No Minister

Author Archive

Incoming Narrative Update Hitting the Fringe of the Mainstream

with 11 comments

The story of what is in the shots has to this point, been kept out of mainstream. No matter that many people are aware, the mainstream media, beyond mocking and belittling anyone raising questions here, has kept away from this.

However, now, The Spectator Australia has dared to mention strange, mechanical objects in the shots, which they then describe!

Inside a droplet of vaccine are strange mechanical structures. They seem motionless at first but when Nixon used time-lapse photography to condense 48 hours of footage into two minutes, it showed what appear to be mechanical arms assembling and disassembling glowing rectangular structures that look like circuitry and micro chips. These are not ‘manufactured products’ in the CDC’s words because they construct and deconstruct themselves but the formation of the crystals seems to be stimulated by electromagnetic radiation and stops when the slide with the vaccine is shielded by a Faraday bag. Nixon’s findings are similar to those of teams in New Zealand, Germany, Spain and South Korea.

Wot’s in the Shots | The Spectator Australia | 5 November 2022

I’ve seen numerous videos of the types of images mentioned above for almost a year now. At first they shocked me so much that I could not mentally process them, so just filed them away in my mind as “interesting” and “disturbing” that needed more verification. So, I can imagine the reaction of those that have not heard this as a serious possibility.

Let’s put the “what” aside, and consider instead the reaction to this type of information, if it were false and you wanted to prove it was false. How, would you do it completely transparently, so that all those who have seen these images for quite time, who have seen how alternative opinions have been derided as “misinformation” and “conspiracies” – how would you prove to people like me that these images are false? And no, bringing out Nanogirl to tell me I am wrong is not going to do it.

What is also incredibly interesting to me is that this story has now been published in The Spectator Australia. Why now, and not anytime prior? Have we got to the point of massive narrative escape, where the number of people who know have increased to the numbers where suppression is too difficult? Or are we being guided into mass outrage, which is a more worrying possibility.

Link to the Video (quite repetitive, so you only need to watch the first 5 minutes or so).


Written by Lucia Maria

November 6, 2022 at 10:45 am

Posted in New Zealand

Tagged with

Musk Twitter Shift

with 9 comments

Times are a changing. Rather than feeling happy that there has been a massive shift, I am worried. I haven’t been able to post much recently as I’ve been trying to work out what to say as the ground rapidly changes. Anyway, this tweet caught my eye:

The tweet by Dave Rubin above highlights two major thought crimes on Twitter pre-Musk. There are more, of course.

The danger is in the backlash, and the quality of the people that will be directed that backlash and what their aims are – that’s what I’m worried about.


When I saw the name, I thought she was the one interviewed by one of the Disinformation Project people. And yes, confirmed by Te_taipo.

Written by Lucia Maria

October 29, 2022 at 10:19 am

Never-Ending Emergency Extension to 20 Jan 2023

with 11 comments

COVID-19 Public Health Response (Authorisation of COVID-19 Orders) Notice 2022

What will be the excuse to keep it going in mid-Summer? Who knows.

All I know is governments don’t give up power willingly.

So, 18 January or so, after a good Summer break, they’ll think of something that will justify a further extension. Baker and Wiles will be on hand to ramp up the fear, which will be amplified by the media and those that think everything is ok, will just nod and say, oh well, it’ll end soon. Nothing to worry about.

Written by Lucia Maria

October 19, 2022 at 5:00 pm

Posted in New Zealand

Tagged with ,

The Hipkins Effect on the Never-Ending Emergency

with 5 comments

You’d think in a Never-Ending Emergency, such as the one we have experienced over the last two and half years, that it would have justifications that could be scrutinised by the public. So that, you know, we could have some confidence that the Government wasn’t just keeping the country in such a bizarre alternate reality for nefarious purposes, that it desperately wants to keep from us so that we don’t all stage a revolution or something.

You’d think, that if we lived in a benign political environment; where the sun rises in the morning, people go to work and school, pay their mortgages and their taxes, and pretty much just get on with life; that there would be this effort to not betray the trust of citizens who still believe we live in a liberal democracy, and all the bells and whistles such a thing entails. You’d think.

Some of us who are somewhat more neurotic, and even more so after the last two and half years; who have been noticing a lot that just does not make sense for a government to do, if it were really acting in the best interests of the entire populace, and are therefore somewhat alarmed at what we’ve been subjected to. Some of us have even noticed that the Government seems to not care that they will never be elected again, so much disdain they show for the average voter and what they might think. And some of us are beyond incredibly disturbed that those who should have prevented the worst excesses, have not done so, making those like me to decide what line has to be crossed, and will it be too late by then?

It’s as if the entire political space is just expanding itself into wrongness that is now just existing through endless renewals. They taunt us with the possibility of how much further they could go with impunity, should they decide they don’t even care if everyone (apart from the zombies), notices. You can’t do anything about us, they breathe, their echoes whispering through the spaces in all the local media where the stories should be and are not.

Remember the Never-Ending Emergency that should be expiring this coming week? You do? Or you do you not think it matters, because Covid is ending – as all things (and emergencies) at some stage, naturally will end. Because no government in New Zealand would keep an emergency going for longer than they had to, right? Right?

In yet another gloomy article, this time promulgated by Newstalk ZB, it emerges that Chris Hipkins, after moving on to become Police Minister, is now temporarily Covid Response Minister again. Ignore the rantings of the ghoulish Baker, who is banging the “we are all going to die drum”, and will probably do so until he runs out of batteries; ignore him and get to the real story:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Lucia Maria

October 16, 2022 at 7:04 pm

Posted in New Zealand

Tagged with

Covid Ghoul Comes Out to Play

with 6 comments

As we head into Halloween, and the coming lapse of the Government’s Emergency Powers, the Covid Ghoul of the last two and half years has re-emerged with the same siren call to wanting the powers to paralyse everyone with masks and restrictions.

‘We need that leadership’ – Baker calls for return to Covid alert level system | RNZ

What I do think we need is that we have a system that when the risk of infection rises we have the equivalent of an alert level system that describes the level of risk in a way that people really understand.

We have alert level systems for fires, for earthquakes, for all these other threats. I think we need one again for the pandemic.

Michael Baker

You’d think Michael Baker would realise that in a sane world his time should be over. No one wants to hear about Covid Alert Systems and all the horrors that would bring. We can’t live like this forever.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Lucia Maria

October 14, 2022 at 11:00 am

Disparagement of those who use the Internet

with 4 comments

The internet has been around for many decades, but has only come into mainstream popular use within the last ten – twenty years. In that time, it has changed a lot. It used to be almost the sole preserve of geeks, nerds and techos. Mostly techos, who found it invaluable as a means of discovering how other people from around the world solved problems.

My personal first exposure to it as an older Gen-Xer was in the early 90’s. There used to be this place called Compuserve that techos would go to in order to ask the world about particularly gnarly problems they might have had. I tried it a few times myself, but generally just resorted to reading the various books I had gathered on the languages and technologies I used and trial and error. It seemed to be more useful for network engineers, rather than business software developers, in my experience at the time.

Back in those times, we also had access to user groups, where techos would gather for monthly meetings and share knowledge. I did my fair share of presenting various techniques I used to those groups, I suppose in the way I now share my various thoughts, etc, here on the blogs and on Twitter.

Best laptops for children

More than a decade ago, there was an argument put forward that school children really ought to have their own devices so that they could have access to the internet to do their homework. Apparently, doing your own research online was considered to be a social good. Various talk show hosts on radio jumped onto this bandwagon, spouting opinions about how much smarter children will be once they can use laptops at school. I know – idiocy – but that was the belief at the time. I even tried talking to Danny Watson of Newstalk ZB about how silly this idea was, how fundamental basics help with learning, and he mocked me. Such is the power of belief when it takes over the mind – it brooks no dissent.

And here we are now in 2022 where “doing your own research” on the internet is now used as a pejorative. No longer is the internet a place where it is acceptable to look up information if that information is not what the authorities want us to know.

Anyone who uses the internet the way people in the past used to use libraries, newspapers, meetings, conversations, etc, is now a “nutter” to those, I think are hanging on to times gone past when they and their in-group, were the sole arbiters of truth.

I think what is happening is that we are bypassing these gatekeepers of acceptable discourse to the point where there is a danger that the population becomes unpredictable and therefore ungovernable. Hence the censorship that we have been noticing and experiencing; some of us more than others, in hindsight, seems to have been inevitable from the start. It was allowed when just a few were using the internet, but now that everyone is, it needs to be controlled.

Written by Lucia Maria

October 13, 2022 at 1:00 pm

Bandwagon Fallacy regarding the Safety of You Know What

with 5 comments

Using logical thinking is an effective way of solving problems and rooting out untruths. Unfortunately, logic can be replaced in many instances with repeated phraseology that has been absorbed and memorised for quick regurgitation without thought, such as arguments using the Bandwagon Fallacy:

  1. X is popular.
  2. Popular things are always true (unstated).
  3. Therefore, X is true.
Bandwagon Fallacy: Why the Majority Isn’t Necessarily Right

Here is the Bandwagon Fallacy argument used to justify the safety of The Shots:

  1. 11 million + shots have been given to people in NZ.
  2. Popular things are always safe (unstated).
  3. Therefore, the shots are safe.

Implied in this fallacy is the idea that if the shots were not safe, then people would be seeing the effects in those around them, that damage would be widespread and noticeable. However, ironically the argument is then used against anyone who says the shots are not safe because they know someone who was injured, or were injured themselves. That person is just an exception, they say; or even worse, that person should not be able to tell their story, so as to not cause “vaccine hesitancy” in others.

Here’s a variation of the bandwagon fallacy used as justification for the safety of the shots for children. This was very soon after their approval for use in NZ, before that many had actually been given out. Because multiple countries have approved the shots for children, and because the US has approved and rolled out “millions of doses” (notice how the approval and rollout number is added up?), then by implication in the linked article, it is safe for children.

“The United States has approved and rolled out millions of doses in this age group, and other countries including Australia, Canada and Israel, as well as the European Union, have authorised its use in children aged 5-11 years,” Mackay said.

Covid-19: Parents launch legal action over vaccine roll-out for 5 to 11-year-olds | Stuff | 18 January, 2022

Now, I’m not saying that the shots are not safe because it appears that the Bandwagon argument has been used to justify their safety by various commentators. What I am saying is that by itself, using the justification of numbers is not enough to prove safety. What I am also saying is that this justification is commonly used, almost as a mantra, by many apologists who seek to calm the fears of those who believe the shots are not safe. Keep an ear and eye out for this argument, and how it is used.

However, if numbers matter in terms of justifying safety, what numbers would justify the inverse – the danger that the shots might pose? Whatever that number is, we have not hit it in New Zealand, yet. Even though many people now know or suspect they know, vaccine injured or dead, whether recognised by the authorities or not, those numbers are still not enough to rouse any of the authorities to action.

In terms of what the Government could do to assuage fears of lack of safety, if indeed the shots are actually safe, is maybe publish more data. For example, the death data, linked to dates of vaccination could be a great place to start. Publish the raw data with the names redacted; and include the date of birth, date of death, and dates of vaccination. It would be a quick and easy way to calm the fears down around the shots potentially being implicated in people’s deaths. Don’t hide this data behind the experts, give it to us to study for complete transparency. Without something like this, trust is so eroded that very much nothing less will satisfy critics, such as myself.

Well, I was trying to keep this post focused, but as usual I tend to bring more into my posts, which make them longer than I intend them to be. So, I will end with a final, related point that Rowan Dean of Sky News Australia made recently: Govt has done ‘very little’ to assuage vaccine fears.

Written by Lucia Maria

October 12, 2022 at 11:06 am

Posted in New Zealand

Tagged with

Controversial interview with a NZ Funeral Director and Embalmer on The Platform

with 6 comments

Yesterday, Sean Plunket interviewed Brenton Faithful, a New Zealand funeral director and embalmer on his observations of deaths he has personally dealt with over the last year or so. During the course of the interview that I was able to listen to (until it became unbearable for me to continue), a disturbing story of deaths post jab was told.

However, when I first heard about the interview, having missed hearing it live, it seemed the most egregious crime Brenton Faithful committed was telling the story of the sudden death post jab of an otherwise fit and healthy man who turned out to be 98. As if that pertinent fact was being held back by Brenton and only extracted by the dogged insistence of Sean the interviewer!

So, it was with some amusement, upon gaining access to the interview later in the day, that I took note that while Brenton Faithful had introduced the 98 year old in his story as “fit and healthy”, he added to that description: “although he was at an advanced age.” Not really a big deal, I would have thought, since “advanced age” does convey the concept of being very old.

Except, Sean Plunket was not ready to let this one go and brought it up as his first issue with Brenton Faithful’s story, in his interview with Matt King who came on to talk about the interview the day before :

I want to take you back to the very first question I asked him, and he tells the story about someone he described as being otherwise fit and healthy. He neglected in that answer to point out about the person he was talking about was 98 years old. Do you not see that as misleading by omission?

Matt King responds to Sean’s interview with Brenton Faithfull | The Platform

I think if Sean Plunket bothered to really analyse his interview with Brenton Faithful, including the context with which he answered the questions given to him, Sean would see that Brenton was not misleading in the slightest. “Advanced age” is not misleading. Especially when asked about the man’s age, Brenton immediately clarified the number of years when the question was asked.

There’s also the general context with which the story of the “fit and healthy” person made an appearance. Brenton was asked about his observations, and he answered by talking about the person who first made him question and why. In other words, Sean made a mountain out of an example, that in context was the story that started off his investigations into the jab status of the people who died that ended up in his care.

There was a lot of anger yesterday morning after the interview, from listeners of The Platform to how Brenton Faithful was treated in the interview. Quite justified, in my opinion, as I could only imagine the interview got worse after the first 6 minutes that I could bear listening to.

I really dislike listening when people are being badgered and not being allowed to respond adequately to defend themselves. Anyone who has control over the microphone and the volume of sound that can effectively drown out the opposite voice has an unfair advantage from the get go. And when you add belligerence to the mix and an obstinate refusal to accept what is being said, most of the time I have difficulty listening in such circumstances.

Anyway, here’s my transcript of four minutes of the interview with Brenton Faithful, starting from the 1 minute mark. This is where Sean asks his first question, Brenton answers and it degenerates from there. I probably need to do another pass to get it more accurate, but it will do for now:

Sean : Brenton, I first want you to, simply and clearly, to tell us what the observations you have made in your work; because an undertaker is, and why this has caused such a stir. What is the information you have that you have been sharing?

Brenton : Um, as far as I know, Sean, I’m the only one in New Zealand who has spoken out. I do believe there are other funeral directors who are aware exactly of what I’m going to share with you. It was about August, beginning of August last year, that we had a funeral in our care, and the gentleman passed away, unexpectedly, but the family indicated he had his vaccine two days prior. That, sort of alerted me a little bit, because they he was fit and healthy, although he was at advanced age. But he could walk, swim, everyday, and

Sean : How old was he?

Brenton : He was 98, but

Sean: Oh, ok

Brenton : they said there was no reason why he wouldn’t live to 108. He’d swim everyday, he would walk everyday

Sean : Yup, but he was 98, ok that’s fine.

Brenton : Right, the first one, the first one, he drops dead in his spa pool, and I thought, well, that’s quite interesting that he’s only died 2 days prior. So, I started counting. Our database that we, uh, it’s for the funeral industry. Most, most funeral directors use the same database, has now crept into it, a Covid case. You can actually count the number of people who died with Covid, the number of

Sean : Oh, hang on, yep

Brenton : you can see if they were vaccinated. However, that’s crept in since. Um, so my observations of people

Sean : So, what are your observations? I’m still trying to get, Brenton, what are your observations?

Brenton : Yeah, sorry Sean. My observations are that over a period of time that I’ve measured from first of April to the end of July, which is a one year period, 95% of the cases that we looked after had passed away within two weeks of getting hogus? the second

Sean : Ok, what I was asking you was, from the first of April, how many cases are you talking about that you got data on?

Brenton : I’m talking well over 150 cases.

Sean : 150. Ok.

Brenton : Yes. Yes

Sean : From April, when?

Brenton : 9th of August, 1st of August

Sean : From August last year, Ok

Brenton : Correct.

Sean : You’re not a qualified pathologist, and you have not medical qualifications, right?

Brenton : No, I am a qualified funeral director and a qualified embalmer

Sean : Ok, alright.

Brenton : [inaudible]

Sean : I’m just wondering to be honest, Brenton, um, 95% of New Zealanders, um.. What was the average age of those 180 people who died?

Brenton : About 83

Sean : 83 [laughs] okaaay, okaaay. That’s interesting, too, isn’t it?

Brenton : [inaudible]

Sean : I’m sorry, Brenton, I’m just looking at this and just saying your 150 cases and with you being a complete lay person regarding this is just meaningless.

Brenton : [inaudible]

Sean : It’s just your hot or cold take, isn’t it?

Brenton : [inaudible]

Sean : Cos, with 95%, with 95% of people being vaccinated, you’d expect that 95% of people who die have been vaccinated and have been vaccinated recently.

Brenton: [inaudible]

Sean : So, actually, in terms of casual evidence, there’s absolutely nothing to suggest that you’ve found anything too terrible or, or criminal or anything hidden about the vaccine?

Brenton : No, so what I say Sean, that 95% died within 2 weeks of getting the vaccine, 2 weeks of geting the vaccine

Sean : No, but that doesn’t mean anything, statistically

Brenton : [inaudible]

Sean : This isn’t a study!

Brenton : Well, the are a very large number of families who said there was nothing wrong with the patient, nothing wrong with their family member at the time, until they got the vaccine

Sean : How many of those patients have been noted as adverse reactions

Brenton: None.

Sean : or have had the cause of death… None!

Brenton: None.

Sean : Oh, ok, so that would also seem to suggest that it’s just a pretty cold take that you’ve got there.

Genius or conspiracy theorist? | The Platform

Besides the unexpected controversy around the age of the person that alerted Brenton Faithfull to the issue of people that end up in his care having died soon after being vaccinated, there are so many blatantly alarming aspects in the first four minutes of the interview that are just disregarded. Let me list a couple in the form of tweets that I made yesterday:

Twitter link

In the above series of tweets, I challenge the notion that having 95% of clients having been vaccinated in within the prior 2 weeks to be an alarming correlation. Sean comes back with his opinion that there is no evidence that the claim is true. I ask how he knows there is no evidence, and it ends there.

However, in the interview, Brenton Faithfull talks about a database that he has access to that presumably gives the dates that people were injected, which to me indicates a great deal of evidence! He also talks about counting, using that database.

Unfortunately, that part of the interview is broken up with Sean interjecting, and asking him the same question that he was about to start answering. It seems to be that this way of interjecting flusters the interviewee, so that their answer is less coherent, as happened with Brenton Faithfull.

So, when Sean says there is no evidence, he is completely disregarding the database that Brenton Faithfull says he used to count the number of people that were injected within a short period of ending up dead and in his care.

Even worse, after this damning information is revealed in the interview, Sean then calls into question Brenton Faithfull’s expertise in being able to ascertain that a person died within a certain time frame of getting a shot!

I’m sure that many teenagers doing Mathematics in NZ could do the same calculations relatively easily, given the same access to the same database. It’s just a comparison between two dates, which you could do using spreadsheet: with columns for date of last shot, date of death, number of days in between. Not hard.

Sure, correlation does not equal causation. But, if it were any other unusual action (other than the sacred shot) that the deceased submitted themselves to before dying; you’d think that would be important to drill into. For instance, what if most of the dead visited by a particular nurse before their deaths? Would anyone say, oh but their average age was 83, nothing to see here? No, correlation points a big, fat arrow that indicates more investigation is required, and that extreme caution ought be employed in terms of injecting further unwitting victims.

Onto Sean’s claim that because none of deaths were registered as adverse reactions, that they therefore were not adverse reactions to the shots:

Twitter link

There’s a particular logical fallacy at play in the argument that I’m countering above. I need to point out that the first premise never clearly stated and therefore I had to deduce it. However, without premise 1, nothing makes sense. If I’ve got this part wrong, please let me know.

Premise 1 : If a person has an adverse reaction, it is reported (false)

Premise 2: None of the deaths were reported as adverse reactions (true).

Conclusion: Therefore, none of the deaths were adverse reactions (false).

This is an example of the faulty logic of denying the antecedent.

I think I need to do a part 2 (or more) on this topic. Both interviews that I’ve linked to encapsulate so many arguments that have been bugging me for a while now, and it’s helpful having examples of them in something topic to attack with vigour before I give up for the night.

To finish off, I had to look up what hot takes and cold takes were, since I really had no idea.

Cold Take: an opinion or statement that is uncontroversial and generally agreed with.

Hot Take: an opinion that is likely to cause controversy or is unpopular

Urban Dictionary

Actually, final thought: I enjoy listening to The Platform. While I have subjected Sean Plunket to criticism here, just know that I only do so because his voice is important. He’s currently one of the few that has a foot (somewhat) in the mainstream, that has the guts to stand against the censored tide that has swept over us all. So, I’m not giving up on him, yet.

Written by Lucia Maria

October 11, 2022 at 4:58 pm

Posted in New Zealand

Tagged with

Who blew up Nord Stream?

with 26 comments

Was it the Russians or the Americans? Or maybe the Ukrainians? Which ever side you land on seems to be an almost ideological position, making it difficult to really explore the question. However, Mark Stein is not afraid of doing so, with his guest, James Melville:

People say, well this couldn’t be the Americans because Denmark and Germany are their NATO allies. Well, when they bugged out of Kabul, they didn’t let the British or anybody else know that they were abandoning Bagram Airbase. Those guys just woke up in the morning and found that all the Yanks had left! So, so, if they were doing something like this, it’s entirely possible that they wouldn’t let the Danes and the Germans in on it?

Mark Stein

Full 1 hour Mark Stein Show of which the above clip is just one small part.

Sky News Australia host, Chris Kenny is likewise not afraid of tacking the questions, with his guest, Global Directions think tank Managing Director Keith Suter:

Through the pipeline, Russia has a source to almost unlimited earnings from Europe by selling gas, if it chooses to; but also, it’s main point of leverage over Europe over energy, so why would it blow up it’s own key, strategic, link?

Chris Kenny

Recently, however, Jordan Peterson did suggest that Russia would be likely to turn off the gas at some point, so maybe there is an argument to be made that Russia did it. Though, turning off the gas versus damaging the pipe so that it would take time to repair before it could be used again seems to be an extreme way of reducing gas supply to Europe.

NZ Disinformation Project key researcher, Dr. Sanjana Hattotuwa considers anyone not falling into line in the correct manner (as determined by who, in particular?) to be promoting Russian propaganda:

Everyone’s an expert or a propagandist; or maybe people are just trying to figure out what the hell is going on and maybe, just maybe, are trying to find a way out that doesn’t involve plunging the whole world into a war that destroys everything and everyone in it’s path.

Meanwhile, just streamed live discussion run by Tim Poole, who is the intersection between my generation Gen X, and my Gen-Z sons. They will watch Tim, when he interviews people they watch, while as he also interviews people I watch. In the video below, they start the discussion on NATO threatening retaliation from the 5 minute mark:

I’m assuming they are not talking about Nord Stream, but they might be, because Germany relies on it. But it’s a weird thing, because; I’m trying to figure out what they are trying to say. Ok, are they blaming Russia for it, directly: no; but several member states are. If they are, it’s very weird that they are like: Our adversary’s infrastructure was like blown up and we’ll retaliate if someone blows up our infrastructure; it’s like; it sounds like you blew it up, and now you’re worried they’re going to blow up yours.

Tim Poole

Written by Lucia Maria

September 30, 2022 at 1:35 pm

Nigel Farage in Australia on Conservatism

with 5 comments

Starts with the host saying, “Let’s talk about whether the right has lost their balls, whether they are dying out, I mean, what is happening here?”

Farage: “No, look at Italy! Giorgia Meloni is going to become the Italian prime minister. Look at Sweden, 2 weeks ago; that country, ruled by Social Democrats since 1945, until now. There’s going to be a conservative majority leading Sweden.”

Helen Clark’s head must be exploding. She was always a die-hard, Sweden fan.

Farage: “Actually, all over the world, we are seeing a move against Globalism. Because what’s Globalism done? It’s made the rich, richer, and disadvantaged absolutely everybody else.”

Farage: “But somehow, somehow in our countries at election time we get people who masquerade as conservatives, don’t have the courage to stand up and fight for our values.”

Farage: “People are just coming up and talking to me. People are desperate for leadership in Australia, and they don’t see where it is coming from.”

Host: “And also they feel, and quite rightly so, that it’s an assault on all fronts. That what was status quo yesterday, is “far right” today, and therefore … wanting to preserve the status quo is immediately defined by the language police, by the media that reinforce it, the business that back them in, as some sort of sedition against reality. But, no, no, it’s just saying, I want to hold the line, for a country that has borders, that protects it’s language, that believes in it’s culture, that understands the reason why we don’t have many of the problems the rest of the world has, is because of what we have done to this point!”

Farage: “Yes, but’s that’s the problem, isn’t it? That the Left just march on, march on, march on and conservatives. pathetically, weakly, defend the position, then decide it’s too uncomfortable, too difficult, too much abuse, and then retreat. And it’s retreat, retreat, retreat .. So actually, holding the line is no good anymore. We’ve got to retake, much of the ground that has been lost. And I tell you what, free speech, as we’ve seen with the NSW police today, getting free speech back. Absolute rights of free speech, provided it does not incite anybody or anything. So, we’ve actually got to move forward, and that means leaders of courage.”

Oh dear, this is totally against what Jacinda Ardern was saying at the UN, recently. Also, I don’t know what he means with regards to the NSW police and free speech. Does anyone?

Farage: “People are crying out for bold, principled leadership to push back, to re-take ground that the Left has taken from us.”

Farage: “Oh, we are waking up in the UK. And in Germany, they are really waking up. They are beginning to wonder why they didn’t listen to Donald Trump when he warned them at the UN, years ago!”

Farage: “We are facing the prospect of the lights going out in February – don’t do it!”

It’s truly amazing how the “algorithms” are still working to give me information I am interested in. I was listening to Jordan Peterson on climate change, totalitarianism and the war in Ukraine, and You Tube recommended I view a three year old video on Sky News on the sun likely to go into a cooling cycle in coming decades and CO2 has nothing to do with warming or cooling (already knew this, but you know, I might have been a gullible person who had no idea). Then it also recommend the Nigel Farge interview from today, which then inspired this post.

I certainly needed something upbeat, kind of, after my previous post. You could be forgiven for thinking I am a very pessimistic person, but I’m not really. I’m very optimistic, because I see such simple solutions to problems, such as – when you are in hole, stop digging-type solutions. The frustration, though is that I see people stoutly refusing to believe they are digging a hole, and then others firmly convinced that the hole must be dug, because everyone else is doing it. Just the blatant stupidity, as well as complete amorality of not seeing the damage that the hole digging does to people gets to me at times.

Anyway, listen to the whole video with Farage. The guy has grown on me ever since I’ve been watching him on GB News.

Written by Lucia Maria

September 29, 2022 at 6:25 pm

Posted in New Zealand