Monday 15 August 2022

Too Many Angels And Devils.


He’s got the fire and the fury
At his command
Well, you don’t have to worry
If you hold on to Jesus’ hand
We’ll all be safe from Satan
When the thunder rolls
We just gotta keep the devil
Way down in the hole

─ Tom Waits, “Way Down In The Hole”

WHAT’S NOT TO LIKE about Stuff Circuit’s Fire and Fury? It’s a well-made documentary of the sort New Zealand television used to make, but now only produces intermittently. It seeks answers to the questions many New Zealanders have been asking themselves since Parliament Grounds went up in flames on 2 March 2022. The driving force behind Fire and Fury, the highly-experienced journalist, Paula Penfold, has delivered on her promise to go behind the events of that day and name the names of those who were, at least in part, responsible for the disturbing scenes that marked the end of the weeks-long anti-vaccination protest.

Why, then, has the documentary left me feeling vaguely uneasy? And, before you object – “It’s meant to! – my uneasiness has nothing to do with the unsavoury cast of proto-fascist conspiracy theorists and “influencers” whose faces and words feature so prominently throughout the documentary. Sure, these people are loathsome, and their comments teeter alarmingly on the brink of outright criminality, but that is entirely unsurprising. From the get-go, the tone, sound-track, and crepuscular palette of the production cues the viewer for the darkness of its subject-matter.

Borrowing their title from Tom Waits’ Way Down In The Hole suggests that the makers of Fire and Fury see their subjects as being down there with the Devil. Perhaps that’s it? Perhaps it was my unconscious conflation of “Jesus’ hand” with the hands of the documentary’s producers, that gave me the uneasy feeling that I was being led to someone else’s holier-than-thou explanation for the rolling political thunder of our times.

Bluntly, Fire and Fury relies much too heavily on the “expert” commentary of Kate Hannah, a principal investigator and director of The Disinformation Project, a state-funded research exercise run out of Te Pūnaha Matatini at the University of Auckland. In an interview with Dale Husband on the Māori radio station, Waatea, Hannah revealed that The Disinformation Project had been set up in February 2020, immediately prior to the outbreak of the Covid-19 Pandemic, to counter the anti-government, anti-scientific, and anti-medicine narratives that the authorities were clearly anticipating.

What is it that disturbs me about The Disinformation Project? Surely, having people monitor the misinformation and disinformation being spread deliberately during a major medical emergency is an entirely sensible government initiative? Any undermining of the collective effort to protect the population from the effects of a potentially deadly virus is prima facie evidence of evil intent. Many would say that identifying and neutralising such anti-social elements is an important state responsibility.

True enough, but why bury such a unit deep in the dense undergrowth of academia? And why appoint as its director a woman whose Masters thesis was on Nineteenth Century American literary culture, rather than a qualified medical administrator? If such a unit was needed, then why not set it up within the Ministry of Health, and make it answerable to the then Director-General of Health, Ashley Bloomfield?

The problem is, the moment you start asking questions like this you immediately run the risk of being branded a conspiracy theorist. And that just circles the whole argument back to its starting-point: the dark narrative of evil intent which lies at the heart of Fire and Fury.

The question, never satisfactorily answered, which lies at the heart of the heart of Fire and Fury is – Why? What is it that prompts individuals to create false political, economic and cultural narratives in the first place? More importantly, what is it that makes otherwise perfectly sensible and caring people follow these fantasists down their rabbit holes?

Well, what led Alice down the rabbit hole in Lewis Carrol’s famous children’s story? Wasn’t it the sight of a waist-coated white rabbit consulting a pocket-watch and muttering “I’m late!”? Who wouldn’t want to get to the bottom of a sight as peculiar as that!

Many people find themselves caught up in events over which they exercise no control, and which they do not understand. Since, in small matters, they find it easy to identify cause and effect, they assume (wrongly) that big events can be equally easily explained.

This is by no means an unreasonable assumption, given the propensity of governments to explain large events in the most simplistic terms. Those who remain unconvinced by these official versions, all too often discover their scepticism is entirely justified. Nothing encourages the growth of conspiracy theories faster that citizens discovering that their own governments have conspired to deceive them.

In Fire and Fury, Kate Hannah explains the concept of what she calls “necessary” or “protective” violence. Once a group of citizens convinces themselves that their government, motivated by pure evil, is “coming after their kids”, then there is nothing they will not contemplate to keep their loved ones, and their homeland, safe.

Step this argument back a few paces, and it is possible to grasp how individuals of an authoritarian and/or paranoid temperament, having learned that their government has deliberately lied to them, decide that striking back with lies of their own is not only justified – but also the only effective way to balance the scales.

Like the evil wizard in the tale of Aladdin, the conspiracy theorists come offering “new lamps [lies] for old”. And, like all good liars, they mix in a hefty portion of the truth in with their falsehoods. “Why is it,” they ask, “that you will never encounter people with information contradicting the government’s claims in the mainstream news media?” While most people will respond by pointing out the idiocy of spreading false information during a pandemic, a not inconsiderable minority will accept the conspiracy theorists’ explanation that the news media are nothing more than the paid mouthpieces of a government unwilling to tell its citizens the truth.

It is a great pity that Paula Penfold and her team did not spend more time talking to the fiery and furious individuals around whose behaviour the documentary was constructed. A pity, too, that they did not explore in greater depth the popular conviction that the Public Interest Journalism Fund – which paid for Fire and Fury – is proof of the conspiracy theorists’ contention that the mainstream news media has, indeed, been bought and paid for.

Yes, there is an argument to be made that it is better to allow these “influencers” to condemn themselves out of their own mouths, than it is to interview them one-on-one. Equally, there is an argument for doing both: broadcasting their views – and also asking them to explain why they continually engage in such dangerous speech. Watching Fire and Fury, it is easy to apprehend its makers’ fear of “the mob”. The hostility directed towards journalists who were “just doing their job” by militant anti-vaxxers certainly was frighteningly intense.

And yet, these people are New Zealanders, too. And perhaps that is what, in the end, made me feel so uneasy about the Fire and Fury documentary. Watching it, the viewer cannot help being struck by the vast epistemological gulf separating its subjects from its makers.

Listening to Hannah and the other, equally disdainful “experts” consulted by Penfold and her team, the viewers could be forgiven for thinking that they was listening to a team of anthropologists describing the cultural practices of a particularly belligerent tribe of indigenes. Certainly, the inclusion of Rebecca Kitteridge, Director of the SIS, among that commentary team does not bode well for the future safety of this truculent tribe.

Fire and Fury didn’t quite call them “deplorables” – but it came close.

This essay was originally posted on the website on Monday, 15 August 2022.


John Drinnan said...

Well sai Chris Trotter,Fire and Fury and Paula Penfold are full of with consracyn theories the4y like to attack consp[rcy theories. they loathe . As with other Stuff ventures - it's excuse for not covering the whole3 story - is that the other side is already in the unacceptable) media so would be ignored, Fire and Fury is activist journalism, and the PIJF funds activist journalists with an authoritarian bent

Kat said...

"Fire and Fury didn’t quite call them “deplorables” – but it came close......"

It's not a spade, it's just a short handled shovel with a flat blade......

Anonymous said...

Nice article, I’m afraid there is plenty of evidence daily that the mainstream media peddles lies, I engaged with an anti vac mate and 90 % of what he sent me was obviously trash, but 10% got me thinking. Maybe they could do a documentary on the lies and conspiracies spread by the main stream media

Anonymous said...

Yes, and accompanying the doco was an article, whose title branded the protesters as "monsters". Unfortunately, rather than seeking to understand, Penfold has succeeded only in intensifying divisions.
One correction, Chris, the protest was about the vaccine mandates, not vaccination per se. One wonders if countries that chose not to mandate the Covid vaccine, eg Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Taiwan, had rioting in the street? I doubt it.
I would be more interested in a doco examining whether our vaccine mandates were worth it overall, considering the intense social division they have caused (not to mention the fact that very large numbers of vaccinated and boosted people are getting the virus, being hospitalized and dying.

Barry said...

The major errors committed during the Covid Sars 2 spread are:
1. Any serious medical advisor knew from the previous MERS and SARS1 Covid infection knew what to expect with SARS2. They knew that masks worked yet the Ministry of Health told us masks made no difference. From that point on many Covid decisions were suspect.
2. The Government could have stopped the protest by talking to them very early on - in the first couple of days. But instead they didnt just ignored them but called them something like a heap of sewage - and then Mallard decided to act.......

It seems the makers of the documentary made the same mistake. The protestors wont go away by ignoring them.
On the day the protest started I was surprised by the numbers on Hamiltons streets who were demonstrating in support of the Parliment group.
There were alot more people who were supporting the protest than many people think.
As we errors are continuong. The Ministry of Health continue to push boosters but these are totally ineffective against the latest mutations - they are good against mutations that are no longer are in circulations.
Im waiting until a booster that works against BA4 and 5 is available.

David George said...

Chris: "a team of anthropologists describing the cultural practices of a particularly belligerent tribe of indigenes"

Well that's it isn't it! De-humanise, vilify, crucify, shut them down; it's a wonder we haven't heard "rats and cockroaches", though "rivers of filth" comes dangerously close.

What happens when the people find out that many of the rivers of filth's, far right extremist's, conspiracy nutter's, crystal Karen's and crazy's concerns were right all along? It's now obvious that the vaccines are neither safe nor effective and the mandating of them was (and still is) a dogmatic and unreasonable overreach of state power.

Brendan put up a compelling wee clip from Neil Oliver on the previous essay. Some serious questions that we won't hear from legacy media or our "one source of truth" government.
For those that missed it:

Guerilla Surgeon said...

If I remember my high school biology, crepuscular means active at dawn and dusk – I therefore fail to see what on earth you mean by that. But then I haven't seen the documentary either.So perhaps it's something to do with that – perhaps I can't understand it until I've seen it.:)
But I must say, that many of the people I've come across who are into conspiracies feel they have little or no control over their own lives. What to do about this I'm not sure, but it seems to me that some if not all of them need some sort of psychiatric treatment. It is not helped by the fact that misinformation is so easily spread these days due to the Internet. I think I said before, things were better when they had to write out their "newsletters" by hand, run them off on the Banda machine, and spend their own money sending them out to fellow tinfoil hat wearers.
But conspiracy theorists have always been with us, and there have always been moral panics back to at least mediaeval times.
And yes we must remember they are New Zealanders, and we should perhaps do something to alleviate their fears about the state. But even you Chris have contributed in some small way to their feelings by writing about the so-called "deep state". This is essentially a made up thing, but it sounds great and mysterious and just the sort of thing to get people riled up. Similarly, you can scare people by mentioning Critical Race Theory – our latest moral panic – or as New Zealand finally caught up with "grooming" yet?
I must confess that I myself am sometimes guilty of considering them as separate species. I find it difficult to comprehend how someone can become so paranoid about what is essentially a relatively benign and useful organisation – the state – even under a centre-right government. I would really like to ask these people what they would put in place of it, but many of them are so incoherent as to defy comprehension.
You only have to watch a YouTube video Jordan Klepper talking to American "deplorables", and letting them condemn themselves out of their own mouths to feel that they are quite possibly irredeemable. And sad though it might be mockery may be the only valid reaction.

Odysseus said...

I'm shocked that government subsidized journalists would try to demonize so many New Zealanders in this way. In the print coverage of this production in Stuff it was even suggested that those who challenged Labour's race-based 3 Waters project were extremists. This sinister paranoid crap has no place in a democracy.

Cricklewood said...

Whilst they did a good job of exposing some real nutcases they very much failed to even consider what is was about our covid response that drove so many people towards these groups or to coalesce with them and perhaps the media's role in this.

Once the govt created rules (despite promises to the contrary) that separated out the vaccinated and unvaccinated from society and the media went all in labelling people as antivaxxers, targeted individuals based on vaccination status in the media, formenting hysteria around rule breakers and generally refusing to publish anything contradictory on the basis of not waiting to be accused of promoting vaccine hesitancy. (an example was the continued insistence in 'the whole truth' series that only a very small number of people (less that 100) wouldn't be able to have the Pfizer despite our own records showing a far far larger number (small by percentage granted) had sadly suffered adverse reactions. The failure to acknowledge this properly made it look like there was something to hide.

As a result we ended up with a bunch of upset, angry & confused people suddenly in financial dire straits and looking for reasons as to why and how a govt/society could so readily cast them aside. The main protagonists of the documentary were more than ready to provide answers.

Brendan McNeill said...

It is entirely appropriate for you to have been disturbed by Stuff’s “Fire and Fury” documentary. I watched the first few minutes, noted the dark colours, the tenor of the sound-track, the foreboding monologue, the video clip of a Māori woman who was clearly on the deranged fringe of the protest, and I had seen enough to know where it was heading.

As an aside, all political and protest movements have these people, including both National and Labour Parties. They are usually quietly managed out of the spotlight, but with the advent of social media, they can now self-publish their views. The authors of this documentary however attempted to portray this woman as representing the mainstream views of the anti-vaccine mandate protest. Ironically, this form of journalistic bias is exactly what disinformation looks like, but the authors apparently lacked sufficient self-awareness to realize this, or alternatively they knew exactly what they were doing.

Demonizing one’s political opponents is not new. What is new is having the mainstream media perform this task on behalf of the incumbent Government, funded by tax-payer dollars. This unholy commercial alliance between the State and the Media is what makes the documentary sinister. These are not the actions of benign players, of objective journalists seeking to hear and to represent both sides of the story. This is raw political propaganda of the type rarely seen since the middle of the 20th century.

I’m old enough to remember when our parliament had its fair share of political statesmen on both sides of the house. Men and women of dignity and purpose with sincere convictions about what was good, just, fair and reasonable, and for whom the funding of “Fire and Fury” would have been anathema. They are long dead, with only shadows to occupy their places.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

I doubt somehow Brendan, if whoever made this documentary said we want funds so we can demonise antivaxers. Not that they don't deserve a bit of demonising in my opinion. Are you suggesting that the government should vet every documentary it funds? If so – what you're suggesting surely is government censorship? Something which in theory you are against.
I will agree though that the commercialisation of everything due to neoliberal politics and economic policies have given rise to a generation of politicians who don't give a shit about what is fair, just and reasonable. Glad to see you coming round from the dark side Brendan.

Anonymous said...

They knew exactly what they were doing. Paula Penfold is well seasoned in producing her particular brand of journalistic ideology, and Stuff’s editorial management will have thought long and hard before gambling that the numbers were sufficient amongst their readership to buy into this propaganda piece, poorly packaged as a documentary. If Penfold wants us to believe that the open hostility directed towards Stuff’s press gallery staff, Thomas Manch and Robert Kitchin, when they finally ventured down from The Speakers balcony to slum it with the protestors during the final days pitch battle with the riot Police, wasn’t in any way related to the earlier questionable reporting of the protest by her media organisation, then she needed to try much harder. For a more authentic visual documentation of both the protesters and the final day of the protest, I recommend visiting the website of two Blenheim ex-wedding photographers who gained enough trust to get inside the events (something Penfold and Stuff weren’t capable of achieving) and document it for posterity here @

David George said...

Some of the claims from the conspiracy theorists and their adherents are quite obviously crazy and can be easily dismissed. Some not so much. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me!

Perhaps the idea that the State is "a relatively benign and useful organisation" is little more than a naïve and foolish fantasy. The thing is that the state and non state elite's (for want of a better word) plans for us are not all clandestine schemes; they come right out and say them - eventually anyway. You will own nothing and you will be happy - that's an order.

You don't have to look much further than political events here over the past two years, the quiet coup that has seen democratic rights trashed and the institutionalisation of race into every level of society. The plans hatched in 2019 and hidden from the people have been, and are being, unleashed. Public consultation is a sick and cynical joke. Does anyone seriously doubt that people willing to engage in a deception and a lie that large are not culpable in lesser lies?

ben said...

Chantel Baker should never have being in that doco.

I might not like her or her dad's politics, or belief systems but I have never heard Chantel advocate for violence EVER! And trust me I looked and I have being hunting "Nazis' a lot long than the folks behind this politically motivated state funded hatchet job.

Alps is something else (and if you look at the material he produces) and their is far right component trying to use the cause to legitimise their own politics and agenda. But lumping all protesters together with a one size fits all is a smear brush. And not giving them a right of reply is in fact empowering ALP and giving him recruits hand over fist. It also not what public interest sourced news should be about.

F&F was state funded journalism drawn from the Covidmedia support fund whose sources were academics who all drew from the same state funds which dictated subject matter. While I believe the academic cited in the interview were all from Te Pūnaha Matatini. From 1 July 2021, the Centre's funding will rise from $2.1 million per annum to $4 million per annum through to the end of 2028. Ib shot not so much a doco but a state funded circle jerk which will alienate people further and bring more dangerous instability into what has being for the last 150 years relatively stable democracy. Not perfect but a place where there was room for every one belief systems and slowly worked our issue as we had environment where folk felt free to express and have dialogue. This wont stop disinformation but it will fire people fury and further distrust of media and the state - who clearly are conspiring together in this "doco" not a good look at all.

The exception the two ladies protesters who did not get to tell their story in a fair way. Oh and a spy boss who says she has shocking evidence but we cant see it. Certainly as conspiratorial bias centric and loose with the truth as the subject they accuse of "fake news". No questions about how Kyle Chapman (who runs Outdoor's social media page) own "charity" was state funded from 1995 to 2014 and never audited.
P.S. There were Johnny's come lately who threw stuff - who all these people were exactly and where they came from, tuning up about midday onwards (I photographed one walking into parliament area with a stick), has yet to be fully established and is still being investigated.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Perhaps the idea that the State is "a relatively benign and useful organisation" is little more than a naïve and foolish fantasy. "
And that statement is a nonsense. What on earth would you put in its place?

Guerilla Surgeon said...

" The governments of the west and all of their medical professionals stood on their soap boxes and told us the vaccine is safe and effective. But subsequent events have shown that it is NOT effective. "
For crying out loud, this is complete nonsense. How many deaths have there been from the vaccine? How much by way of side effects? A damn sight less than those from the disease itself. If you going to claim that the vaccine is not safe and not effective and if you're going to claim that "subsequent events " have shown this you need to show figures at least. But I guarantee you haven't got any.
No vaccine is 100% effective and you should know this – if you know anything about science at all. All vaccines have the occasional rare side effect, up to and including dying. But these are almost literally one in a million events. Chris I thought you were not going to allow vaccine misinformation on this site anymore?

Guerilla Surgeon said...

" If Penfold wants us to believe that the open hostility directed towards Stuff’s press gallery staff, Thomas Manch and Robert Kitchin, when they finally ventured down from The Speakers balcony to slum it with the protestors during the final days pitch battle with the riot Police, wasn’t in any way related to the earlier questionable reporting of the protest by her media organisation, then she needed to try much harder."
No she didn't. My son was threatened by these arseholes when walking home from work simply for wearing a mask. Twice. So was the occasional business owner. So not all of them were hippie dippy peace and love freaks.

greywarbler said...

As a result we ended up with a bunch of upset, angry & confused people suddenly in financial dire straits and looking for reasons as to why and how a govt/society could so readily cast them aside. The main protagonists of the documentary were more than ready to provide answers.

Look at that comment of yours in reverse Cricklewood. Why, asked the government should people considering themselves citizens deserving of government care, then turn around and cast government's wishes and safeguards for the people aside? Anti-vaxxers seeing everything from their own POV I think. Those who suffered adverse reactions needed to communicate closely with a liaison to the Covid control top people. But not try and put everybody off or throw aside the measures that were stopping spreading in NZ. If you are different then you should be accepted as such and helped to manage that. But now the custom seems that everyone else is expected to stand down for the small minority. Pardon us for living!

David George said...

Chris: "the conspiracy theorists’ explanation that the news media are nothing more than the paid mouthpieces of a government unwilling to tell its citizens the truth."

The Truth, according to our "one source of truth", Jacinda & co is whatever they say it is. If anything was tailor made to encourage the sickening realisation that were being told what to think it's that. Can't they see the implications of saying something like that, do they even care? This latest "doco" only serves reinforce those suspicions. Things like the establishment of the Orwellian sounding Disinformation Project as well.

"Kate Hannah, the principal investigator and director of the Disinformation Project said of these 13 (Aotearoa Dozen) people, in an RNZ interview:
"The key is they mustn’t be left unchecked as it could impact the election cycle".

Hannah meant it.

The current Labour Government is ignoring a fundamental aspect of justice. The Disinformation Project has been given extraordinary powers to silence others they deem to be enemies of the state.

Hannah has gone even further to silence Baker and the others, by making them a significant part of the recently released government propaganda documentary, “Fire and Fury.”

What is incredible is that the targets of her criticism are not interviewed for their views or given the opportunity to correct misinformation.

She is both judge and jury of their characters. They are repeatedly damned in the one-sided documentary, released by Stuff and funded by the Ardern government.

Chantelle Baker and the other 12 had no redress or opportunity to speak.

Kate Hannah is known to be a close friend of Jacinda Ardern and seems determined to assassinate the character of anyone who does not love Ardern as she does."

Anonymous said...

Thank you Chris, another thought provoking post, and an interesting discussion.

If I can attempt a reply to Anonymous of Aug 16 at 17:11, my first point is there is no such thing as "the vaccine". There are multiple vaccines based on different technologies. In New Zealand, Pfizer was "the vaccine" in the sense of "the vaccine of choice", but AstraZeneca was also available. And for most people, most of the time, vaccination, with any approved vaccine, was much safer than getting covid. But vaccines are not perfect, and yes, there were a small number of vaccine related illnesses and deaths. Hence the government's dilemma, trying to be honest, but, at the same time, not frightening people off vaccines unnecessarily. And how people feel can be contrary to the facts. Statistically, commercial aviation is much safer than travelling by road, but few nervous flyers find that fact reassuring.

I supported mandates when they were first imposed, but now, with 20/20 hindsight, I'm wondering if the mandates should have been more limited, maybe, say, to essential medical and emergency staff.

I was struck by the depiction in the documentary of the highly volatile mixture of some outright white supremacists, and some deeply alienated Maori, arriving, quite literally, in the same camp together. That mixture doesn't seem a base to build a broad movement on. Kyle Chapman and Brian Tamaki as co-leaders of a united movement? Seems very unlikely. (But a Maori fascist movement? Deeply alienated people, displaced in their own land, with more than a sprinkling of military veterans.Check Displaced by colonial regime that included Jews, giving a bas

Anonymous said...

Same anon. as earlier on Aug 18, replying to Anon of Aug 16 at 17:11.

Sorry Chris, I pressed "Publish" too early by misteak. To carry on that train of thought, yes, there could well be a Maori element in a real fascist movement. But that won't sit well with the white supremacists, and fascists tend not to settle internal differences peacefully. (See falling out of Hitler and the brown shirt leaders, a.k.a. "The night of the long knives". Being useful to a fascist leader won't save you from them if they ever decide you've become more of a problem than a help).

There is a political problem I think there are no easy answers to. How to win potential fascists away from the influence of the actual fascists? Not at all easy, but also vital.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Mildly amusing story about Canadian nutcases. Maybe I'm just getting old but it seems to me the world is going to hell in a hand basket.

David George said...

An interesting discussion with Rachel Stewart on Fire and Fury. Very good points, 15 minutes.

John Hurley said...

A Texter to Sean Plunket who suggested we won't get emissions down unless we curb immigration was called xenophobic: "where did that piece of xenophobia come from?"

Gordon Brown and Mrs Duffy

Reminds me of Pete George: "Free speech for those who don't [step out of line] threaten free speech"?

David George said...

"If you’ve ever wondered what a documentary made by a conspiracy theorist about conspiracy theorists would look like, Paula Penfold’s hour-long Fire and Fury pretty much fits the bill."

Well said Graham Adams. There's more:

"Penfold’s attempts to find parallels between an interest in health and well-being among female fascists in the 1920s and the 1930s and the fact that some of the women opposed to vaccines and mandates in 2022 like to knit and use essential oils was another thigh-slapper.

It did, however, give the producers a chance to show old footage of a crowd giving Nazi salutes and women marching under a swastika symbol just in case viewers were underestimating the deeply unpleasant nature of the women involved in the Wellington protest who like to knit and crochet.

Perhaps the funniest own goal was Penfold’s plaintive declaration about her forays into documenting the vaccine-mandate protests at Parliament: “We haven’t experienced this kind of hostility — just for doing our jobs — anywhere in the world we’ve reported,” she opined.

It may have been wiser to have kept that observation to herself. It flings open the door to the unfortunate conclusion that New Zealand’s mainstream media — in some quarters at least — is possibly among the most despised by the public anywhere."

David Stone said...

"It is a great pity that Paula Penfold and her team did not spend more time talking to the fiery and furious individuals around whose behaviour the documentary was constructed."
There is a very good reason for this. It would have completely demolished the depiction of these people the documentary was created to present.
The error of those who are most aggrieved by the mandates and the whole Covid/ experimental vaccine episode might be that they can't understand how it could have been performed without a huge conspiracy of government officials and MPs. Though there may turn out to be a tiny clique of deliberate actors in or behind the WHO implementing a premeditated population reduction plan , it is more likely that even if the virus was prepared in a laboratory , the reactions have been people doing what seemed to be the right thing at the time from what was known at the time. Except for those in government who knew what had to be signed with Pfiza to secure the vaccine when everyone thought it was going to save us all from death, who might have bene worried by what was in it, it is unlikely that our government knew any more about how innocuous the virus was going to turn out to be, or how useless and dangerous the mRNA vaccines were going to turn out than the rest of us.
But it is time now to look back clearly and frankly at the whole episode and face the unraveling facts.

Chris Trotter said...

To: Guerilla Surgeon @ 12:26

You're quite right, GS, I did.

I'm not sure how that one slipped through.

Will try harder.

David George said...

Chris, it's well past the point that a thorough investigation of the covid strategy and vaccination regime will have any adverse effect on compliance so perhaps you could be a bit more relaxed about discussing it freely.

Obviously the strategy should be examined so that future outbreaks can be better managed but the government have refused to undertake a proper review so you can hardly blame people for asking a few questions. Before shrieking "misinformation" we should take a good hard look at some of the issues.
Why the significant rise in non covid mortality among under 60's? Is it a mere coincidence that cardiovascular and SADS (sudden adult death syndrome) problems have risen substantially or that immune systems seem increasingly unable to cope with other pathogens. Why are demands on our health system well above normal - that is even once direct covid cases and understaffing are taken into account? Were the social, psychological and economic effects of lockdown and mandates really worth it?

I know several people that were seriously adversely affected by the vaccine, "coincidence" just doesn't cut it with me, sorry.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"I know several people that were seriously adversely affected by the vaccine, "coincidence" just doesn't cut it with me, sorry."

No – I suspect well I pretty much know that you know a couple of people who say they have been affected by the vaccine – has this been established by a proper medical professional in which case I might listen to you. Not to mention that nobody said that vaccines are harmless. They do do damage but at a far lesser rate than the disease. God help us if you'd knew anything about science you'd know this.
Serious side-effects from the vaccine are somewhere around about .012% of all the people given vaccines. The problem with people like you is you often go to the US for information where side-effects are simply self-reported and not followed up to see if they are actually side-effects, or coincidences, or people just playing the system.
So give us the source of your data for the increase in mortality of under 60s. Or forever hold thy bloody peace, because at the moment you are a danger to those around you.

"The Government has welcomed the release today of StatsNZ data showing the rate at which New Zealanders died from all causes during the COVID-19 pandemic has been lower than expected."

The only information I find on excess deaths is in those older people who have received boosters,(Although to be fair I'm not particularly keen to waste my time chasing up your usual red herrings.) and I'm not sure that that can necessarily be sheeted home to the vaccine. Those who haven't received boosters are doing pretty damn well thank you

David George said...

NZDOS (N Z Doctors speaking out with science) is a good resource for covid and vaccine information including individual testimony and official statistics, if you can be bothered GS.
Any link between vaccination and mortality is difficult to establish, there's no proper "death by vaccination status" statistics available. The statistics are far less than ideal generally; the reporting of suspected adverse effects is not even mandatory, for example. The spike in deaths coincident with vaccine roll out may, indeed, be just coincidence. The point of my questions above is that we should be examining all aspects of the response - not sure how that represents "a danger to those around" me.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

David you have encapsulated quite well the whole problem with vaccine side effects. And for that matter supposed vaccine deaths. Unfortunately, there are people who use this information, particularly the self-reported side effects in the US system to suggest that there are more side-effects than there are stop these self-reports are never if I remember correctly, checked out to see if they are true/false or if they are simply incorrectly ascribed to vaccines. If there are people around you like this, then you are certainly a danger to them for promoting "discussion".
As far as NZD OS is concerned – few doctors and not a great deal of science.

"There are More Doctors called Sarah Who Support Vaccination
Than all the doctors who are spreading doubt"

And the more you investigate them, the worse they sound. Jesus Chris, this is exactly the sort of misinformation we don't need. Some people will believe anything as long as someone puts a doctor before their name. Siouxsie Wiles who I have met and have a lot of time for has castigated these people for providing evidence that people might believe but is completely unscientific.

David George said...

You might like to read this new (11/8/22) report GS, endorsed by the director (Queensland) centre for chronic disease.


"I am pleased and proud to endorse the attached letter and monograph, meticulously compiled
by Dr Phillip Altman and his colleagues. They address some important aspects of COVID19
management and policy, especially in Australia, with a focus on the nature, deployment and
effects of “vaccines”. It is abundantly clear that there has been repression and suppression in scientific circles and the media of any views or suggestions that run counter to the government/mainstream narrative. However, many studies now indicate that the Covid19 vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines, are less than 'safe and effective', and the ramifications are truly confronting. Armed with these facts, the scientific and medical communities can now begin proper discussions of potential solutions that improve the benefit/risk ratios for the public and do not harm careers and livelihoods of professionals seeking the best outcomes for their patients.

Professor of Medicine
Director, Centre for Chronic Disease
University of Queensland
Brisbane, Australia

David George said...

From that report:

"The new generation COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ have not been fully ‘approved’ by the
Australian drug regulator – all these products have been “Provisionally Approved” due
to deficiencies in the normal scope and depth of safety and efficacy data normally
required for full approval. This is of particular importance in relation to vaccine
mandates in so far as the regulatory status of these products establish without any
doubt that important safety and efficacy concerns remain in relation to the use of these
products. In such circumstances, forcing individuals on a massive scale to receive
such serious medications with potentially unknown and serious adverse
consequences, including death, using coercive vaccination mandates, is without
precedence in medicine. "

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) provisionally approved these vaccines after a complete assessment of all the available data. This is the same process as any vaccine approved in this country. The TGA will only register and approve a COVID-19 vaccine if it is safe and effective.

"No part of the process has been rushed, and there was no emergency authorisation granted. The TGA does not have an "Emergency Use Authorisation" pathway for COVID-19 vaccines.

Some countries are using versions of Emergency Use Authorisations (such as the UK, US and Canada) to urgently make vaccines available. This is because of the large number of COVID-19 cases and risk in those countries.

The urgency of the global pandemic means that researchers and developers are prioritising the progress of COVID-19 vaccines. This has allowed countries to deliver safe and effective vaccines faster than has been done in the past."