Key Points and Questions that arise from this letter:
11,005 MOH workers were granted an mRNA vaccine exemption.
On average, there were 10–11 exemptions for every 103 applications.
The basis on which these exemptions were granted needs clarification.
What level of investigation was conducted before granting these bulk exemptions?
Most patient applications for vaccine exemptions were declined, raising concerns about potential favouritism.
So, were there instances of favouritism in the granting of exemptions?
Rumours suggest that many staff within the Ministry of Health and the Accident Compensation Commission were either unvaccinated or refused vaccination due to their awareness of ongoing harm.
In light of these points, it raises the question of whether those who were pressuring others to get vaccinated, while causing harm to reputations, businesses, while dividing families, and communities, granted themselves exemptions from the very requirements they were imposing on everyone else?
All the while, people like Sarah, were being pressured to take more jabs: https://www.garymoller.com/post/an-interview-with-sarah
Is this unacceptable? Is this not criminal in nature? Tell me what you think in the Comments Section below.
I was sent this letter:
So, officially, there were probably 39 unvaccinated workers, but the wording of the FOI request was such that thousands of "exempted" employees may have technically been excluded from Welsh's response. Let's hope there was no lying involved. Anyway, it then begs the question of where are these thousands of MOH staff who were exempted? Have I got this right?
Thousands of MOH workers were granted exemptions:
Thousands of MOH Workers Were Granted Covid Vaccine Exemptions," according to Dr Guy Hatchard, who sheds light on a concerning revelation. The Ministry of Health (MOH) has granted vaccine exemptions to hundreds of its key staff members, totalling a staggering 11,005 exemptions. This revelation challenges the prevailing narrative that Ministry of Health staff were predominantly vaccinated, exposing a significant number who remained unvaccinated. Let's delve into the details and implications of this revelation.
Unveiling Misleading Media Coverage:
The media coverage surrounding the MOH vaccine exemptions has been misleading, creating a false impression of widespread vaccination among Ministry of Health staff. The reality, however, is quite different. Hatchard's article highlights the discrepancy between the reported 81 exemptions and the actual number of exemptions granted. This misleading coverage has inadvertently reinforced the belief in a "safe and effective" government narrative, leaving many dutifully vaccinated individuals unaware of the significant number of unvaccinated staff treating them.
Serious Adverse Effects and Motivations:
To understand the motivations behind the vaccine exemptions, Hatchard draws attention to a 2018 paper by Drew Weissman. The paper outlined serious adverse effects observed in prior mRNA vaccine trials, including inflammation, autoimmune diseases, and blood coagulation issues. These risks, which were known to many medical personnel, researchers, and regulators, raise questions about the motivations behind widespread experimentation on human populations and the resulting suppression of vaccine risks.
Government Handling and Personal Health Choices:
Criticism is directed towards the government's handling of vaccine exemptions, particularly the stark contrast between the exemptions granted to MOH employees and the denial of exemptions to the public. The centralisation of the exemption approval process designed to limit exemptions for everyone except privileged MOH employees, raises concerns about fairness and transparency. Hatchard's article also highlights the control exerted over personal health choices, with families torn apart by calculated disinformation and the creation of a two-tier society based on vaccination status.
The Need for Change and Protection:
In light of these revelations, Hatchard emphasises the need for change. He calls for the entrenchment of the NZ Bill of Rights as a constitutional principle to safeguard against future government overreach. The integrity of political leaders is questioned, as the refusal to discuss these issues raises doubts about their commitment to addressing the concerns raised by the vaccine exemptions. Hatchard concludes by urging those aware of the extent of the problem to speak up publicly, making sure that the truth is heard and acknowledged.
Conclusion:
Dr Guy Hatchard's article sheds light on the controversial topic of MOH vaccine exemptions, revealing a significant number of unvaccinated staff within the Ministry of Health. The misleading media coverage, the potential risks associated with mRNA vaccines, and the motivations behind suppressing vaccine risks raise important questions about transparency, personal health choices, and the need for change. As we navigate the complexities of the Covid-19 pandemic, it's crucial to have open and honest discussions to ensure the well-being and safety of everyone.
We must have a full and open inquiry into what's happened in NZ, as promised by New Zealand First.
To be clear, this wont be for MOH staff themselves, but a wider health sector interpretation. There were only 1,000 to 1,500 MOH employees around this time from memory (in total).
This dark chapter in NZ is not over By a long shot. A full independent inquiry with no individuals spared is required, and in my book, is another compelling reason to vote NZ First!