Tuesday 30 August 2022

False flag at Zaporozhzhia nuclear power plant?


Is it possible that the Kiev regime would attack the nuclear reactor and blame it on the Russians?

Make sure to read the article, Chernobyl, Fukushima Scenario Possible at Zaporozhye NPP Amid Ukraine's Shelling - Authorities, below.

Ukrainian shelling damages roof of nuclear fuel storage – official

The Zaporozhye facility is the largest atomic power plant in Europe
Ukrainian shelling damages roof of nuclear fuel storage – official
A Ukrainian strike has hit a reactor fuel storage at the Russian-controlled Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, local authorities said on Monday. 

The roof of the building has been damaged as a result of the attack, Vladimir Rogov, the spokesman for Zaporozhye Region’s administration, said on Telegram. 

He also posted a photo of a hole in the roof that was supposedly caused by the strike. 

The affected storage facility holds fresh nuclear fuel for the reactors of the plant, which is the largest in Europe. Russia said earlier that a Ukrainian drone targeting the nuclear facility had been shot down.

Moscow has repeatedly accused Kiev's forces of targeting the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant – which has been under Russian control since March, but operated by Ukrainian staff – with artillery and ‘kamikaze’ drones.

It warned that those attacks could trigger a disaster that would eclipse the 1986 Chernobyl incident. Radioactive material could potentially reach Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Moldova, Belarus, and even Germany in a worst-case scenario. 

Ukraine, meanwhile, has claimed that the Russian forces have turned the nuclear plant into a military base and that they’ve been shelling the facility themselves to pin the blame on Kiev. 

Russia has repeatedly denied those accusation and urged for international inspectors to visit the site to assess the situation for themselves. 

Earlier on Monday, International Atomic Energy Agency head Rafael Grossi announced that such a mission will take pace after all, with IAEA specialists expected to arrive at the Zaporozhye plant this week.

Ukraine War May Broaden

Chernobyl, Fukushima Scenario Possible at Zaporozhye NPP Amid Ukraine's Shelling - Authorities

Вид с воздуха на Чернобыльскую АЭС, Украина, 2007 год - Sputnik International, 1920, 29.08.2022

MELITOPOL (Sputnik) - A possible accident at the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (ZNPP) resulting from the shelling carried out by the Ukrainian military could be comparable in consequences to the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters, the head of the regional military-civil administration Yevgeny Balitsky told Sputnik.

"In the event of radiation release, the consequences will be catastrophic not only for the Zaporozhye region. It will be a situation equivalent to what happened at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and in Fukushima," Balitsky said.

"Experts believe that if the backup diesel generators and mobile pumps fail, the core will overheat, as a result of which the reactor plant will collapse, radioactive substances will be released into the atmosphere, and then they will spread hundreds of kilometers away."

He warned that a possible accident at ZNPP, resulting from the constant shelling by Ukrainian troops, could become a catastrophe for Europe, and radiation could spread to the Crimean Canal and the Black Sea.

"The Chernobyl accident affected dozens of countries, and the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant is the largest in Europe, so everyone should be aware of this," Balitsky told Sputnik.

The Russian Defense Ministry said on Sunday that the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant had been shelled again by Ukrainian troops. Three shells fell in the area of a special building of the ZNPP, which stores new TVEL nuclear fuel and solid radioactive waste. One shell fell next to the ZNPP's sixth power unit, and five others landed opposite a pumping station, which provides cooling for one of the reactors.

Sunday 28 August 2022

The destruction of free speech under tyrant, Jacinda Adern

New Zealand, under Jacinda Adern has taken a leaf out of the copybook of 1930's Stalinist Russia along with denunciations and informers (with the sole difference that people are not being taken round to the back of a shed and shot in the back of the head, but reputations are being actively destroyed.

Be careful what you wish for: silencing others in the name of 'stopping extremists'  

As Simon Sinek famously claimed 'people don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it.' Why do we stand so passionately for free speech, which necessarily includes speech we fundamentally disagree with? Because history has shown us that time and time again, the alternative to free speech, ultimately, is violence. Unfortunately, this may be what we are re-learning in New Zealand.

Two weeks ago, Stuff released an investigative documentary into the disinformation in New Zealand which allegedly led to the protest at Parliament in March: Fire and Fury.

Stuff reporter Paula Penfold considered the role of organisations like Counterspin and Voices for Freedom, and prominent individuals such as Chantelle Baker, Carlene Hereora, and Kelvyn Alp in manipulating hundreds of thousands.
In an op-ed Penfold wrote on the documentary, she opens by saying 'The Stuff Circuit documentary Fire and Fury is a confronting watch.' Well, at least we agree on one thing- but probably for different reasons. 

Not only is this documentary confronting, frankly, it was an unpleasant hour as Penfold essentially progresses a thesis that hatred, violence, and the death of democracy are inevitable if individuals like those named above get to keep saying their piece.

It seems that in all the reporting on anger against the Government, or journalists and media, it has never occurred to Penfold and her team that the reason there is such anger is because people feel their voice is being taken away.

The anger and frustration has not come out of being allowed to express themselves openly- it has come because they believe they no longer have this liberty.  

As Rachel Stewart wrote, 'I forced myself to watch but it was a tough task. Seeing something so amateur, blatantly biased, and borderline defamatory from a journalist who was once respected, wasn't easy. The gleeful “othering" of her fellow New Zealanders was also deeply nauseating, and the emotive music steered you decisively towards the “bad guys”.'

Penfold intentionally didn't hear from the other side. She claims, 'We didn’t approach them. That’s a really unusual editorial decision and I don’t know that we’ve ever taken that decision before, I think it is unprecedented for us.

But it was obviously a very considered decision because in this instance we wanted our documentary to be the right of reply to what they’ve already said in the public domain
She continued on to note 'When you’re reporting on far-right dangerous speech you do not give them a right of reply because that elevates them.'

Who gets to decide what constitutes 'far-right dangerous speech'? Penfold, obviously.

She gets to decide.  

In an article on The Platformjournalist Graham Adams claims, 'Rather than investigate the myriad and complex reasons for the “mistrust and anarchy” she witnessed in Wellington, Penfold’s single drum beat was the notion that most of those opposed to the mandates or who went to the protests were in thrall to right-wing extremists and white supremacists'.

All this begs an obvious question, what of those who were not from the Right at the protest?

What about those who were not white, like former-Maori Party MP Marama Fox?

What about those who weren't extremists, or did simply supporting the protest make you an extremist?

It's worth remembering the results of a Horizon poll published on February 18 that showed 30 per cent of New Zealanders supported the protest.

As Adams notes, 'That’s well over a million New Zealanders who the documentary makers imply were deluded, along with the thousands who camped outside Parliament for more than three weeks.'
'You’d have to say that a lot of the footage she presented revealed a crew of very brown white supremacists. Of course, Penfold had a predictable explanation for that awkward fact — they were obviously duped by the aforementioned white supremacists and right-wing extremists.This would be a dangerous conclusion for a white woman to come to but, fortunately for her, that deeply patronising view of Maori had a champion in the form of Khylee Quince, the Maori dean of law at AUT.'

Let me be clear, the Free Speech Union is disturbed and concerned by commentary like Fire and Fury, though not because we were in favour of the protest or opposed mandates.

We were neither, as we don't take positions on substantive issues. We are disturbed by this documentary because whenever so much effort is put into discrediting the speech or perspectives of others by labelling and name-calling, rather than through reason and dialogue, free speech is a casualty.

Through Fire and Fury, and other similar attacks on provocative or unconventional opinions, Penfold and her fearmongering colleagues unfortunately are setting the scene for a self-fulfilling prophecy that does lead to great polarisation, and potentially more violence.

The best alternatives to this are found in open dialogue, by giving the other side a chance to speak, and by avoiding name-calling and playing the argument and not the speaker, the ball, and not the man.  

Justice delayed, justice denied? Ministry of Justice don't want to talk about the hate speech consultation 

After 13 months of putting pressure on the Minister's Office, the Ministry of Justice has finally released the numbers of those who were for and against the hate speech proposals that were put out in July last year.

The responses make for an interesting read. Unfortunately, they were only given to us under the condition that we not share them until a report on the consultation process is released.

Transparency at its finest. 

In both New Zealand law and international human rights law, free speech guarantees the right to access information.

The results of this public consultation have been hidden away for 13 months, and then only partially released after the Ombudsman required it.

Is it just me or does it make you think they have something to hide?

When the hate speech proposals were first released, the Minister of Justice wanted them to be law before Christmas. 14 months later, and the Government still can't confirm whether they intend to scrap them or not.

One thing's for certain, though, the results to the proposals (read, Kiwis' views on the proposals) weren't what they wanted. 

We've already told you that the Free Speech Union coordinated 80% of the submissions against the hate speech laws, calling on the Government to respect their free speech.

If the Government lines up to take another grab at what Kiwis can think or say, we'll have the exact same response ready to go- bugger off. 

Meeting with senior leadership at Massey University a positive step forward

Following the release of our University Ranking Report, which following our First Annual Academic Freedom survey in March, the Free Speech Union was invited last week to sit down with Vice-Chancellor Jan Thomas at Massey University to discuss a redrafting of their Free Speech Policy. 

Despite ranking 6th out of 8 universities in the country, we were very pleased to see Massey University using this opportunity to address weaknesses in the ways they have dealt with free speech in the past.

Of course, Vice-Chancellor Thomas was personally responsible for Don Brash being barred from speaking at Massey University in 2018, and earlier this year, 33% of academics at Massey rated their 'ability to discuss ideas related to the Treaty of Waitangi' as 0-2.5 out of 10; effectively 'very unfree'.

While there's still work to do with Massey, and each of our universities, where so much antagonism against free speech is taught, the Free Speech Union is making meaningful progress, sitting down with the most senior leaders to make sure this is a priority. 

Podcasts and articles from the Free Speech Union

- This week on the Free Speech Union podcast, volunteer Daphna Whitmore sits down with the Executive Director of the Maxim Institute, Tim Wilson (of TV1 fame) to discuss his article No Womb, No View, exploring how and why open debate about abortion is so fraught. - Free Speech Union Council Member, Dane Giraud, also penned a spicy article for The Platform following the attack on Salman Rushdie: The only killers who deserve our respect are those who kill on the page. -

Some content from one of our younger supporters, Tomas O'Brien, a second year law student at Otago University, reflects on our recent Union meeting and the need for everyone to contribute for free speech to meet its potential (this is one you want to read).

If you're looking for some content on free speech from futher abroad, this article in the Atlantic advances a central theme to our work here at the Free Speech Union 'Freedom doesn’t belong to a political party, and it’s not the tool of the powerful; it’s the tool of the powerless.'

Whether its meeting with senior university leaders, holding the Government to account on legislation, representing employees in disputes with censorious bosses, or arguing for free speech in content we release, the Free Speech Union is hard at work.

For the size of our team, we've had massive wins, but we can't do it without you.

Penfold's Fire and Fury is just one example of of those who want to undermine free speech and silence dissent. Our commitment is that we'll stand with you, to be able to use your free speech to argue your case, if you keep standing with us. Would you pitch in today to keep our work going? Whether $50 or $500, this fight takes all of us.  Thank you for your support. 

Jonathan Ayling Spokesperson Free Speech Union www.fsu.nz

P.S. Protecting free speech isn’t free. Unlike so many of the opponents of free speech (like the media with their $55 million slush fund), we are not funded by the Government or politicians. We’re relying on your support.

Saturday 27 August 2022

Trevor Mallard's terminally-ill victims

Check through the archives and you will find that there is no one more in favour of voluntary euthanasia.

And I mean VOLUNTARY - if people make their own decisions and take responsibility for their decision.

I was never in favour of any top-down system coming from governments, especially the fascism we are living through.

That only leads to the sort of outrage that is described here/

See this:


EXCLUSIVE: Disabled and terminally ill among first victims of Trevor Mallard, but media refused to tell the story

By Henoch Kloosterboer, Editor of The Defender.

Defend NZ

With the welcome departure of former Speaker of the House Trevor Mallard, there’s been a lot of talk about the public scandals that have plagued his tenure.

Everything from the highly questionable use of trespass notices, to dubious accusations against Parliamentary staffers, to his turning loudspeakers and sprinkler systems on protesting citizens.

There is one very serious incident, however, that you probably aren’t aware of – that #DefendNZ were one of the first victims of Trevor Mallard’s authoritarian excesses at Parliament.

Despite our best efforts at the time, the media refused to report what had happened to us, and so our story has remained largely untold to the public until now.

Back in May 2019, the second reading of the then End of Life Choice Bill, attempting to legalise assisted suicide and euthanasia, was due to take place in Parliament.

In preparation for this, we collaborated with a sitting MP to host a special event at Parliament which involved our #DefendNZ heroes – courageous Kiwis with terminal illnesses and disabilities who became public ambassadors to highlight the harms the Bill would bring about.

The day after this event, when the second reading of the Bill was thought to be highly likely, we were invited back to Parliament by a sitting MP. This is when we came face-to-face with the unforgiving wrath of Trevor Mallard.

Our small party of mainly disabled and terminally ill New Zealanders were not there to protest, disrupt or engage in illegal activity. We were simply there to attend pre-arranged meetings with MPs, observe proceedings from the public galleries of Parliament, and be silent advocates for vulnerable Kiwis.

We faithfully adhered to the rules which had been stipulated to us, including the fact that we were not to wear our #DefendNZ shirts in the public gallery. (The shirts simply said, “Vote no to assisted suicide”)

Over the course of the day, we began to sense that even our silent presence was becoming too challenging for the pro-euthanasia MPs, and around lunchtime, we discovered just how cruel those in power can be to a dissenting presence.

Without any prior warning, a Parliamentary security guard began rudely demanding that we leave the Parliament building immediately under the urgent order of Trevor Mallard.

Remember, we had not done anything illegal, we had not done anything disruptive, and we were there as guests of a sitting MP.

None of that mattered to Trevor Mallard, who quickly appeared in person to reinforce his eviction of a small and peaceful group of disabled and terminally ill New Zealand citizens.

I watched stunned, as Trevor Mallard stood over a woman with terminal brain cancer, and berated her with a raised voice, threatening her with a trespass notice as she sat in her wheelchair, made powerless and with eyes watering.

Here’s how disability advocate, and Anglican priest John Fox, who was one of those evicted, described the incident at the time:

“We were wearing our ‘Vote No to Assisted Suicide’ t-shirts (or some of us were) in the Parliamentary Cafe and the hallways: (we knew we couldn't wear them in the Public Gallery and we didn't). We were clustered around the lift because there are only two disabled lifts in Parliament; they're tiny, and we had a bunch of wheelchairs… Next thing you know, two pro-assisted-dying Ministers are complaining that we are there and accosting people, (which we didn't, we spoke to the people who spoke to us, or people we knew) so security arrived. They shouted at us (really), they were extremely aggressive, and refused to tell us what we did wrong, then they got increasingly demanding and aggressive, a couple of us on meds got upset, and demanded to know why he was being so aggressive and confrontational, and the wonderful [terminally ill] Vicki Walsh demanded to know why he was being so angry. 

Then the Speaker [Trevor Mallard] appeared and said we're not allowed political t-shirts, and that we shouldn't have been in the Cafe. We said we were invited specially, followed all the instructions we were given (we did, I was there, we were extremely careful to be respectful), the security man had another go at us because Ministers have complained, we asked why, and he explained to us [later, after we were escorted] outside that the rules have changed because of March 15 [Christchurch Mosque attack] and no one told us. We said that wasn't our fault, I explained to him the physical logistics of negotiating the damned difficult building and that we did nothing wrong, he said he didn't really care. 

In essence, the other team got sick of looking at us.” 

After the eviction: Vicki Walsh can be seen in her wheelchair bottom left, and Kylee Black in her wheelchair bottom right. Rev. John Fox can be seen at left of the security guard with Henoch Kloosterboer at right. This photo was taken after we had been removed. We are seen here outside Parliament’s entrance.

After the incident, Vicki Walsh (RIP), contacted her local MP to alert him to what had happened. She received this reply:

“I have now heard the whole story and am a little sorry I wasn’t there with you as I think you were done an injustice by our speaker.”

In the immediate aftermath of our unjustified eviction from Parliament under threat of trespass notice by Trevor Mallard, we felt we had to alert the public to what had happened.

The forceful removal of peaceful and non-disruptive New Zealand citizens from our nation’s Parliamentary buildings was too serious an incident to stay silent about.

As we were being forcefully removed by no less than three security guards, I immediately made phone contact with journalists from 1NEWS and the NZ Herald, both of whom indicated that the Parliamentary press gallery was aware that something serious had just transpired in Parliament.

They also told me that they were keen to come down and interview us, but they would just need to clear it with their editors first.

An hour later, after hearing nothing further from either journalist, I contacted them for a second time. It was then that I was told that their editors had refused them permission to report on the incident.

I was dumbfounded, as I can’t ever recall any other incident involving peaceful advocates, who were at Parliament by invitation, having been then threatened with trespass notices and evicted by the Speaker of the House. 

To say that this wasn’t something even mildly newsworthy beggars all belief.

At that stage, we chose not to take the issue any further because we didn’t want to create a sideshow, nor undermine our profoundly important advocacy work for vulnerable New Zealanders.

Don’t forget, the End of Life Choice Bill was still alive in Parliament at that stage, and we did not want to take any course of action that would jeopardise the possibility of a good outcome for those Kiwis the Bill would harm if it became law.

Later that same year, the Francis Review, which was an investigation into bullying at Parliament, was published. Among other things, it found the following:

“Bullying & harassment are systemic [at Parliament].” “Unacceptable conduct is too often tolerated or normalised.” “There is low accountability, particularly for Members, who face few sanctions for harmful behaviour.” “The identities of many accused are an open secret, and there are alleged serial offenders.”

We can definitely attest to having been targeted by that toxic culture, and it wasn’t good.

You might be wondering why we’ve chosen to speak publicly about our story now.

No, it’s not simply the fact that Trevor Mallard is departing, and it’s not an attempt to re-litigate old grievances. 

Instead, the important issue here is that of the public accountability of those who are elected to serve us in public office. 

This was just one of many incidents where the media performance during the passage of the assisted suicide and euthanasia Bill was highly questionable. 

One of the untold stories of that whole period was the way in which some journalists and media outlets went from being unbiased observers of the parliamentary process, to biased advocates and cheerleaders of a Bill.

This might have suited the supporters of legalised euthanasia, but it resulted in an extremely bad outcome for the people of New Zealand.

Even if you are pro-assisted suicide, the final End of Life Choice Act we ended up with has some very serious flaws in it. This means that vulnerable New Zealanders are now at greater risk of a wrongful death than they were before this Act was passed.

These flaws could, and more than likely would, have been addressed if the media had maintained a proper standard of journalistic ethics and ensured a greater degree of accountability.

The media’s decision to turn a blind eye to our unjust treatment at the hands of Speaker Mallard was just one example of many questionable media actions during that period.

Trevor Mallard may be departing Parliament, but the issues that allowed him to operate with impunity for many years while in office, culminating in the incidents of the last 12 months, remain unaddressed.

This is precisely why the public accountability aspect of the work we are engaged in at #DefendNZ is so fundamentally important.

If we can’t rely on the fourth estate to ensure a level playing field for vulnerable Kiwis, then it’s up to us to do our best to be a beacon of light, shining the uncomfortable light of accountability at the times and places where it is most needed.

Friday 26 August 2022

New Zealand is East Germany

Democracy is dead  dead as a dodo

But Cindy ain't no Erich Honecker. As dictator she's pretty pathetic

I woke up this morning to the following news:

I also picked this up. 

How ever would I know what is being talked about here because there will be nothing in the NZ media. 

The fascist revolution will not be televised.

23rd of August was the day NZ lost its free speech. Both bills to do with the bill of rights and hate speech have been amended in to the Terrorism Act 2002. Meaning any speech deemed to cause ''fear'' in the public can be charged as Terrorism.

— Aaron 17 Livingston 🇮🇱 🇳🇿 🇺🇸 (@RealALivingston) August 25, 2022

Does anyone remember a liberal adage?

"I disagree with you (in fact I disagree strongly) but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"

Quite good, wasn't it?

Quite good, wasn't it? 

These people are not my ideological fellow travellers but they have stood up for what is right and have my respect.

The last nails have been driven into the coffin that contains what was once NZ democracy


Yesterday, Vinny Eastwood and Billy te Kahika were found guilty, I believe by a judge (no jury) of disobeying government regulations and gathering for a protest against the lockdown despite the fact that a much larger group (Black Lives Matter) were able to meet without masks or social distancing unharassed. 

They have yet to return for sentencing.

Here is a documentary about the day made by Vinny Eastwood

The Day Democracy Died, 18 August 2021, The Arrest of Billy TK & Vinny Eastwood

Here is the captive, lamestream media reporting.

The founder and hosts of a far-right media outlet, Kelvyn Alp​ and Hannah Spierer​, have reportedly been arrested and charged with distributing an “objectionable publication”.

A police spokesperson said two people, a man and woman, were arrested on Thursday night in Christchurch.

They did not name Alp and Spierer, but confirmed that arrests had been made following online posts saying Alp and Spierer had been detained.

In a statement, police said the two people were also arrested for failing to allow officers to search their computer.

They were bailed and will appear in the Christchurch District Court on August 31.

From Telegram


Thanks everybody for the amazing love and support. They’re obviously feeling the results of a rude awakening and not a Great Awakening, however they’re both in good spirits. 

Please note they are not to have any connections to social media but the team have verbally  fedback the overwhelming support shown by you all. (Including the trolls taking time out to air their perspective. All views accepted but we must remember, it’s facts and evidence only). If you can’t back it up, then don’t post it up. 😉💁🏻‍♀️

As you know, CSM is a peoples’ platform, for the people, by the people and this runs on donations only. Kelvyn and Hannah now face a legal challenge on top of still wanting to maintain their bi-weekly show,  so please jump onto the website and hit the donate button if you wish to support in any way. They’d greatly appreciate it. Again, they’re restricted from seeing any of your messages across all platforms but feel your support regardless of this issue. 

A statement will be released today sometime. We are the 99%. 💜💓💜 🙏🏻


Here is a reaction

How Exceedingly Primitive......

 There are a small handful of brave people willing to speak out. Looking at the comments on Counterspin chat I was pretty disgusted. These poeple are brave in speaking Truth to Power which is more than I can say for the keyboard warriors who would scatter in the face of any threat. 

Here are two heroes

Here is Hannah talking to another fearless fighter, Monica Smit

This was an interesting response from across the other side of the world, from Scotland.

Counterspin media what's going on?

So, it is all about "objectionable material" that is the video livestream from He Who Cannot Be Named (Brendon Tarrant). 

I doubt that the people who ordered this action (and I can almost guarantee that the orders for this action came from the 9th Floor of the Beehive) are less worried about the effects the footage might have on sensitive souls and rather more on what it reveals - such as this was NOT the action of a lone gunman. 

He had accomplices. 

Who were they?

People imagine that the destruction of democracy began with covid. 

Far from it.

Back when this happened Max Igan did a bit of irrefutable analysis of the video which I recommend revisiting

Here is his video.



People have extremely short memories. You could not escape the most hateful people anywhere talking about "hate speech". 

Prominent at the time was ratface presstitute, Paddy Gower imagining he could equal the combined intellect of Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux who destroyed him in this lamentable "interview"

Full interview: Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux | Newshub