE.
Matumua was stunned to see that Waitangi Tribunal member and historian Angela Ballara declare that all Ngati Hotu had been wiped out. Matumua told her story to the tribunal as part of a claim on behalf of Ngati Hotu.
In 2013 she submitted a sample of saliva to the National Geographic Genographic Survey, which aims to map historical human migration patterns by collecting and analyzing DNA samples from around the world
Results published in Elocal in February of 2014 showed the first reference population matching Matumua’s DNA was based on samples collected from the Kinh ethnic group living in Vietnam. Her second reference population is in Puerto Rico.
Her haplogroup, which includes those people with similar DNA results and where some of her more recent ancestors settled, showed that parts of South America and New Zealand were very closely related to her DNA code, with Hawaii particularly close.
Marsh and Plumm also talked to moko artist Jason Phillips, Ancient Celtic New Zealand author Martin Doutre, Barry Brailsford, who studied the oral history of the Waitaha, and Secret Land series writer Gary Cook.
They referred to an incident in Awanui in the Far North by an excavator driver who found 2000 skeletons hunched in a fetal postion, bound, and buried.
The driver asked the Auckland Museum for advice and was told the museum could do nothing because the local tribe had no interest in these remains because they were not their people. The remains were not investigated.
The 60-minute documentary that was released in November of 2015, the first part of a series, is quality cinematography and sound fronted by the British-born writer of short stories and a children’s book and filmed by a Fiji-born Australian.
Being outsiders and independent of state funding, Marsh and Plumm do not have to pick a side in New Zealand’s culture war.
Skeletons in the Cupboard shows that our past is much more interesting than you ever imagined.
Couple Receives Notice Of Search 12 Months After It Happened And Why That Should Worry You To The Extreme January 19 2016 | From: AotearoaAWiderPrespective
A golden bay couple received a letter from the police. Attached to that was a signed search warrant. What was also attached was a “postponement” notice. The search had taken place, without their presence, 12 months earlier.
It appears that the police felt they could have something to do with a threat issued against Fonterra. the threat was that milk powder would be contaminated with 1080.
The couple, who had an impeccable record of non-violence and peaceful activism both here and in their native country Germany, was stunned to learn that the police had been in their house and had gathered hair tooth paste swabs and computer printouts. They had also downloaded telephone data and other storage data from their computers, and Ipads. They were also stunned that the police had been allowed to do so without their presence and been able to keep it secret for 12 months.
During the period National has been in power several draconian law changes where pushed through. One of them the the way the police can search your home and the way they can spy on you.
While most law abiding citizens assumed that it was to help the police find real nasty criminals such as drug dealers and gang members involved in crime or dangerous terrorists, for those of us political activists and bloggers it was just a matter of time for these powers to be used for the intimidation of people involved in activism of any kind.
The Kleinen family being a perfect example of people who are active and politically aware and who still had a modicum of trust in the system. From the article you will learn that they are no longer willing to cooperate with the police or even contact them.
For them to find out a year after the fact that the police had been in their home secretly in January 2015 and had taken personal and private information as well as samples of their DNA without their knowledge as well as raiding their home another time in March 2015 when they were present broke whatever trust they have and it will do so for a lot more people.
While the fact that the police can enter your home without your presence, secretly and without supervision is terrifying in and of itself just imagine what could happen if this becomes the norm and the police see this as a normal part of their investigation.
What is next?
Will they start planting evidence if they don’t like your political views?
Will they, as we witnessed in the Nicky Hager raid, lie to the judge to get search warrants for their political masters and set people the government doesn’t like up to be jailed after kangaroo court proceedings? Some 20 million Russians were killed in Russia by Stalin whose secret police and KGB torture centres and kangaroo court judges were willingly complicit in doing just that!
The experience this couple has had will paly out ever more brutally in the coming years if we don’t fight this tooth and nail!
The TPPA: New Zealand’s Democracy December 10 2015 | From: Scoop
The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) negotiations are concluded, and have shifted to the next phase - ratification by parliaments. The government is spinning like a top telling us how wonderful it will be for New Zealand. Forget the figures of $2.7 billion.
They are mere guesstimates, and carefully avoid the costs. The Government's negotiated access to overseas dairy markets are continually trumpeted as some sort of economic panacea. They are a delusion to anyone but those with a narrow vision that extends no farther than the commission or the closing of the 'deal'.
They are a delusion because there is no way Japan or Canada want to kill their family farm dairy operations in the interests of industrial production from New Zealand. There are very good economic, environmental and social reasons for that. It’s the same reason the French won’t kill off their rural communities by allowing factory dairy products in, and see the dispossessed move to the slums of Lyon and vote for extremist parties in their despair.
We and the Anglo-American west are about the only countries who think industrial agriculture is a sane approach, and I don’t know why – production of dross with an ever-larger factory, rather than creation of multiple co-values. Other than State Communist collective farms, of course. Now there's a similarity in authoritarian hierarchical thinking worth examining.
And then they’re the increased costs for medicine and the impact on our local communities and businesses – forgotten in the haste to get a dairy deal that will never happen. Other governments are not that naïve.
So what’s it for, this so-called trade ‘partnership’.
Well, they are careful not to discuss that. Trade Minister Tim Grocer won’t mention the fact that only some five out of over 20 clauses deal with trade and the rest are about the investment rights of mega-corporations – including the ability to sue both our central and our local government – that’s you and me.
"The reality is that this is an agreement to manage trade and investment relations – and to do so on behalf of each country’s most powerful business lobbies."
Bryan Gould argues there is a need for an agreement on managing trade. He thinks – and I agree – that we should look very carefully at the activities of corporate investors across national boundaries to ensure they comply with our laws, protect our people and avoid damage to our environment.
The TPPA does the very opposite. It reverses our democracy. It extends their interests without having to bother to consider ours. We – the people – now have to be mindful of their corporate interests in making our laws – or else.
Or else they can sue. "How dare you reduce our profits for the public good."
It happened when Australia wanted plain packaging on cigarettes. It happened when Egypt wanted to improve labour laws.
If you believe in Adam Smith’s village – local enterprise with no powerful outside exploiters coming in the make our lives worse – then you should be against this ‘deal’.
This deal goes to the core of our democracy. Prof Jane Kelsey issued a challenge to our government that needs to be addressed:
"Who gave the Prime Minister and Trade Minister the right to sacrifice our rights to affordable medicine, to regulate foreign investment, to decide our own copyright laws, to set up new SOEs, and whatever else they have agreed to in this secret deal and present it to us as a fait accompli?"
This is far from over. The dealmakers haven’t disclosed the details – they should immediately – but when they do, expect outrage. The US congress may be our greatest ally.
Christchurch: The Man-Made Earthquakes - What Really Happened, How And Why December 5 2015 | From: GodElectric
The Rothschild cartel attacked Christchurch with their Earthquake weaponry killing 185 people and injuring thousands over a prolonged period.
This article is written from the perspective of someone on the ground during these events, employed at the leading Geotechnical Engineering firm in the country, which was responsible for the Earthquake Commission land damage assessments. I am not a whistleblower, the people in the military have yet to come forward.
It is believed that the motive for the attack was financial greed. The Rothschild cartel used the military industrial complex to target the Central Business District of Christchurch, the area with the highest land values as a method of releasing stored funds.
Prior to the Christchurch Earthquake New Zealand was the least indebted nation of the western world. Increasing Government debt driving wealth back into corrupt insurance cartels of the City of London and other financial institutions of the world was done at the expense of the people of New Zealand.
The motive of greed meant the destruction of the city was planned meticulously. Little thought was given in regards to any rebuild.
Corrupt banking cartels privately bought up the most profitable part of the reconstruction process, the project management companies like Fletchers, in advance of the Earthquake occurring.
Earthquakes are the result of charge displacement, causing underground lightning. The hieroglyphs describe the dynamics of Earth events, through the relationship explained by Sekhmet and Ptah.
To understand how Earthquakes can be electrically induced, we will begin by explaining what is commonly termed as HAARP.
Bernard Eastlunds patent is shown below adjacent to the Tutankhamen headrest, together highlighting how the dynamics of the Earth and how it can be used to magnify energy for natural disasters. In theory HAARP can charge the Van Allen Belts moving charge layers, inducing charge in the rocks below.
Bernard Eastlund HAARP Patent alongside Tutankhamen Headrest.
The conclusion section of the patent contains the following text:
“This invention has a phenomenal variety of possible ramifications and potential future developments... Two new approaches to weather modification and control are suggested.
The first is for manipulation of the steering winds that control the development of mesocyclones, or the modification of the directions of the jet streams that influence development of hurricanes. The second is a method for influencing the electrical charge distribution in weather patterns such as meso-cyclones.
Possible defense applications include a method of accelerating electrons to MEV energies in conjunction with the HAARP antenna. Research applications include the creation of bright and controlled guide stars for astrophysical purposes.
Thus it can be seen that the ramifications are numerous, far-reaching, and exceedingly varied in usefulness."
I believe a number of different types of Earthquake weapons were used on Christchurch. I happened to be positioned at both the transmission and receiving nodes during the December earthquake event and was subsequently mind controlled out of the country, narrowly escaping death.
Raytheon, the company owned by Rothschild cartel bought the patents to HAARP and have offices in Christchurch, what is more worrying is they also have bases located across the entire Antarctic continent. This is of significant strategic importance.
John Key says: Christchurch Earthquake was man made?
Even though it is clear that New Zealand Prime Minister is a Cabal sellout / placement (or there is simply no way he would have come to hold such an office), he was clearly fumbling or pissed off on some level with what happened there as he twice referrs to the quake/s as man made in a thinly veiled manner:
Signals are magnified at the poles of the earth many thousands of times by the phenomenon known as Tesla Magnifying Resonance, creating the energy required for large natural disasters. Because of this phenomenon both Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, the U.S. Navy, Russia and China are in a race for military supremacy at the poles.
SuperDARN is one such array that is already established at the poles of the earth under the guise of experimentation, it does however have hidden modes of operation which have been photographed such as at Unwin radar.
“The station is very significant from a global perspective as it completes a worldwide network of radars focussed on auroral zones, called SuperDARN.
Southland is regarded as an ideal location for such a facility because of the southerly aspect, low radio noise and unobstructed horizon."
- From the Venture Southland website
The Unwin Radar (Left) and significant ionization visible near Unwin SuperDARN Radar - Bluff, New Zealand (right)
The SuperDARN radar is strategically located, near the main electricity trunk line from Manapouri power plant that serves the Aluminium smelters at the south of the island.
I was holidaying near Bluff on the Southern tip of New Zealand, 3 days before the December 2011 earthquake for my trip to Stewart Island. I saw an ionized rainbow cloud not more than 1km above the surface of the earth, I heard clicking interference on the radio and suffered severe drowsiness. Later that day there was a wave formation of clouds going back to a singular point in the sky as far as the eye could see.
Below is a picture of backscatter in Bluff, this was occurring during the week prior to the larger earthquake events in Christchurch.
22 December 2012 (Approx. 24hrs to Event) - Backscatter producing Scalar Cloud Spiral near Unwin Radar - Bluff, New Zealand
Before the larger earthquake event Russian media channel RT reported 107 dead pilot whales being washed ashore on Stewart Island, close to where Unwin radar is located.
Because of the power transmitted into the ionosphere by these antennae interference can be heard on all bands of the car radio, shown below.
Truthers on the internet did a great job of exposing what happened, with videos such as the one below appearing on Youtube.
The power for these Earthquakes is not generated in the core of the Earth. The hieroglyphs explain we are part of an Electric Universe. Gods Electricity flows through the galaxy charging planets and stars.
SuperDARN type RADARs couple into the ionosphere through mechanics explained by Pakhet, generating the power needed to create the larger natural disasters such as erupting volcanoes and earthquakes.
When used in this manor the Galactic power line, or Gods Electricity is used to destroy cities like Christchurch, New Zealand and others. God will answer this stupidity, its written into the heart of our civilization, in our music as an Omen.
Central Business District Targeted - Christchurch, New Zealand
The earthquakes were 'pepperdusted' daily across the Canterbury plain by the military industrial complex. Coordinates were given regardless of the lithosphere - hallmark evidence that a HAARP weapon was being used to generate the land damage. Sometimes ruptures would occur less than 10km below the surface of Christchurch, at extremely shallow depths.
The vertical acceleration was recorded up to 2.7G or 2.7 times the force of gravity, extraordinarily high for the magnitude of earthquake. For a shallow rupture to develop such a high vertical force HAARP or an Earthquake weapon is the only plausible explanation, the physics are more akin to having a bomb detonate underground.
2.7G Vertical Acceleration. Shallow Rupture. Click on the image above to view a bigger version in a new window
It did however have a live uplink onto the internet which the military could in theory have accessed allowing them to accurately calculate the charge state of the surrounding area.
Fox news also reported that 9 US senators, plus the head of FEMA and a "delegation" just "happened" to be in Christchurch New Zealand and just "happened" to leave a couple of hours before the quake struck.
They marked the anniversary of the Earthquake with an electrical weather event. Golf ball hail rained down on the people of Christchurch.
Could the NWO be in the process of unknowingly for filling Bible prophecy -
“Earthquakes in divers places."
(Matt 24:7) (Mark 13:8) (Luke 21:11)
If you read this article, it is important you understand the site mindcontrol.se. Your thoughts are not always your own.
Also I can recommend reading Robert Duncans Book Soul Catcher. It has a very exact account of the methods and practices used to torture me, as a Civil Engineer who saw the truth whilst on the ground in Christchurch. I never cried for these people that tortured me, despite being locked up, tortured and discredited so that I lost my career.
The only times I would ever cry is when they would use my true love against me, threatening to rape and abuse her via synthetic experiences, synthetic telepathy and Voice to Skull technology.
I underwent years of torture like this. The most hurtful of any being ten years earlier for reasons I do not understand, they deceived her from me using this technology soon after we fell in love whilst studying at University.
(Note: On page 235 Robert Duncan explains that the leadership of this planet still use the phonetic translation of the hieroglyphs to communicate, which is effectively showing their complete ineptitude due to greed. They failed to look at even the basic principles in nature knowing full well this is an Electric Universe.)
The hieroglyphs for Ramesses and Osiris explain that the electrical resonance of Earth and the creation of Earthquakes is watched by the Gods or advanced life in the cosmos. Not only this but every thought is being watched, including the entirety of the Illuminati or leadership of this planet.
The symbol that is the Eye of Providence carries with it this very meaning, that nothing is hidden from the cosmos. The cosmos allows free will on Earth but explains clearly that this universe is about love.
The leadership of our planet has become stupid over time because they do not follow this path, instead following a path of greed, blinding them from the real truth which is Gods earth. It is true that I proved God to my mind controller, by deciphering the hieroglyphs infront of them as they tortured me from my true love.
Anubis - Egyptian Jackal
“Truth is stranger than fiction, its an extraordinary Universe and our hearts and minds are linked to it
Note: The following account was written by the author of the article above. It deals with advanced mind control technologies which most people are not aware of. This material is disturbing - and will sound unbelievable to some - but the reality is that these technologies do in fact exist. Images have been added to provide context.
I am a TI that has been extensively tortured using military grade mind control since 2002. My girlfriend was taken from me and I believe she was raped however I am unable to help her because she refuses to speak with me. I have been placed under HAARP during its activation for the 4th largest induced earthquake in Christchurch.
I have also been subjected to years of synthetic experiences, they use the love I have for my girlfriend as a means to try and break me down. The worst torture I have endured has been months of a tingling sensation under my scrotum induced my military grade mind control weaponry with a man in my head saying "she is being penetrated by another man".
The Summary of Events
New Zealand I arrived in New Zealand August 2011, blissfully ignorant that manmade earthquakes were a reality, having never heard of HAARP or Electric Universe theory. I immediately started work at T&T where I was to evaluate Land damage for the Canterbury Land Information report and EQC claims.
EQC is the New Zealand Earthquake commission that provide disaster insurance for residential property in the event of a natural disaster. I am a fit and healthy man who understands his body, it was apparent that working in Christchurch I would suffer from severe exhaustion, usually in the run up to Earthquakes.
I was also speaking to the people of Christchurch, face to face contact with up to 30 Earthquake victims per day and many would describe similar symptoms. If you have ever been in a big earthquake you will understand the immense power to behold, to comprehend how this could be man-made took me some deliberation.
I have explained using the hieroglyphs and the theory behind Tesla Magnifying Resonance using the Earth and how they achieve this effect in the appendix of this document. December 19th I was driving a hire car to Bluff for a Christmas vacation to Stewart Island, I approached Bluff from the Catlins Conservatory Park on the Tokanui Gorge Road Highway and Gorge Road Invercargill Highway.
All the occupants of the vehicle, were suffering from severe drowsiness and were asleep despite being fully rested the previous day at Dunedin. Sometime between 2:00pm and 4:00pm close to my approach to Invercargill outside the left hand window of the vehicle was a ionized rainbow cloud, not more than 1km above the surface of the earth.
It puzzled me and I questioned the occupants of the vehicle as to what sort of rainbow can appear in a cloud, no one could answer the question and we did not stop to investigate because we were all suffering from severe drowsiness. There was also clicking interference on all bands of the car radio, including FM.
I have included a photo similar to what I saw that day below. At this point I also received a subliminal message which I originally thought was God, saying "You will need that cloud later". I now know that message was sent by a mind controller on this earth who has been targeting me for some time.
That evening we stayed at a Hostel in Bluff, I looked out to the North and could see wave formation of clouds going back as far as the eye could see, it ended at a singular point in the sky close to where I saw the ionized rainbow earlier that day. 3 days later The 4th largest earthquake struck Christchurch, luckily there were no deaths.
Upon further investigation on my return to Christchurch it revealed that the Unwin SuperDARN Radar was close to the location. Part of the SuperDARN array, Super Dual Auroral Radar Network evolved in the west during the late Cold War. Then we had a strange earthquake late one night which was more like a Vertical bounce.
I then started scouring the internet for information about HAARP. I wrote an email to Structural Geologist from Otago University questioning his article about the earthquakes and their causes. 4 weeks later I was posted on an unusual job to investigate slump from extraordinary excessive rainfall of someone's front drive in Akaroa.
It became apparent that the front drive I was investigating was the Structural Geologist I had emailed querying manmade earthquakes 4 weeks prior. Upon meeting him in the drive we discussed the idea, he was having great difficulty he said writing another article on the subject - I believe secretly suspicious in what I was saying.
The mind controller was able to make people speak, I remember the specific urge to talk words that I did not want to say when others around me were talking. I kept quiet but found the whole experience odd, eventually working out that it was a mind controlled event. The probability of me arriving on his front drive with the thousands of houses and EQC claims available, was mind control - though not apparent to me at that time.
Sometime continued and I carried on investigating man-made earthquakes using HAARP. Eventually convincing myself of the science behind such an event. It was after trying to raise the alarm at work I came home and had an audible message in my ears in the room I was in.
This was around May-July 2012, shortly after a photo appeared on facebook with her looking like she had fallen down some stairs, however she would not speak to me so I was unable to understand what went on. Naturally intrigued as to what mind control was I seek answers, it was only now that I began waking up to mind control and the fact that they could both listen to control the thoughts in your head.
I would be surfing the internet, if I found a website on the subject it would become apparent that it was increasingly difficult to concentrate. I put together more and more evidence, and was positioning myself to wake up people in Christchurch. It was shortly after I tried to wake up a work colleague, which I returned home to have an audible message.
Maori Elders Explain The Meaning Of The Hongi And The Ancient Maori Traditions November 25 2015 | From: WhiteWolfPack
A hongi is a traditional Māori greeting in New Zealand. It is done by pressing one's nose and forehead (at the same time) to another person at an encounter.
It is used at traditional meetings among Māori people and on major ceremonies and serves a similar purpose to a formal handshake in modern western culture, and indeed a hongi is often used in conjunction with one.
In the hongi, the ha (or breath of life), is exchanged and intermingled.
Through the exchange of this physical greeting, one is no longer considered manuhiri (visitor) but rather tangata whenua, one of the people of the land. For the remainder of one's stay one is obliged to share in all the duties and responsibilities of the home people. In earlier times, this may have meant bearing arms in times of war, or tending crops, such as kumara (sweet potato).
When Māori greet one another by pressing noses, the tradition of sharing the breath of life is considered to have come directly from the gods.
In Māori legend, woman was created by the gods moulding her shape out of the earth. The god Tāne (meaning male) embraced the figure and breathed into her nostrils. She then sneezed and came to life. Her name was Hineahuone (earth formed woman).
At her home just north of Tuai, a small town in the mountains of the North Island of Aotearoa New Zealand, Dr. Rangimarie Turuki Rose Peri shares a song in her own language.
Rose welcomes people from all over the world into her home to talk about ancient Maori ways and the importance of learning to understand and respect different peoples, cultures, traditions and the environment around us.
Easter Island - Ancient Links With New Zealand Maori May 28 2015 | From: WakaHuia
Life on what is said to be the most remote inhabited island in the world -- Easter Island or Rapa Nui the naval of the Pacific.
Through the stories and insights of the Rapa Nuian people we discover ancient roots and uncanny similarities to Aotearoa, roots centuries old are reconnected when Mana Epiha travels to the kainga or homeland of his distant Polynesian cousins.
As of 2011, Rapa Nui's main source of income derived from tourism, which focuses on the giant sculptures called Moai.
The Real Indigenous People Of NZ April 16 2015 | From: Youtube
With official recognition by Auckland University of ancient standing stones, with discovery of stone walls, carved boulders, and ancient working solar observatories, there is compelling evidence of a pre - celtic peoples inhabiting New Zealand as long as 4500 years ago.
This 6 minute clip asks why is there a wall of silence on this most important part of NZ's early history?
Mike Butler: Gareth Morgan Wrong On Treaty February 6 2015 | From: BreakingViews
Self-appointed guru Gareth Morgan bought into human-induced global warming in an earlier book and his current work on the Treaty of Waitangi shows him as a devotee of the make-it-up-as-you-go-along biculturalism that is the defining characteristic of New Zealand’s race gravy train.
Promoting Are we there yet? The future of the Treaty of Waitangi, Morgan has got the New Zealand Herald to agree to run a four-part series to promote his book, with the first installment published today.
Comment: Since he cashed up, Gareth Morgan has become a wilful idiot in attaching himself to half-baked topics such as man-made global warming and killing cats. This is the latest of his fumbling attempts to find some relevance.
Also; as an astute reader pointed out: "There is one element you should be aware of, which is in the minds of those who sold the land, no one can actually own the land, as the land is here before us and will be here after us. We are care takers of the land, which is a completely different mindset to the western way of thinkng and the Maori may have been mislead in the first place. Maori only see themselves are care takers and inheritors, you can not sell something that does not belong to you in the first place."
His conclusion that the treaty process is a success because the “treaty is now taken to mean whatever Maori leaders and the Crown, as the public’s representatives, agree it means” ignores the elephant in the room by way of a racial faultline that came into existence with the creation of the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975.
Along this faultine has widened a gap of haves and have-nots, both among citizens with some Maori ancestry and between those of Maori ancestry and those without, with the progress of successive “full and final settlements”.
The total settlement bill to March last year was $2.3-billion. The newly rich tribal corporations pay little or no tax and two entities, Waikato-Tainui and Ngai Tahu, are entitled to repeated top-ups as a percent of the increasing grand total.
Morgan’s assertion that making it up as they (Crown and claimants) go along was necessary because "the original documents aren’t very useful” shows that he has not looked closely at the texts of either Te Tiriti or the official English and has ruled out the Busby February 4 draft, also known as the Littlewood treaty.
Morgan has either forgotten or has not thought about the fact that the treaty was drafted in English and translated into Maori, which means the meaning and intent is clear in the source document, the original English.
That source document is quite likely the Busby February 4 draft that has only four words that differ from Te Tiriti, one of which is the date. But any mention of that document brings a torrent of spat tacks from grievers on the gravy train.
Because Morgan is woefully ignorant of the contents of the treaty he can make an idiotic statement like “how do we help Maoridom realise the all-important aspirations encompassed in rangatiratanga (used in Article 2, te reo version) in modern day Aotearoa New Zealand?”
If he had looked at the English source draft to see what the word “rangatiratanga” translated in Article 2, he would have seen that it translated the English word “possession”, as in “the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and the tribes and to all the people of New Zealand, the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.”
Morgan is also wrong to buy into land-loss rhetoric when he writes “justice and reparations have been a long time coming and, as generous as they might look to non-Maori, they’re just cents in the dollar for what Maori lost in terms of property”.
No mention by Morgan of the fact that land-owner Maori sold New Zealand to the wicked white coloniser in hundreds of transactions painstakingly recorded in Turton’s deeds posted for all to see on the New Zealand Electronic Text Centre of the Victoria University of Wellington’s website.
New Zealand has 26.8-million hectares of land. A total 1.2-million hectares were confiscated during the 1860s wars (much of which was returned at the time). There are approximately 1.47 million hectares of Maori land (including customary land). Therefore, Maori land owners sold 24.13-million hectares.
The staggeringly foolish policy by the fourth Labour government to look into grievances back to 1840 invited claimants to get cash-for-grievance top-ups on 19th century sale and purchase agreements.
Once "rangatiratanga" is understood to translate "possession", Morgan's pompous assertion about the "all-important aspirations encompassed in rangatiratanga" is reduced to the nonsensical concept of aspirations to asserting possession over property already sold.
And if "rangatiratanga" is taken to mean "self-determination", the "rangatiratanga" aspiration appears to describe either the state of self-reliance that every citizen who works for a living already has or Maori separatism. If the latter is the case, is Morgan talking up Maori separatism?
I challenge Morgan to present a coherent argument to support his contention that "because the chiefs’ signatures were on the te reo version, it’s certainly possible they didn’t cede sovereignty then".
If he had read the treaty he would know that article 1 clearly states “the chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes and the other chiefs who have not joined the confederation, cede to the Queen of England for ever the entire Sovereignty of their country”.
Anyone who refers to the "unique bicultural character of Aotearoa New Zealand" in a sentence, as Morgan does, has outed him or herself as a card-carrying treatyist who is looking for a seat on the gravy train.
Even though Morgan criticises the conduct of the Waitangi Tribunal I don't hold much hope for his proposal for a different course.
Why Treaty-Based Constitution 'A Disaster for New Zealand' November 22 2012| From: BenjaminFulford
A very interesting report and exchange if ideas with respect to New Zealand; worth a read.
"Here is yet another case being filed against the cabal: November 19, 2012
Dear Benjamin Fulford:
I am writing to inform you of a pending $150 Trillion US Dollar legal action between King George Watene Tautari of the Maori and the New Zealand Government/The Crown. I am also writing to ask for your help.
The Maori King must raise funds to pay the legal costs to bring his Case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
Firstly, I will share with you the highlights of the case.
In essence, this starts in 1760, when King George 111 of England and King Waitaheke Tautari of the Maori entered into a Private Trade Agreement. King George was bankrupt at this time and needed help to discharge his debt.
The agreement was for the Maori to collect Kauri trees (which produce a hardwood for boat building and fine furniture) and trade them for gold bullion. The gold bullion was to be held in trust by the King of England and all colonial lands owned by the Maori people throughout the world would be leased for a 99 year period by The Crown with an agreed upon 60/40 split (60% to Maori and 40% to the English). In addition, all Commonwealth colonies had access to the gold bullion (which was being held in Trust by the King of England), and could borrow against it, as long as they returned it with interest in gold bullion.
In 1820, the agreement was still active, with Kauri trees continuing to be harvested and sold for gold bullion. In the early 1820's, King Ngawaka Tautari of the Maori set up 59 Merchant (Creditor) Banks using the interest on the gold to finance and back bank guarantee hundreds of Wholesale/Retail (Debtor) banks in 59 countries. In 1911, King Ngawaka Tautari's successor, using the compounding interest from the 59 Merchant banks set up a 60th Merchant/Creditor Bank (BNZ), which was bank guaranteed by the 59 Merchant Banks.
In 1995, King George Watene Tautari succeeded his father and for the past 14 years, has been trying to unravel what has happened to his people's wealth.
He discovered that in 1967 the accounts set up by his ancestors were being illegally accessed and the funds being withdrawn. Furthermore, in 1992, the 1000+ accounts, which had enormous amounts of money in them (48 zeros), were changed from grey screens to black screens without legal authorization, and the accounts were credited to 60 individual Maori names with 1000's of subsidiary accounts for each name.
Also, in 1992, the BNZ Merchant/Creditor Bank was illegally sold and the $12 Billion in assets were seized and distributed amongst the NZ Government, the US Government, the CIA, FBI, and others, and came to be known as the “Wine Box Enquiry”. The details of all of this, are well presented in the documents (see attached PDF file).
The historical explanation is contained in the letter of October 2, 2012, from King George Watene Tautari to NZ Prime Minister John Key, which starts on page 27 (see attached PDF file) .
Letters from King George of the Maori to the Prime Minister of Australia, the UN, the World Bank, heads of Corporations that were fraudulently sold and many others are also included. King George is seeking payment of $150 Trillion US Dollars in damages; the return of all businesses and property sold fraudulently; and return of 60% ownership of all NZ Crown and NZ Government Corporations to King George Watene Tautauri of Maori Nation.
The initial Notice and Cease and Desist letters are dated October 2, 2012. As there was no legal reply, Notices of Default were sent out are dated November 13 and received on November 15 and 16, 2012 (see attached).
In order to pay the expected legal costs in the World Court, King George Watene Tautari needs about $100M. King George has instructed his Attorney General Neal Lyster to seek investors willing to participate in a 50% /50% JV Private Placement Program that has been offered to him. The King and his Attorney General believe that this is the best why to quickly generate the required funds for his legal case.
I am no expert with regard to these high yield Programs, however I know they offer exceptional returns. Attorney General, Neal Lyster is well versed with these types of platforms and will detail the investment to any interested investors. Recently, Neal described to me in writing how this Platform is managed as follows:
“A Managed Buy Sell or MBS is where a Manager Sells the Investor the Bank MTN or BG’s. Then the Manager arranges the Exit Buyer for the Investor. This happens very quickly like within an hour so the Investor is not out of Pocket at all. The Investor must put up a minimum of 100M and he / she gets back 20% of the sale price per tranche. If an Investor is willing to fund a court action I would expect a fair way to do it would be 50-50 share of the profits. 1% is always shared with the Brokers split 50% Buyer side 50% sell side”
Attorney General Neal Lyster is available to speak to you about this legal case and the managed MBS in detail.
I am not a licensed agent and this is not an offering of shares or securities.
The reason I am writing this letter to you is because I was recently approached by Neal Lyster to seek financial support to pay for expenses for the legal case. I originally connected with Prince Neal about 7 years ago, when I was seeking funding for an ecological city I wanted to build in Mexico (where I currently live, I am Canadian land developer). We ended up becoming friends, as we share many of the same values and interests, especially in regards to the environment. He recalled that I had worked in China over 6 years (1992-1998), with the Chinese Electrical Utility President and other high level bureaucrats to introduce ecologically friendly coal powered plants. He thought I may still have some contacts.
After some reflection, I realized I did not know anyone from my past who had an understanding of global issues, and who would be motivated to assist. I realized also, that asking an Asian person or group made sense, as any other group with ties to the UK and Commonwealth could be in a conflict of interest.
I thought of you Ben, because I have followed your work for years and have a lot of respect for what you do. I am especially impressed with your ability to connect the dots and I believe you to be an honest man. I also know from your background, that you have a lot of knowledge and experience with respect to high level financial transactions, including trades. And lastly, I resonate with your values and goals as I have spent a big part of my life on environmental initiatives.
As to the journalistic details of this pending legal case, to my knowledge, this has not been reported in any news outlet of significance (it has been reported in a Maori newspaper). The people whose names appear of the letters obviously know of the case, but from what I hear they have taken no legal action, nor offered any defence and are likely unsure of how to proceed. I believe Neal and King George would welcome journalistic coverage. I would ask you to speak with Neal about what he is comfortable about revealing before you report on this $150 Trillion Claim. As you can see from the most recent Notice of Default, this letters were received on November 15th and 16th, 2012 so this news is very current.
I suspect your emails are monitored, however what I am presenting here is not secret and it will eventually get out.
If you can help in any way, please respond to me via return email.
I thank you in advance for anything you can do to help King George of the Maori.
Thank you for your e-mail. I agree with your observations. The Maori as a whole will benefit.
Yes you may publish my letter minus my personal data.
The Crown may be Bankrupt.... there is a lot of Gold in New Zealand that belongs to the Kings family and the Maori people.
Some say that the Markos Gold is also hidden in NZ. There is known to be Gold in storage under three Air Ports.
There is a greater story here if you get into the Wine Box Inquiry. The NZ, and US Governments the CIA, FBI and others stole 12 Billion from the Kings family Bank.
If you require more details, you can speak to Attorney General Neal Lyster.
Would you like him or myself to call you?
> Hi Ben:
> I just read your next to the lastest report on your blog titled.
> "Here is yet another case being filed against the cabal:"
> The part about 48 zeros has to be nonsense or dis-info. If that kind of
> money were to be dispersed to everyone on the planet, each person's
> share would be more than 1 followed by 38 zeros dollars. If this was in
> trillion dollar notes, then each person share of the trillion dollar
> notes would weigh more than one followed by 24 zeros grams or 1 followed
> by 18 zeroes tons of trillion dollar notes. i.e. each person would have
> more than one million - trillion tons of trillion dollar notes. This is
> classic dis-info. Do a little arithmetic.
> From your report;
> "...He discovered that in 1967 the accounts set up by his ancestors were
> being illegally accessed and the funds being withdrawn. Furthermore, in
> 1992, the 1000+ accounts, which had enormous amounts of money in them
> (48 zeros), were changed from grey screens to black screens without
> legal authorization, and the accounts were credited to 60 individual
> Maori names with 1000's of subsidiary accounts for each name. Also, in
> 1992, the BNZ Merchant/Creditor Bank was illegally sold and the $12
> Billion in assets were seized and distributed amongst the NZ Government,
> the US Government, the CIA, FBI, and others, and came to be known as the
> “Wine Box Enquiry”. The details of all of this, are well presented in
> the documents (see attached PDF file)..."
> "Just look at us, everything is backwards; everything is upside down.
> Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge,
> governments destroy freedom, the major media destroys information and religions destroy spirituality."
The Vatican P2 lodge once showed me a gold dollar bond with 33 more zeroes than a trillion on it. I thing it was decadecillion or some such ridiculous number.
Hey, I tell you what, I can give you a googleplex of Benjamin dollars if you let me have the rights to all your property.
What do you say?
Talk is cheap and promising the sky in exchange for something real is what these people have been doing for years.
A leading academic says it would be a disaster to adopt a written constitution incorporating the Treaty of Waitangi, something the Maori Party demands.
Canadian James Allan, who taught law in New Zealand for many years and is now the Garrick professor of law at the University of Queensland, says he would “run a mile from entrenching or incorporating the Treaty into any such instrument”.
“No one knows what it means when applied to any specific issue, so all you will be buying are the views of the top judges instead of your own, the voters.
“That’s not a trade I would ever make,” Prof Allan says in a paper he has just written for the New Zealand Centre for Political Research.
“The Treaty has little content in its few short paragraphs and talk of its ‘principles’ inherently involves a lot of ‘stuffing it full of latter day content that no one at the time imagined or intended.’
“And if, as is overwhelmingly likely, the top New Zealand judges adopt the same sort of ‘living tree’ interpretive approach that we see today in Canada, Europe, and among most or many of the top judges in the US and Australia, then there is absolutely no predicting in advance what may be imposed on Kiwis some time down the road.
“Remember, the words can stay exactly the same but their imputed meaning can change and alter as the top judges see fit.