Dear Ministry of Health,

The NZ government said that it would assume responsibility / liability for harms arising from vaccination. That is to say, it waived the manufacturers liability, and assumed the manufacturers liability for itself.

I am wondering what NZ's rate of adverse effects are, compared to USA and Australia.

The NZ government also instructed vaccinators to vaccinate differently from the instructions supplied by the manufacturers (e.g., with regards to how many doses per vial, how much vaccine per dose, the age of the recipients).

Please can you inform me on the government's position as to whether the government was doing a scientific experiment on people who were mandated to comply or whether the government thinks that it's manner or way of vaccinating was not an experiment at all.

I am wondering how much money the NZ Government has set aside to be distributed amongst those who have been harmed by adverse outcomes that could be due to the way in which the NZ government

I am wondering when the settlement will be finalised and the money actually paid out to people who were harmed (e.g., psychological harm, at least, by being forced to participate in a science experiment where the NZ government ordered vaccines to be administered contrary to manufacturers instructions).

I do believe that that is what is meant by the NZ government taking responsibility / liability away from the manufacturers. They denied the people of New Zealand access to the US courts to settle the claims in that jurisdiction. But then, the greatest harms to the people were not done by the US manufacturers they were done by the NZ government.

I suppose that is why it is not responsible for the developed world to supply to New Zealand. The government is presently engaged in a mis-information campaign instructing people to deploy Rapid Antigen Tests in violation of the manufacturers instructions, again.

Other counties have been involved in returning things (face masks and rapid antigen tests) because they did not pass independent quality control measures. For example, it was not possible to obtain a fit-test on some face-masks, or the false positive rate of rapid antigen test result was deemed unacceptable.

If it turns out that the NZ government is obtaining a great many false-positive test results in order to justify lock-down policies and, more in particular, to justify removing from public office medical doctors, nurses, teachers, etc for non-compliance with government directive then this is very concerning.

You only need 2 government employed 'doctors' to sign off that euthanasia is right for you (and you wouldn't last 6 months without food in your government detention camp).

What are we supposed to think when you:

- Refuse to get a student's work to an external examiner to be externally examined for the qualification the student applied to be enrolled in, in order to prevent and prohibit timely completion of the qualification

- Refuse to enrol students in Medicine (or not) on the basis of their objective rank order score determined by the algorithm that was published for the purposes of accountability.

- Refuse to pay your workers. Students are forced to do 'work placements' where they do all the work while paying the University. They pay the University. They pay the University. They pay the University. Then their visas expire and they are deported with no Degree.

- Refuse to pay your lawyers. The judges are not willing and / or able to find in the interests of justice or fairness. They will not award costs to lawyers who bring good cases before the courts. They act as reverse-robin-hood where they find against the victims in support or defense of perpetrators.

I don't understand how this can be regarded a developed or free nation, at all, when the courts refuse to uphold the law. The judges lack the willingness and / or ability to pass judgment on the claim that was actually brought before them.

When will the euthanasia mandated be rolled out?

Yours faithfully,

Kelly Roe.

Dear Ministry of Health,

I wrote you a new question for the UMAT or UCAT or interview or whatever phoney selection process you have next year.

- You discover that the consultant psychiatrist is raping and torturing patients. What do you do?

1) Join him.
2) Enable him.
3) Follow the process that there is for reporting such things.

Answering 1 means the applicant is 'must have'. Answering 2 means they haven't eliminated themselves with their choices, yet. Answering option 3 is a definite no. That person must be black-listed for any job where they have anything at all to do with vulnerable people.

Yours faithfully,

K Roe

Dear Ministry of Health,

Please tell me about the oxygen deprivation protocols that are used on infants, particularly at the Grafton teaching hospital.

I know we are supposed to think that alcohol abuse is responsible for the gamma baby production factory that is New Zealand but it is important to look at what the Government Employees are doing when it comes to what would be internationally recognised as brain-injury-inducing oxygen deprivation for infants.

Yours faithfully,

K Roe