Did you join the baying crowd when they came? Did you remain silent? Or did you – with the hallmark of the brave – stand up, speak out, and advocate for those of us who were natural healers? I hope you chose the latter – for when your time comes, this is what your soul will be judged upon – then and now. MH
Between 1450 and 1750, there were 35,000 to 50,000 souls accused of being witches and subsequently executed. The last witch-hunts in Europe took place in the 18th century, although in some parts of the world witch-hunts still exist and legislation against witchcraft is still applied.
The definition of a witch-hunt on Wikipedia is defined as: A search for people who have been labelled witches or a search for evidence of witch-craft. Wiki gives an additional definition:
In current language, “witch-hunt” metaphorically means an investigation that is usually conducted with much publicity, supposedly to uncover subversive activity, disloyalty, and so on, but with the real purpose of harming opponents. It can also involve elements of moral panic or mass hysteria.
Moral panic is described as: . . . a widespread feeling of fear, often an irrational one, that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society. It is “the process of arousing social concern over an issue”, usually perpetuated by moral entrepreneurs and mass media coverage, and exacerbated by politicians and lawmakers. Moral panic can give rise to new laws aimed at controlling the community.
That sounds remarkably like the playbook of the last three years.
In 2020, witch-hunts appear to have made a global come-back. But surely not here in New Zealand or the rest of the western world? Tragically, yes, it seems they have – mainly since the arrival of Covid-19.
With the entry of Covid-19, Kiwis seemed to almost instantly lose the right to hold a differing opinion from that of government, without ridicule and/or threats of loss of livelihood. This was particularly harshly imposed on medical staff with the subsequent result that most obediently marched in “lockstep” with government officials, who worked in concert with the Medical Council of New Zealand (MCNZ) and the Nursing Council of New Zealand (NCNZ).
Any member of the medical staff that mustered the enormous amount of courage required to speak out against the approved narrative was threatened with de-registration, censure, substantial fines, and in some cases “re-education sessions” at their expense. This is a continuing tragedy, as it seems to have turned the profession in this specific area into a parody – little more than an empty, soul-less, cookie-cutter duplicate of whatever the “government” orders. And with subsequent visits to a hospital or doctor’s practice, many astute patients felt the faceless spectre of “government” bureaucrats and politicians hovering over the shoulder of attendant medical staff, which made the doctor’s room feel unsafe and decidedly crowded.
As a result, doctors were treated with suspicion by many, for if they wouldn’t speak out against giving an experimental gene-based therapy jab – the full contents of which were unknown – would they speak out against anything else that was harmful to patients if the government ordered them not to do so?
Remember the pre-COVID days, when one was free to consult more than one doctor to seek a different opinion and it would be willingly given? In some specific branches of medicine that may still be the case, but if it is anything to do with reporting side-effects and/or the death of loved-ones from an experimental gene-based therapy injection, or asking for the full information in regard to them – including the nine pages of listed adverse reactions from Pfizer – then the response seemed identical and almost always seemed to be in favour of the jab.
Yet some brave medical staff were so concerned about the false narrative of ‘safe and effective’ being trotted out by the government – and supported by the MCNZ and the NCNZ – for an experimental injection on trial until 2023, that they dared to raise their voices in caution.
Acutely conscious of their Hippocratic Oath, ‘First Do No Harm’, The Bill of Human Rights, and the Nuremberg Code, these doctors, nurses, and other medical staff, continued to speak out. This included Dr Alison Goodwin, Dr Matthew Shelton, Drs Samantha and Mark Bailey, Dr Alanna Ratna, Dr Cindy Villiers, Dr Anne O’Reilly, Dr Jacques Imbeau, and Dr Peter Canaday – whose story also appears here. There are other amazing doctors, nurses and health staff who have also been brought before tribunals and/or court for daring to caution their fellow New Zealanders that there are negative side effects of this experimental product. Unlike those who approved the experimental gene-based injections without proper testing, these courageous souls were not anonymous.
Regardless of threats of loss of career, suspension, fines, or anything else, these heroic New Zealanders continue to stand strong, despite censure, suspension, de-registration, and losing their careers. Undaunted, they formed www.nzdsos.com and opened a clinic for those who suffered injury after the injection, and did what they could to help with remedies known to work. They keep speaking out and continue to make available some of the best global scientific information that warns of serious adverse events from the experimental medication, along with remedies that may bring relief. It was information the New Zealand “government”, the MCNZ and the NCNZ chose to ignore.
These “trials” and “investigations” of our medical staff are ongoing. For example, in August, 2023, an MCNZ tribunal met in Christchurch to investigate the successful, high profile Doctor Samantha Bailey who has approximately one million viewers of her weekly videos. She is the latest of many brave medical staff who have been treated in similar fashion.
Dr Bailey had not practiced medicine for several years and already had a long-standing request with the MCNZ to be removed from their register of doctors. Anyone watching the weekly videos of Dr Sam and Dr Mark Bailey know that their papers and videos are backed by meticulous research, yet they are always open to any factual evidence submitted that counteracts their stance.
So far, none has been forthcoming.
Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change the world which yields most painfully to change. – Robert Kennedy
Over the years that Dr Samantha Bailey has run her weekly videos she has received just one complaint out of one million views, although the investigative committee of the MCNZ alleged they received 15 notifications or complaints amounting to eight ‘members of the public’. Eight or nine public complaints from one million views? That must surely be some sort of world record for lack of complaints when taking into account the number of views.
It is difficult to understand how someone like Dr Bailey can be the subject of such an investigation with so little complaint, particularly when the global statistics of sudden, unexplained deaths has soared since the rollout of the experimental injection, and Iatrogenic events and deaths are known as the third cause of death. Where is the MCNZ on these issues? Nowhere? New Zealand has its share of iatrogenic events and follows the global trend in that area, although the information seems quite difficult to find.
The recent escalating death statistics of New Zealanders doesn’t appear to have been investigated by the MCNZ, and the increased number of New Zealanders suffering severe adverse events post-injection doesn’t seem to be under investigation either. Coroners also seem to be missing in action. (Another relevant article is here). Those are surely statistics that should capture the attention of the MCNZ on a more urgent basis than Dr Bailey, shouldn’t they?
The investigating ‘Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal’, set up by the MCNZ, is charging Dr Bailey with ‘professional misconduct’. This ‘charge’ has been, ‘laid by the MCNZ’s Professional Conduct Committee (PCC).’ Their website alleges that they, ‘protect the public and promote good medical practice.’ As outlined above, as a member of the public, I haven’t seen any recent key evidence that shows this. But in the past three years in particular I have observed that they appear to work to keep the voices of doctors with dissenting views silenced through what seems to be little more than serious threats of loss of career, witch-hunts, and black propaganda. Likewise, the NCNZ.
An online news item said Dr Samantha Bailey faced charges relating to 23 videos she published on social media between March 2020 and July 2021, that, they alleged, were “inaccurate”, “misleading” or “inappropriate”. It was further explained this related to “PCR tests, vaccines, and issues related to Covid-19.”
Dr Bailey did have videos on these subjects, and an article in regard to the PCR tests that explained the PCR test in basic, easy-to-understand language. It also highlighted, with a link, that showed the inventor of the PCR test, the late Kary Mullis, making it clear that the PCR test should not be used to diagnose anything as it was too inaccurate.
Did the MCNZ know more than the Nobel-prize-winning inventor of the test? Dr Balm, one of the doctors “giving evidence” for the tribunal alleged the PCR was an “excellent” tool for diagnosis of infections. But it is Dr Bailey’s video that refers directly to the inventor of the test and shows what he said, while Dr Balm’s remarks don’t appear to align with the inventor’s view.
From newspaper reports — which is all the public has to evaluate this “trial” on – the vague charges against this doctor seemed a combination of generalities and unfounded accusations that are difficult to follow, while valid facts countering Dr Bailey’s statements appear absent. Several years before, the Baileys provided 19 pages of factual evidence in answer to questions put to them by the MCNZ and were given a one-liner in response that basically noted that the MCNZ didn’t accept what they said. Provable facts put before such a Board surely deserve a more detailed factual response in return?
According to news reports, a spokesperson for the tribunal (Dr Coates) alleged that 23 of Dr Bailey’s interviews included “disinformation – false information that is knowingly shared to cause harm.” This seemed to the reader like a sweeping generality without factual backup. And with escalating deaths and serious injuries from the experimental injection flooding in throughout the world which the MCNZ appeared to ignore, they expect the public to believe that Dr Bailey’s factual videos backed up by proof are false and “knowingly shared to cause harm”?
The spokesperson further alleged that it wasn’t only what Dr Bailey said but “the way she said it, including hand signals and memes, that was “problematic” for her as a member of the health profession.” Why was it problematic? Many years ago, as an NZRN, I accompanied doctors and specialists on ward rounds who each had their own individual style. Some could have been described as flamboyant, and several may have waved their hands around a little – or even a lot. But I never remembered the MCNZ peering around corners to monitor the movements of these doctors. And nor should they. Perhaps there may have been an issue if Dr Bailey had sashayed out and danced towards the camera in a mini-skirt, black stockings and high heels, but that was not the case. As a New Zealander watching Dr Sam’s videos, my perception – and apparently also that of her one million viewers – was that her style in videos is professional, engaging, lively, interesting, refreshing, and upbeat. She provided excellent information and explained it in a factual and easy-to-understand manner.
Dr Balm (for the MCNZ) was also concerned that Dr Bailey referenced her book “65 times during the 23 videos”. That sounds like a lot, but it only equates to mentioning the 516-page book two or three times for each video and the book was directly related to what Dr Bailey was discussing, so why should she not do that?
Another witness for the MCNZ/PCC also mentioned that Dr Bailey was trying to “monetize” her views by encouraging her viewers to purchase a book that she had co-written. It is difficult to see how that is a crime. Doctors charge for their time. Inviting viewers to purchase a book to learn more information about many of the subjects Dr Bailey was discussing seems both fitting and logical. That particular witness had permanent name suppression. Why is that? If one is making accusations, then surely the person should stand by their accusations with their name? Otherwise it gives rise to questions about who the secret witness was and who he/she works for — otherwise it is just a witch-hunt isn’t it?
More witnesses were called to give “evidence” including Dr Petousis-Harris who appears to have deep connections with pharmaceutical corporations, and international groups promoting them, so does not seem to be an independent ‘expert’ at all .She was the Chair of the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety until August 2020, is a member of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Big-Pharma-sponsored “International Society for Vaccines”. Mainstream media seem to have missed that.
Dr Hattatowa was another apparent “witness”. He is not a medical doctor, but a researcher of ”information disorders”, for the “Disinformation Project” – aptly named at least. He also has involvement with an organisation, ICT4Peace which has links to the World Economic Forum. Both groups had a meeting in Davos, regarding the building of an inclusive and principled AI (Artificial Intelligence) Governance, which sounds chilling. Did New Zealanders give permission to be governed by A.I.? And would it be possible for A.I. to function in an environment with dissenting voices?
And is the MCNZ, so concerned as they are about public health, addressing the government’s reckless allegations that the experimental gene-based therapy is a “vaccine” and is “safe and effective”? Apparently not. Why is that?
This leads one to question who IS the MCNZ? Who appoints the members and why are they trying to order a robotic, generalized approach to medicine and health?
The MCNZ website states that they have, ‘ approximately 80 staff, including a Chief Executive and senior managers whose activities are overseen by a Council of 11 people who are mainly a mix of doctors, lawyers — one of whom ‘has been a legal adviser to Pharmac since 1997, as well as to District Health Boards, the Ministry of Health and more recently Te Whatu Ora. He also led New Zealand’s Covid-19 vaccine contract negotiations‘.
According to New Zealand Doctor in 2019, it appears that several appointments to the Medical Council were made by the Ministry of Health. If the government still appoints key MCNZ members, and it appears they are able to appoint up to 14 members, is that not a little too close?
In a recent post, NZDSOS announced that they have served Legal Papers on the MCNZ. A short article in regard to their concerns also asks if the MCNZ is independent from government. This article can be found here.
A key part of the post states: . . . It is a requirement that three members of the council are lay people. Concerningly, the HPCAA [ Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003] states that the Minister may appoint up to 14 members by notice in the Gazette (read, by decree) while only one health practitioner needs to be elected by its members! Council members are elected for three years.
We note that up until some time in 2022, the lay people consisted of a lawyer, a consultant and a businessman who had also been a member of the Osteopathic council. The lay people on the council are now made up of three lawyers and the consultant who has worked mainly for government and NGOs. There is now no “ordinary” New Zealander representing patients on the Medical Council. We wonder if the Medical Council or the Minister of Health and/or overseas interests are deliberately moving the focus of the council away from the medicine provided by doctors to individual patients to that of medicine that can be coerced onto individuals and whole populations, in the name of public health. NZDSOS has considerable confirmed evidence of cooperation between the Ministry of Health (MoH) and the MCNZ.
No doctors who were brave enough to speak out are on the Medical Council. No, they are the ones threatened with suspension of medical practising certificates, de-registration, loss of livelihood, and loss of licences.
Several of the NZDSOS doctors won in court cases the MCNZ brought against them. Dr Matt Shelton also did, and the MCNZ were required to lift his suspension. It was possibly lifted for a day – or less – before the MCNZ decided to suspend him again for another charge that hadn’t been put before the Court. Does this have the hall-marks of a witch-hunt?
‘From caring comes courage.’ —Lao Tzu
It is difficult to forget the speech by Dr Matt Shelton in Wellington in the early months of the nation-wide roll-out of the experimental injection. This lone figure humbly, yet so powerfully, talked before a receptive audience about the risks of an experimental gene-therapy that was being falsely touted as ”safe and effective”. He is not big in stature, yet when he speaks people listen, for he risked his livelihood to speak out and lost that ¬– but he kept his integrity and honour. They all did. They are armed with nothing but the truth. And courage. Formidable weapons indeed.
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 F. Kennedy
The courageous Liz Gunn did an illuminating interview with Doctor Bruce Dooley on the MCNZ. Dr Dooley had ‘concerns over international interference in New Zealand’s medical regulatory processes’. He bravely talked about the connections ‘between the MCNZ and a private, secretive organisation ¬– the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) – based in the United States’.
It was also reported in the Daily Telegraph NZ, the MCNZ ‘is a member organisation of an international arm of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), based in the United States, the International Association of Medical Regulatory Authorities (IAMRA). At the time of the interview, Dr Dooley had not met a doctor in NZ who was aware of the FSMB that the NZMC operated beneath.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears that there are global threads to every Medical Council in key countries. It is alarming to think that there may be international interference in the medical regulatory process of our country.
In his interview with Liz Gunn of FreeNZ and New Zealand Loyal, Dr Dooley explained that both the FSMB and IAMRA are registered US charities with hidden and anonymous donors who oversee disciplinary action of licensed medical doctors.’ Is it possible that the Medical Councils take their orders from a private international organisation? Listen to the interview and make your own conclusions.
Doctor Dooley further explained they ‘particularly target clinicians working beyond the Big Pharma paradigm who they label as ‘quack’ or ‘fringe’. A similar strategy was employed by Rockefeller in the early part of the 20th Century, in an attempt to wipe out successful, natural ways of healing in the US. The above link explains.
Members apparently lobby lawmakers to restrict the freedom of clinical practice in areas seen as competing with pharmaceutical industry profits, arguing a need for medical council control to ‘protect public health’. (That’s an interesting thought, when considering the billions that the pharmaceutical industry has paid out for fraud, bribing of doctors, and side effects of drugs causing injury and death.)
The brave Dr Dooley also referred to a letter from the FSMB that was released in July 2021 that alleged medical professionals speaking out against the mainstream narrative were a ‘scourge of misinformation and disinformation’ on the profession who ‘risk the suspension or revocation of their medical licence’. It further claimed these doctors were a ‘fringe group of licensed physicians who had intentionally spread false and misleading claims about COVID-19 and vaccinations, advocating the use of unproven, potentially dangerous therapies and influencing communities across this country’. (Yet most astute people now know that there never has been a “vaccination” for “COVID-19”. There has been an experimental gene-based therapy that was defined as a “vaccine”. Not quite the same. It appears that it was the gene-based therapy that was found to be unproven and dangerous. One only has to look at the escalating side effects and increased deaths all over the world to see that. New Zealand has fared no better.)
This announcement was followed by rapid suspension, de-registration and fines of New Zealand doctors, nurses, dentists and other medical staff who spoke out. Spurious trials, accusations, investigations, censure, and court cases followed where these New Zealanders found themselves standing in defence of their patients, their Hippocratic Oath and Human Rights for all. The “trials and censure” were made very public with a propaganda-paid media piling on to “make an example of this “wayward few”.
Accusations of “misinformation, disinformation”, “misleading”, “fringe group” followed. At the time, the doctors and medical staff of www.nzdsos.com were suggesting the use of the Nobel-prize-winning Ivermectin, one of the safest medicines in the world that has been on the market for decades, and has since been vindicated as a form of effective treatment. They also promoted Vitamin D. But they did not promote the gene-based therapy experimental injection that contained new technology and was still on trial. Nobody could even tell the public what was in the vials, so how could anyone pronounce it as “safe”? The courageous who supported them were also labelled “conspiracy theorists”, ridiculed, reported on, and spoken of in derisive terms, too.
Dear God, these souls are among our most brave.
The majority of medical staff kept their heads down and did what they were told. And when the evidence of side-effects and injury from the injection became acutely evident, many medical staff, who had obeyed all orders, told these New Zealanders it “must be in their heads”. In my view, as a former NZRN, this, in combination with not advising patients of the negative side effects of the experimental injection, not permitting freedom of choice, and refusing virtually all exemptions, were the greatest betrayals of all
Doctors, nurses and all medical staff must be able to practice medicine, not politics. When patients come to a doctor they trust the doctor to advise them on the best way to regain their health and if a medical procedure is required, or if drugs are suggested, then the patient expects to know what the side effects may be and what the risk is. That is part of fully informed consent. The patient must be fully informed so they may make their decision with all of the relevant information. That is not happening.
‘Who dares not speak his free thought is a slave’
— Euripides, The Phoenician Woman.
The NCNZ seems no better. This week the Free Speech Union helped take on the case of a registered nurse, Jennifer Scott, who is faced with deregistration for comments she made on social media. The allegations against her stated that: In December 2021 and January 2022 she made “offensive and/or inappropriate online comments about LGBTQIA+ communities.” It was also alleged that she, “shared online posts that were inaccurate and/or contrary to Ministry of Health directives regarding Covid-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine.”
Jennifer said she was suspended because she criticised the experimental gene-based therapy jab and had warned others to research the adverse effects from it. On 22 December 2021 in an online post she “shared a screen shot from the Nursing Council website and alleged corruption around the Covid-19 vaccination. On 17 January 2022 in an online post she stated, “It is not a vaccine as it does not prevent the spread of disease or protect from it. This drug has killed and injured many, many people . . . please stop and ask yourself some questions before you allow someone to jab children in the arm with an experimental substance.” She also spoke up for women and had stated that a woman is an adult human female. She wanted to ensure that women’s bathrooms and changing rooms were for women only. She said that children as young as six should not have to be confronted by grown men in public toilets and she spoke for them, too.
Jennifer seemed to be trying to ensure that Kiwis were fully informed and also sought to protect children from what could be unsafe spaces and/or potential harm. A nurse who had already been mandated out. Courageous soul.
On 7 February 2023, the NCNZ apparently wrote to her advising they had received further information regarding her “conduct” and that the scope of the PCC’s investigation would be widened to include a further allegation that Jennifer allegedly made anti-trans statements to a couple in a Dunedin restaurant.” Jennifer had a call from police regarding that as well.
Most presume New Zealand is a genuine democracy where one has a right to voice one’s personal opinion, albeit without harassment, wisely or unwisely, rightly or wrongly, and regardless of politics. This former registered nurse was apparently accused by the NCNZ in regard to a comment she made while off-duty. Because the NCNZ was treating her comments so severely, The Free Speech Union looked into the comments on Jennifer’s Facebook posts and, ironically, found the comments and allegations of the NCNZ to be of greater concern.
The Free Speech Union pointed out that, “At no point was Jennifer speaking on behalf of her employer, at no point was it in the workplace, at no point did it undermine her relationship with her employer.” So what business is it of the NCNZ to threaten to permanently suspend a nurse for private opinions she voiced?
It is true that Jennifer is known for passionately voicing concern about those with penises claiming to be women having a right to enter women’s changing rooms and toilets. She seemed to be wanting the same rights for women (and children) as the NCNZ wanted for the Pride community.
So who is the NCNZ? Just like the MCNZ for doctors, the NCNZ apparently has affiliations with international groups. The BD Foundation is one such group. It is “the philanthropic arm of global medical technology company BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company). On September 19, 2022 the BD Foundation announced a three-year commitment to “invest in the development of National Nursing Associations (NNAs) to support health equity and advance nursing education across 21 countries in Africa”. More information on their connections with the International Council of Nurses (IC) can be found here. It seems there are also links between Becton Dickinson and Company (BD) and the World Economic Forum.
Johnson and Johnson are affiliated with the International Council of Nurses (ICN) of which the NCNZ is a member. The ICN collaboration with the United Nations has apparently expanded its collaborations to “include active ongoing collaborations with the World Bank” and others. The website details that:
ICN is regarded as an expert in a range of issues related to the concerns of UN: economics, policy development, workforce, gender equality, education, climate change/planetary health, advocacy, women’s empowerment, peace and peace education, resource disparities and all of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in addition to health and its social determinants. As the largest health profession in the health workforce, nurses are intrinsically linked to the ability of countries to achieve the goals under all 17 of the SDGs. ICN representatives are active members of civil society and contribute in many ways to the ECOSOC and NGO community.
In my view, as a former NZRN, it is difficult to see why nursing has to complicate itself with such a vast array of subjects, when all the patient would want is to be nursed by good nurses who are compassionate and care, provide fully informed consent, protect their patients from harm, advocate for them, and carry out their duties professionally.
The NCNZ has signed up to the Pride Pledge, stating that it recognises the importance of the rainbow community in the workplace and in the nursing profession, and the need for supporting diversity in gender and orientation.
Yet all nurses should fundamentally know that it doesn’t matter who the patient identifies as, for everyone should be treated with kindness, respect and compassion shouldn’t they? It’s just a shame that, based on the treatment of former NZRN Jennifer Scott, that the NCNZ doesn’t appear to reserve the same respect for women.
Witch-hunts on medical staff must stop. They are extremely damaging. Witch-hunts on everyone must stop. For the brave souls who speak out – and we haven’t yet touched on the many other Kiwis in alternative media, and other professions, who speak out – are all that separate us from totalitarian cabals and tyranny. And those that speak out are the thin line that uphold our freedoms and our inalienable rights.
Let us all peacefully unite and stand to protect our freedoms and raise our voices in a chorus that can be heard to the heavens . . . for it is time.
May God bless all who peacefully speak up and speak out. You bring light.
And, at the end of our days, we will know, within ourselves, whether or not we stood to peacefully protect our freedoms, and whether or not that we held the human spirit and nature’s blueprint sacred, and that we kept it so for our future descendants — forever.
In your hands lies the future of your world and the fulfilment
of the best qualities of your own spirit. — Robert Kennedy