Dr. Bruce Dooley – A man of courage

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. — Martin Luther King Jr.

I was asked this week if I knew Dr Bruce Dooley. “Yes I know him,” I replied. “He’s a legend. One of New Zealand’s finest. He was the guy who exposed what appears to be the obscured, undue influence and control of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) over Medical Councils throughout the world.

“And that was all before breakfast.

“He is also well-known for treating patients without using harmful experimental drugs with hideous side-effects and walks — in cowboy boots — mostly without noticing, over cowardly, forelock-tugging individuals one usually finds in paid-for-treason jobs in areas of attempted totalitarian rule.

“In my view, you’ll find Bruce is a doctor who will stand in front of his patients to protect them.”

Recently, Dr Bruce Dooley has been ‘on the mat’ — that is, called to be investigated by a Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal. According to The Press, he is alleged to have sent emails to patients and made public comments on ‘Covid’ that were ‘inaccurate, misleading, inconsistent with best available evidence, and likely to endanger the public health response.’

That all sounds very general doesn’t it? Whose best available evidence? Don’t tell me the Department of Health or the Medical Council New Zealand (MCNZ). If so, then yes, Dr Dooley’s comments would be inconsistent with what they are stating, when they falsely allege the ‘Covid’ jab is ‘safe and effective’, while surely knowing that it is not, as there is an avalanche of proof that its likelihood to maim and kill has been long-proven and published around the world. It has also been admitted by Pfizer who, on the order of a US Judge, was forced to release nine pages of adverse events. And if the allegations against Dr Dooley mean that he is likely to ‘endanger the public health response’ that consists of jabbing everyone with an experimental genetic DNA-altering jab, then yes, he would definitely suggest other remedies that don’t kill and maim, for he applies the Hippocratic Oath — First Do No Harm.

Or are they meaning that he committed the cardinal sin of voicing his professional opinion and exercised free speech, which seemed to set the ‘thought police’ on his trail? Was he hauled before a tribunal on the orders of others, because he was not marching in lockstep with the desired ‘fear and jab’ campaign of the government at the time but rather sought to calm the fear and offer a far safer solution to that of an experimental injection that has severe side effects that were kept hidden from the public? And was it also because the Medical Council New Zealand (MCNZ) appeared to be obliged to follow the dictates of the shadowy Federal State Medical Board FSMB, through the International Association of Medical Regulatory Agencies (IAMRA) that the FSMB separately formed? As Dr Dooley explained in the interviews highlighted above, the Federation of State Medical Board, via IAMRA and the Medical Council New Zealand, apparently ‘extends into inciting medical boards to censor and punish doctors who don’t comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s demands.’ (New Zealand’s bravest doctors and medical staff who dare to tell the truth and protect New Zealanders have experienced a great deal of that over the past five years.)

As a registered medical practitioner for many years, Dr Dooley also appears to have been accused of practising medicine, (oh, the irony) part of which was to prescribe a well-known Nobel-prize-winning medicine (Ivermectin) that has been in use for around 60 years, to alleviate and eradicate the symptoms of patients in his district. It is understood that it is a safe, prescribed medicine he knew, in his professional opinion, to be helpful to patients.

That all seems fairly normal for a practicing doctor doesn’t it? After all, that’s what they DO isn’t it?

Apparently not any more. No, these days it increasingly appears that all doctors have been issued with government/MCNZ song-sheets they must adhere to and if anyone steps out of lockstep they will be pilloried — sent to the stocks — and the paid-off press will then duly act as the town-crier chanting their perceived list of so-called sins. Tut-tut.

One man or woman with courage makes a majority. — Anon

So, it was off to a Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal for the free-thinking Dr Bruce Dooley with his many decades of successful practice as a doctor. One of the witnesses was apparently a local school teacher who ‘reported’ that Dr Dooley told him to ensure the children got plenty of natural vitamin D by being out in the sunshine — and advising it was far less harmful than the proposed experimental mRNA injection, the contents of which were unknown to this school teacher and the rest of the population. It is difficult to imagine why this teacher thought vitamin D from the sunshine to be of any concern in comparison to an injection of unknown content.

Another ‘expert’ witnesses was a doctor who was quoted as stating “If you disagree you are usually out of line.” Quite. So much for practicing as a doctor rather than a robot.

Yet some Kiwis remember those halcyon days where a patient could freely go from one doctor or specialist to another for a second opinion, which could well be vastly different from the first opinion. It was de rigeur. No one cared if you sought a second opinion and it was up to the patient to go with what worked for them and for the doctor to suggest treatment based on his or her experience.

Surely it should be entirely up to the patient to opt for a medicine with a 60-year history of safety and a Nobel-prize instead of a trial gene-tech injection that altered the DNA and had pages of side effects including death and where the contents of that trial jab were unknown? Why do they not make the contents of these vials public? Is it because if the contents were known then 99.9% of the patients would never agree to have it?

Apparently it is part of the government/big Pharma deal not to disclose the contents. It begs the question as to how the MCNZ and the government — and anyone giving this jab — know it is ‘safe and effective’ if no one is cognisant with what is in the vials. However, it has been established that — contrary to what the public was initially told — it can cause serious side effects, can alter the DNA, and is a genetic substance.

It would also have been very inconvenient for big Pharma and other unelected cabals if there was a viable alternative on the market that doctors were prescribing, as that would have prevented the release of an ‘emergency’ still-on-trial experimental drug as the ‘only solution’ to be unleashed upon the world.

One of the charges against Dr Dooley was that he was ‘likely to endanger the public health response’. This is possibly correct as the ‘Public Health Response’ appeared to be very harmful as they seemed hell-bent on getting everyone in NZ injected with the trial gene-tech jab, regardless of their allergies, their wishes, or their health. Everyone that is except for just over 11,000 health workers who were strangely exempted, while those who had nearly died from the first jab were forced to have another if they wanted to keep their job, regardless of their shocking reaction after the first one. They were callously told to get their second one at the hospital so they could be resuscitated if necessary. It was criminal.

Ever since the rollout of this trial genetic mRNA jab there has been an escalating number of injuries and death. The government know this because thousands of New Zealanders have told them including NZDSOS (www.nzdsos.com) who have sent many signature-required letters to MPs to inform them of it. Most New Zealanders now know this, too.

So it is courageous doctors like Dr Bruce Dooley who have probably saved more people than they would ever know. Because they cared enough to speak out and to effectively help people the best way they knew. One that did not harm. One that sought to heal.

What the public increasingly see is a government working overtime to stamp out any divergence of opinion, free-thought, common-sense, care and compassion and to try to ‘make an example’ of great doctors, medical staff and others who continue to refuse to follow the party line if they see it causes harm.

It seems to have become a tangled web, so please correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, The Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal is apparently appointed by the Medical Council New Zealand (MCNZ). We are told that it acts independently from the MCNZ but, with respect, as a lay person, I have concerns about this if the tribunal is nominated by them. (What if it was nominated by the people instead?)

Added to that concern is the fact that the MCNZ have three lay positions that are understood to be there to represent the public, but those appear to be appointments made by the government. Why? Why not by the public, for the public? Surely that would be more independent? It is also alarming to see that one of those ‘lay’ appointments is filled by a lawyer (now the Deputy Chair) who had an integral part in the Pfizer contract with the government (the contents of which have remained undisclosed.)

The current CEO of the MCNZ, Joan Simeon, is not a doctor and formerly had a role in the administration of the MCNZ. In 2024, she apparently signed some sort of Memorandum of Understanding with the WHO, the detailed contents of which has never been disclosed, despite requests. This was understood to have been signed in her role as the Chair of IAMRA (The International Association of Medical Regulatory Authorities).

The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) apparently played a key role in establishing the IAMRA in order to create a global platform for ‘medical authorities to collaborate’ and ‘improve medical regulation worldwide’ and has grown to include ‘members from various countries, including medical councils, licensing authorities and health ministries’. These seem to be very disquieting links, particularly also when the Secretary of the IAMRA, Dr Chaudry, is also the President and CEO of the Federation of State Medical Boards. That seems like seems a little too close and leads right back to what Dr Dooley exposed in his interviews linked above, particularly in view of the fact that the FSMB is a private organisation.

The WHO are not elected by the people either, but appear to have undue influence over countries all over the world as well. They also have ‘Collaborating Centres’ in different countries, as Dr Tess Lawrie explains here. Surely this is irregular in what is meant to be a transparent democratic country? According to AI: ‘The WHO receives most of its funding through voluntary contributions from private entities.’ Presumably, this does not discount big Pharma with their deep pockets, nor some of their most dangerous products. The list of fines these big Pharma corporations have to their names tells a story. And yes, Pfizer and Astra Zeneca are on the list.

The over-arching theme of these organisations appear to lead ever-closer to unwanted control of the medical profession, a funnelling of all medical staff — through all manner of controls — into a narrow, homogenous, one-size-fits-all approach to medicine where the only solutions appear to be exclusively provided by big Pharma, while other approaches are ridiculed and ostracised. All to the detriment of the patient.

One very sad example of this recently was when the current NZ Minister of Health publicly chastised Public Health doctors for advising against fast food and advocacy programmes. It was reported that he wants them advising about “technical advice and immunisation programmes.” The linked article indicates there is now a directive from the Ministry of Health which says any advice doctors want to offer about health issues in their regions needs sign off at a “national level”. How hobbled, restricted, muzzled and draconian is that?

Doctors whose integrity comes before their pay-packet, and doctors and medical staff who won’t sacrifice their patients in the effort to ‘obey’ if they consider it is detrimental and/or dangerous to their patients have a tough time in this environment.

They are brave doctors who steadfastly refuse to salute or bow to the latest version of what seems to be a modern-day Inquisition. They remain resolute with their integrity intact, despite extreme provocation, including threats, loss of their livelihood, loss of their medical licence and their ability to practice.

Yet still, these doctors and medical staff resolutely stand firm.

Doctors like Bruce Dooley. And all of the doctors and staff at NZDSOS (www.nzdsos.com)
(Donations and support for NZDSOS are gratefully received by clicking this link.)

God bless each and every one of these heroes in our midst.

It is time for all New Zealanders to stand with them.

Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance. — Robert Kennedy