Boyd (79), Retired Worker (Teacher). Otago, NZ.

My REQUEST and Terms of Reference

Having read and heard much of the debate on numerous media platforms- which no doubt included Government (Gvt) ideological claims via paid media scripts (Stuff et al), it is clear that the original RCI intentions would be very limited in nature and its intentions ie to raise and provide possible solutions to the catastrophic nature of Gvt/Health control that led to more public harm and deaths than expected. These extreme outcomes arose from believing that a new pharmaceutical drug would save the population. The implication was always that Government(Gvt) Health and its many experts were confident about the drug they chose. Its “safe and effective” profile would benefit the NZ population. At the same time they created fear to enforce their strict use of Pandemic rules to control public behaviour even if it meant loss of job/income/education etc – but would hopefully save lives?

The time and effort to scrutinise numerous medical interactions within and beyond our borders has made it clear that the Government Health's view on dealing with the Covid virus in NZ was based on the understanding they knew everything about the drug from its makers and advice from their chosen experts to ensure the public of NZ will cope well. NZ Health took a commanding position that they and their experts were always at the top of the known scientific data. That in my view was one of the most stupid and dangerous positions to take, given the ongoing research on the experimental nature of Covid Vaccines (and the variants that came to light) along with well known antiviral drug aimed at dealing with related diseases was both ongoing and constantly being monitored by medical scientists world wide-and not just FDA or CDC- or the makers of the vaccs ie Pfizer, Moderna, Astra Zenica/Oxford, Johnson & Johnson et al.

Many Government (Gvt) departments and offices alongside many collaborating NGOs took strong actions to strengthen Gvt's compulsions for the public to take the vacc or loose their freedom in order “to save the young ones and grandma et al” nonsense. These compulsions caused many stressful situations for many in the public arena – and to this day many are still unemployed -and many small businesses gone for good. But Gvt officials like Bloomfield were happy to simply say it was “their” choice (to take the vacc). That is disgusting behavior from an official who no doubt knew the problems they had created- and the harm to public confidence but reacted by simply ducking the issue and opening the door to a new well paid job where I suspect a lot more people could be harmed given his additional advisory position with WHO.

WHO was bad enough with Tedros G the UN puppet at the top. But now he has Bloomfield as the “expert” alongside to advise him. There is no doubt if countries sign up to WHOs plans for future pandemics that far greater freedom will be lost – and far more dangerous drugs (vaccs?) will be used and only Pharma (and its NGOs eg Gates et al) will benefit.

But no doubt the health problem we are struggling with is not limited to NZ. It's a world wide issue given the main vacc makers (Pfizer, Moderna, Astrazenica, J&J, Merc and a few less known entities) have strong control over the US Health system from NIH and NIAID down to HHS, FDA and CDC. Sadly NZ Health and its many officials – Baker, Petousis-Harris, Turner et al- and so called modelling experts like the Plank from Canterbury and Hendy at AU- have significant links to money makers and/or Pharma industry to be influenced by those organisations in their decision making process that the Gvt Health department relied on. They supported the claim the Vacc was safe and effective and should be called to answer to the issue of vaccine harm and compulsion in the absence of effective drug use such as ivermectin and HCQ to the Royal Enquiry- and all concerned will then understand their actions and become aware of their reasonings?

Leaving out the role and the significant impact of the vaccine on the population in NZ (as elsewhere around the world) could give the false impression the vacc was safe & effective with more people evidently suffering from being unvaccinated. Those two main ideas are still being promoted and highlighted to this day by Health staff and the media. But there is no doubt the use of overall mortality data collected by NZ Health should be carefully scrutinized and the information tabulated and graphed to detect changes that may reflect the same occurrences seen world wide given NZ also used the same vaccs. It's a pity the revelations by Barry Young is being “protected” from public scrutiny by NZ Health. But hopefully a more open and thorough investigation goes ahead in order the RCI is open and competent for clear public understanding. The use of that data by the statistician Steve Kirsch has shown that NZ stats indicates a rise in overall deaths during the period when vaccination began. But which part of the population made the most contribution to the deaths incurred following the start of vaccination period? World statistics suggests one particular group but so far NZ Health is suggesting the unvaccinated? If that data remains hidden, the public may never appreciate that the real danger rested with the use of a vacc that wasnt as safe as suggested but combined with severe lockdown rules then suffered additional economic, health, educational and numerous social issues like crime that showed a community under extreme stress.

Another nasty development was the removal of many doctors from practices or medical institutes for disagreeing with NZ Healths ideology of medical treatment based on the use of numerous drugs known to be safe and effective. But this was contrary to FDAs declaration that those safe drugs like ivermectin and HCQ were not safe or effective under then current EUA use of the Covid-19 Vacc. One would have thought that the HEALTH “experts” like Petousis-Harris, being a former WHO advisor for Pfizer would have been able to clarify the issue ie declaring that NZ was not under US Health control via FDA and the so called EUA regulation does not apply to countries outside the US Health system. But that did not happen and it appeared that numerous managers of NZ HEALTH departments became experts on vaccines and are now telling the public and the media that the harm that some were experiencing following vaccine use was both normal and mild for all ages even though some of the issues involved cardio vascular problems and clotting with numerous deaths occurring in NZ and world wide across all ages -but significantly in the younger ages. Certainly not mild nor is it normal for the vaccinated who experienced those problems especially at the younger age levels.

Fortunately Im aware of the backgrounds of both Dr Tony Blakely and John Whitehead – and without going into the relevant details (Im also aware that many in the medical fraternity are keen to reveal those details), I hope they will do the honorable thing and resign – so others with no chance of being biased may get the opportunity to be involved in a very significant investigation that the public of NZ should benefit from especially for possible future pandemics. Unfortunately If they do not resign- and are kept in charge by the authorities, the investigation is unlikely to meet its intended goal of a beneficial outcome for the public of NZ- and it's the NZ public who are paying- financially and with their lives. Protecting the few will likely harm the majority. A good example was the public suffering experienced by Victorians (in the State of Victoria -Australia) under Daniel Andrews management who relied on his medical advisor Dr Tony Blakely et al.

The problem with a non-adversarial collaboration is that those (politicians and so called “experts”) who forced the public and many medical groups to comply with their “ideas” on public control and medical beliefs, would likely walk away unfazed, and believe they did right. But it also means they would likely support the same actions at the next pandemic that hits NZ. That would be an unbearable consequence both for the public and the harm to Medical “Science” in Medicine here in NZ.

Human rights must be emphasized and based on true informed consent ie knowing for sure the efficacy and relevance of any drug being promoted as safe & effective- and then still give the public the true freedom to choose. Not relying on the pharmaceutical makers who were simply promoting their drugs through their NZ agents in Health (Baker, Petousis Harris et al) who then used their authority and the legal system to compel the whole country (except certain Gvt Health agents they protected and gave exemptions to) to take the vaccine- and any subsequent boosters should the initial vacc lack impact -followed by more boosters when immunity declines or when new harmful variants surface from the vaccinated. That is to say that the Pfizer vacc in NZ is now developing serious immunity issues and cardiovascular and clotting problems in too many vaccinated people. But the paid media is supporting the Gvt line by still blaming the unvaccinated. That is sheer stupidity given the Health authorities must be aware that natural immunity is far more stable and effective and long lasting compared with short term immunity arising from artificial stimulants/adjuvants used in vaccines and the mRNA spike protein to access many cellular content in the Pfizer vaccine. There is no doubt the US Government used the EUA to permit Pfizer et al to trial it (experiment) on the public with the unusual application of the spike protein to access cellular content during the Covid-19 vaccine development. Unfortunately NZ Health agents and Gvt have simply gone along with the mRNA vaccine and relied on public ignorance to protect them.

There is no doubt that many Health agencies who shared responsibility in advancing the Covid Vacc as the only safe drug and the use of mandates backed by severe punishments for lack of compliances created many serious harms to a significant portion of the population. Many of those so called “leaders” are even medical physicians and they should now be able to stand up and explain their actions at the enquiry given the negative consequences that many vaccinated people in the public experienced. That wouldn't happen under a non-adversarial system of review where those responsible for the harm will not need to justify their actions- and consequently avoid loss of reputation.

The idea that the Covid catastrophe is now behind us -and should be treated as a normal health event of the past so that we can all look forward to a greater future. Then we can seek more effective drugs to maintain our wellbeing and create new plans for more effective public compliance is a perception of the catastrophe that is extremely deceptive and inappropriate. It does not take into account the large number of unnecessary deaths caused by lack of appropriate protocols, medical practices became strictly controlled and sick patients were often force vaccinated and then isolated until suitable treatment became ineffective to save them.

Unfortunately a significant portion of the public generally support Government ideas in the absence of a willingness to scrutinize available data that may help them know better. Consequently most of the public will comply with promotional data and propaganda. That is one of the reasons so many experienced so much suffering- and the current RCI strategy will only look at the generalized outcomes with little to no examination of the real effect of the Covid spread and Vacc roll out experienced by the public as a whole.

The country's tax payers provided the massive cost of the vacc (billions) to the makers (Pfizer et al) because everyone was supposed to get it. But Pfizer had no time to check its safety and effectiveness(Janine Small/ Rob Roo debate). But they (pharma) still wanted its vacc promoted as safe and effective -and that's how the Government, NZ Health and the paid media promoted it -even to this day. Worse it appears that Dr Blakely is a true supporter of pharma ideology that vaccines can now be made very quickly. That means long term studies for safety and effectiveness will follow the Pharma mantra that they know how everything works and long term studies taking 2 – 12 or more years are outdated but new studies will still achieve safety and effectiveness in a matter of days if not weeks. Its no surprise then that since the Vaccine '86 law went into action in the US, vaccines have carried a high level of harm amongst the vaccinated population (and Covid vaccs now hold the record for the highest rate of harm of all vaccines to date). Its no surprise then that Health and Government would sooner limit the scope of the RCI than go for a more revealing investigation that will affect Gvt and Health agencies who were behind the pandemic roll out in NZ. They still have their jobs and probably still being well paid during the whole process over the last 4 years. But many in the public arena are suffering social, educational and economic issues relating to business failures and no doubt health issues from both the vaccine use and infections from covid virus especially with older members who may also be carrying additional pathogenic infections – just as the flu adds to other pathogens in many countries world wide.

Hence there are many issues the RCI should examine about the Covid Lockdown in order the truth is made public through questioning and having Gvt/Health authorities who managed the lockdown stand up and explain their actions. Accountability is a major issue but in the end, its the public who fund both Health and Political leaders whose actions benefited some but caused serious harm to others. That needs to be explained for public understanding so future disasters do not repeat themselves. Its always expected that Governments set out to do its best for education, health, welfare and long term benefits of its nation but new events (like pandemics) can be very challenging- and heavily controlled review meetings that follow no matter its goals will fail to convince the majority unless it is open and available to all. Very unlikely a non-adversarial enquiry will manage and reveal the truth.

Share This