An Open Letter to the Government From an Award Winning New Zealander

Several years ago, I was able to go to my doctor with any health concerns and feel relatively secure that it was a confidential space where the doctor would be there to give professional advice that I could decide to take, or not, and that the advice he/she gave was based on their own professional opinion. I no longer have this confidence. Instead I see doctors controlled and muzzled in what they can advise, with a big-brother government dictating to every doctor in New Zealand what they are permitted (or not) to prescribe.

In today’s world, the government, the MCNZ (Medical Council of New Zealand), the Opposition, and others, are threatening to take doctors before the Medical Council and have their licenses revoked if they dare to speak out against the dictates of government, and/or advise their patients according to their professional experience and what they know to be true. Yet the “government” is not in the room with the patient, the DG (Director of Public Health) doesn’t have the patient in front of him, and the politicians aren’t qualified to prescribe or adjudicate. It is not in the best interests of the patient to be told a “one size fits all” approach works, and it violates the Hippocratic Oath, First, Do No Harm, to which every doctor has sworn to honour.

The brave doctors who risk everything to bring the truth to New Zealanders are being pilloried, threatened and censured. This would not be surprising in a communist or fascist regime, but in the New Zealand that we knew it would have been unthinkable.

Doctor Matt Shelton recently texted his patients warning them of the potential side effects of the experimental gene-based therapy injection, especially for children and pregnant mothers. He has been interviewed on his views. As a doctor he is qualified to comment and to have a view. His information made a great deal of sense. So why the censure?

Even worse, he is being hauled before the Medical Council. For what? Giving his patients the benefit of his professional advice and caring enough for them to warn them of certain imminent danger? I can see why it would be a crime NOT to do this, but I fail to understand why it is a crime to advise one’s patients according to one’s professional opinion. Otherwise his patients are being dictated to by politicians.

In earlier weeks there was blanket media coverage of a group of doctors who have the website NZDSOS. The New Zealand public read of a hostile attack on them by the Chair of the Medical Council who accused them of being “conspiracy theorists”, and of being in danger of having their licenses revoked, but the article doesn’t inform the public that there are thousands of doctors all over the world confirming what this group of New Zealand doctors are stating. These doctors who dare to speak out are also courageous in the extreme. Despite being under a hostile attack by media, the Medical Council, and the government, they have steadfastly stood by their Hippocratic Oath and have been so concerned to see what is unfolding that they have stood up and spoken out, regardless of the personal consequences. Dr Sam Bailey has bravely made videos to get the truth out to the world and she has been viciously attacked, too. Do New Zealanders know that her right to free speech is being challenged by the authorities as they attempt to suppress her views even more than Big Tech? Meanwhile, the Director General of Health and his “experts” can make contradictory and non-evidence based statements at will. There is no debate going on: it is a controlled narrative with suppression of the scientific process.

The experimental jab is being touted as the universal panacea, as the “way we will return to normal”, as the cure-all for Covid. On the other hand we are told it doesn’t stop transmission, it doesn’t stop a person from getting the virus, and they could still become ill. We have a Labour politician stating that even if 100% of the population was jabbed, there would still be “lockdowns”.  Why is that, if this jab works?

Why are there no news releases on what is happening in Israel, a country that has over 80% of the eligible population double-jabbed and getting booster shots now, along with the highest ever number of covid cases to date? How could that be? Similarly in Gibraltar, the UK, and the Seychelles. Australian health officials have recently suggested that because the alleged protective effects wane so quickly there will be ongoing covid “re-vaccinations” in the future.

Why is the government not acting cautiously when viewing what is happening with those countries already almost fully jabbed? Why the intense pressure on New Zealanders to bend to your “solution” when most are already under extreme hardship. Good people, living good lives, and contributing to the country, do not deserve this.

Why is the government announcing that 12 year old children can get this experimental injection without parental consent? That is unconscionable, particularly when not even adults are given full information on the consequences. Surely that is illegal?

Fully informed consent means fully informed. It does not mean a few paragraphs of concentrated propaganda that are full of half-truths, untruths, and outright lies, while trying to turn New Zealanders against each other as a direct result of this misinformation. Ironically, the MCNZ are compromising their statement in regard to the role of doctors in providing informed consent. They state; “without informed consent, the treatment may be unlawful.”

The fact is that there is confusion and untrue information in the messages being given to the public which includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. The injection is labelled a “vaccine”, but this injection doesn’t contain a virus or part of a virus, it is an experimental gene-based therapy on trial until 2023. So to label it a “vaccine” is disingenuous.
2. To label anyone who expresses genuine concern over this trial jab as an “anti-vaxer” or a “conspiracy-theorist” is little more than an ad hominem (lowest form of argument) hostile attack of black propaganda and slander.
3. This injection has caused hideous side effects and death. A list of over 100 documented deaths, suspiciously following this injection after it was administered in NZ, has been submitted to the Minister of Health and the PM, among others, with a request to stop the rollout. Instead, efforts have intensified. Why is that?
4. The government has had news outlets focus instead on a woman, 93 years old, who died “with covid”, indicating there were co-morbidities, but suggesting it was this terrible virus (yet to be isolated) that killed her, while the “one single death attributed perhaps to the injection”, was given scant attention. Why is that? I have personal experience of a family friend dying as a direct result of the injection. No news story for this lovely New Zealander, either, or hundreds of others who have died or suffered severe side effects.
5. Eminent doctors such as Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Roger Hodkinson, and doctors from Stanford University have all spoken out, warning people of the dangers of this experimental jab. The government ignores them.
6. The government has 24/7 propaganda about the experimental jab that are lies. One example is that it is “safe”, but it is not. How can the government even know if it is safe when they haven’t confirmed all the contents in the injection? How can they categorically state it is safe when such an injection has never before been rolled out on a global basis, with long term side effects unknown? How can they confirm its safety when Medsafe listed 58 concerns with it, not all of which they will have the answers to until 2023 — if then.
7. How is it that Dr David Martin of the US has located patents in the US that were registered on this experimental jab years before “covid” was unleashed?
8. Why were governments around the world putting in orders for PCR tests in 2017 — pre covid?
9. Why is the New Zealand government testing with a PCR test that a European court declared not fit for purpose in 2020 because at 35 cycles it gives 97% false positives?
10. Why does the New Zealand government refuse to disclose the PCR cycle thresholds for positive ‘cases‘?
11. The virus has not been formally isolated, and in any case the PCR “tests” are not capable of detecting a virus (they only detect selected sequences) so why do health officials claim that it detects a virus and diagnoses a disease?
12. Why is it that the government advocates the same experimental injection for different variants? How does that work? That is confusing when, on the other hand, New Zealanders are advised to get a flu vaccine every year, as there are different strains of the ‘flu every winter, so a vaccine for the previous year becomes ‘ineffective’ for the ‘new strain’.
13. In New Zealand today we have escalating suicides, thousands of businesses collapsing, New Zealanders dying due to cancelled operations and appointments being cancelled, and many facing financial ruin, as a direct result of these paranoid lockdowns. This is little more than torture for our people — and all while you continue to pay yourselves your salaries, from their work., and while the debt bomb grows for our children.
14. The government keeps advising everyone to “be kind” while their actions towards business are hostile, they are attacking New Zealanders and their way of life and unnecessarily curtailing our inalienable right to democracy and freedom.
15. Experts overseas categorically state that it is not possible to catch covid if one is asymptomatic, yet the government has New Zealanders locked up in their homes because the Delta variant is ‘so dangerous’ and it can transfer from one person in quarantine to another’ if the door is open for even a moment — or so we are led to believe. Yet when a patient in hospital complained that she was just two beds from a covid patient the Director General of Health alleged (correctly) that she would not be in danger as the patient was asymptomatic. Correct, so why the lockdowns for healthy people? Why the quarantine for asymptomatic people? Why the paranoia?
16. Last year the DG of Public Health was at pains to explain to us that masks were ineffective, as did the Prime Minister. The DG gave the science behind it. So far, so good. But this year, Kiwis have been told they must wear masks. It goes against the science that Dr Bloomfield was at pains to explain in 2020.
17. A healthy immune system is kept healthy by being in contact with others and combating and overcoming bacteria and viruses in the environment. Locking healthy people up weakens their immune system and makes them more susceptible to disease, as do unhygienic, chemical-laden, synthetic masks, used for hours. You know this. So why are you doing it? It is another attack on our people.
18. Why is the government not encouraging people to build up their natural immunity with vitamin D, vitamin C, sunshine, exercise and wholesome food?
19. This month the Director General  said that the majority of doctors throughout the country support the government protocol. (A protocol which involves lockdowns, masks and injecting people with an experimental gene-based therapy, with serious side effects, including debilitating chronic illness and death). He said there were only a handful of doctors that disagreed. But the first sentence was incomplete. The complete sentence perhaps should have read: The majority of doctors throughout the country support the government protocol, because they know if they don’t we will threaten to de-register them, we will decline GP funding and if they dare to question it we will publicly ridicule them and label them as peddling conspiracy theories.
20. This protocol set out by government is not a way to live, it is a way to die. We do not consent.
21. Why is it that all politicians, and most doctors, seem to have morphed into little more than dodgy salespeople for a pharmaceutical corporation that has ensured it will accept zero responsibility for any side effects from its product? A corporation that has the dubious record for paying out billions for fraud and bribing doctors.
22. Lockdowns? Really? For a virus that is reputed to have a 99.7% recovery rate?

When I worked in the world of medicine, we used to quarantine the ill, not the well. When we talked about “cases” we were talking about people who were ill, not people who tested positive to a PCR “test” that an Austrian Court recently ruled is not suitable for determining infectivity. A “case” should not be a person who is well or has an unrelated condition.

When we talked about a “vaccine” it was referring to an injection with the modified pathogen or a small piece of it to which the person would build up antibodies, not an experimental gene-based therapy without the isolated pathogen.

These words have been mis-defined. They are confusing people, and those standing at the pulpit of propaganda (not the “single source of truth”) are intentionally doing this.

We do have a deadly virus spreading through the country, but it isn’t Covid, it is a government (and the “opposition”) creating a climate of fear and paranoia, in tandem with government-funded mainstream media, terrifying the population, to lead people into a dystopian world where freedom and democracy are relegated to “archaic” in their woke dictionaries.

The Nuremberg Trials ensured than no-one would ever be forced to undergo medical experimentation against their will. That is international law that must be upheld. No question. Any government that ignores such international law must immediately be dissolved, for by ignoring it they have betrayed those they purport to represent.

Most of us have ancestors who went to war to fight for our democracy, for our freedom, and for our country. Thousands of Kiwis died to safeguard those freedoms. Anyone in government who purports to destroy our hard-won democracy is in treason to New Zealanders. They are no longer serving the New Zealand people, but have bowed instead to other hidden masters.

It is our time to say no, to order any enemy to our people to cease and desist.

Our freedom depends on it.

You do not have our consent to do any of the above. You do not have our consent at all.

You must cease and desist. Immediately.

(M Hobbs)