Sustainable development

Was the NZ abortion law changed to meet a UN sustainable goal?

While the rest of the world’s governments are dealing with Covid-19, the NZ government pushed through the Abortion Amendment Act.  It’s an extreme abortion bill that there’s no public mandate for – you’ll see why in a minute.

It didn’t need to be changed – as the law stands, women can get abortions up to 20 weeks, and it’s easy to get in NZ – it’s pretty much ‘abortion on demand.’

The changes are horrific:

  • Abortion up to birth
  • No pain relief as the fetus is being dismembered
  • No life saving treatment for a baby born alive. Yes, infanticide is now legal.

Abortion NZ

I believe our abortion laws were liberalised in keeping with the demands of the UN.  It’s right here on their ‘Sustainable Developments Page,’ as part of Agenda 2030.  Population control is a UN development goal and Jacinda Adern wants to tick all the boxes she can while she’s in power.

access-to-legal-abortion-services-needed

Source: UN Sustainable Development Goals – Access to legal abortion services needed, to prevent 47,000 women dying each year – UN rights experts

In accordance with this, the NZ government stated they wanted to “remove abortion from the Crimes Act,” so I read the Act, and I found that abortion is only a crime when it’s procured illegally, as in a backstreet abortion.  (Section 183 – 187A of the Criminal Act for procurement.)

Currently, this law stands to protect NZ women from unregistered abortionists – but the government has now removed this protection, because the tightening of the definition of ‘health practitioner’ to doctor, midwife or obstetric nurse was defeated in the second reading of the bill.

So now, it’s legal to go to an unregistered abortionist.  Is this fulfilling the requirement?  Will Jacinda get a big fat tick on her sustainable development report card from the UN for this?  If the UN was involved, was this a suitable goal for New Zealand?

A sane society would offer a choice to women.  Women could be sheltered, paid to give birth, and have the child adopted out – but because there’s no statutory definition of fetuses or embryos as “unborn children” within New Zealand law, the evil people in power have mandated it’s okay to rip a live human fetus apart or leave a baby to die in a bucket.

I never thought I’d see the day when a NZ government would hold human life in such contempt.

Calves have more protection.  On 1st June 2015, a new law came into effect stopping farmers from inducing cows and killing the calf who wouldn’t survive being born too early.  This practice was considered “inhumane and cruel” by the MP’s promoting the change.  Unborn calves are now protected from this.

Green party logic

Also, the Whanganui River, the river that flows through my old home town, has been made “a legal person.”  That philosophy fits right in with ‘Gaia,’ but having children does not.

The contempt extends to the NZ public.

The public outcry has been ignored by the government and media.  The protest marches were ignored.

Media

Also ignored were submissions; 90.6% of the submissions were ignored by the parliamentary select committee.  Demonstrations which filled the streets were ignored and under-reported.  When the public clapped in the public gallery after MP Agnes Loheni opposed the bill,  the speaker of the house threatened to have them removed.

“National MP Agnes Loheni is staunchly against the bill and was quick to point out 91.6 percent of the submissions opposed the bill.  She said she was not scaremongering because there was plenty to be alarmed about, and diminishing the life of an unborn baby to the point they were no longer called babies meant humanity had been lost.

“Late-term surgical abortions are nothing short of barbaric,” she said.  “There is nothing kind in it – a truly progressive society protects the rights of all its members down to the smallest and most vulnerable, the unborn child.”

There was huge applause from the public gallery following her speech – prompting Speaker Trevor Mallard to threaten removal if it happened again.”

In desperation, another demonstration against the Abortion Legislation Bill was held at Parliament at the same time as the bill’s second reading, and this time it used graphic visual images.

“Out of respect for post-abortive woman, the pro-life movement has generally resisted using graphic visual photos of aborted babies in public places,” organiser Gina Sunderland said.

”But that’s all about to change.”

But Ardern, who supports the bill, said she was personally against the use of such images.

Instrgram 'welcome to our village wee one'

Jacinda and ger baby Neve. What would her baby’s name have been if she’d been terminated – “Never?”

“I just think that’s not a way to share the legitimate views that other people will have,” Ardern said.

Jacinda Ardern opposed to ‘graphic’ abortion law rally at Parliament

Leighton Baker of New Conservative stated that when Government ministers proclaim discomfort at being shown images of what they seek to legitimise, it proves that they are disconnected from reality and society.

There certainly is a disconnect.

Links

Here’s a handy summary of the amendments to the abortion bill that were all defeated on the second reading.  They show the real agenda of the pro-abortion lot.   Key amendments voted on were:
* requirement for abortion procedures post-20 week to ensure that fetus does not feel pain (as per the Animal Welfare Act which requires vets to ensure that animals don’t feel pain) – DEFEATED
* tightening of definition of ‘health practitioner’ to doctor, midwife or obstetric nurse (to avoid unsafe abortions) – DEFEATED
* abortions post-20 weeks only for extreme circumstances – DEFEATED
* keeping conscientious objection standards the same as they currently are (the bill currently weakens the protections) – DEFEATED
* restricting employment discrimination on grounds of conscience – DEFEATED
* cultural considerations to be considered consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi (woman’s wellbeing protected by recognising her whakapapa and the whanaungatanga responsibilities of her family, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family group) – DEFEATED
* annual reporting of abortion statistics (bill only requires reporting for 18 months after passing!) – DEFEATED

Also, 80 New Zealand MPs voted down the amendment of National MP Simon O’Connor which clarified that a qualified health practitioner who performed an abortion that results in the birth of a child after an attempted abortion has a duty to provide the child with appropriate medical care and treatment, no different than the duty owed to provide medical care and treatment to any other child born.  It was DEFEATED.
Source: Another atrocious day in Parliament, Family First


How’s this for gender-bending crap?  Other proposed amendments, in Green MP Jan Logie’s name, would scrap the 20-week legal test altogether or replace “woman” in the bill with “pregnant woman or other pregnant person.”  The 20 week limit was scrapped but they decided not to include a “pregnant man” in the definition.


Infanticide:  What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.


Opinion shaping: here’s an example of the poor quality of reporting on the issue in NZ – abortion was not a crime.  Abortion no longer a crime in New Zealand as law change passes final reading in Parliament.


NZ PM rushes world’s most extreme abortion legislation into law while country distracted with pandemic

Duckspeak and Agenda 2030

I will be blogging about the UN’s Agenda 2030, focusing mainly on it’s detrimental effects on New Zealand and Australia.  In case you don’t think it’s a thing, here’s Jacinda Adern speaking about fulfilling the goals of Agenda 2030.  Note, there is no mandate from the people of New Zealand for this.  When she says “we” or “New Zealand,” she’s speaking for herself.  

UN SDG review – Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern

But this is a good example of “Duckspeak.”

“There is a word in Newspeak,’ said Syme, ‘I don’t know whether you know it: duckspeak, to quack like a duck.” – George Orwell, 1984

duck-quack

Adern’s minority government was elected to reduce immigration because of concern about New Zealand’s homeless problem.  We have the worst level of homelessness in the developed world.  Instead of doing anything about it – Adern increased the number of refugees and on Christmas 2019, our country was sneakily signed up to the UN’s Global Migration compact, without New Zealanders’ permission.

I am left asking why?

Adern broken promises

In case you think that “giving our country away” is a bit emotive, here’s the page showing the 1.1 million migrants for New Zealand.   Look and decide for yourself.  The source is the UN DESA (The UN ‘Department of Economic and Social Affairs.’)  Now we can see whose interests Jacinda is acting in – and it’s not New Zealand’s.


18 March 2020, further to this post: I’ve just read about a young gun owner in Waikanae who was harrassed by the police. He was asked questions about the New Conservative party: “Do you know what New Conservative’s immigration policy is?”
Do you know any representatives of the New Conservative party?”

Source: https://waikanaewatch.org/2020/03/16/police-continue-to-intimidate-licenced-firearms-owners/

Why was the NZ Police asking about this political party???

Here is New Conservative’s reply about their immigration policy:

New Conservative

 

 

Dear NZ Police Management,

New Zealand is a sovereign nation, and it’s also supposed to be a democratic one. So please find our immigration policy attached.

PS – You are supposed to enforce law, not a political agenda…

#LetsFixThis

Immigration policy

Immigration is central to many parts of New Zealand’s culture, economy, and future prospects. New Conservative believes that there is a balance to be struck between the important benefits that immigration brings and the wellbeing of those who already call New Zealand “home.”

We believe that those who choose to immigrate should embrace New Zealand’s culture and not try and change it.​

New Conservative will ensure there is no acceptance or allowance of Sharia Law, in any expression, as well as any non-constitutional jurisdictional authority, in New Zealand.

The key New Conservative immigration policy is “Net Zero Immigration”. This would be for a period determined by the time taken to ease housing demand, which could be as little as 12 months (student visas and returning New Zealanders excluded).

Long term immigration policy must be based on which occupations will be available/necessary in the future.​

Prioritising immigrants who can add to our economy and not depend on it.​

Working with NZ based non-governmental organisations operating in troubled zones to identify genuine refugees who are more closely aligned with our nation’s values, and fill our refugee quota with these people, rather than accepting the United Nations allotment.

NZ New Conservative

A Digital Identity will be needed by 2030

According to Sustainable Development Goal SDG 16 of the U.N. Agenda 2030 we’re going to need a digital identity.   This high-minded goal doesn’t tell us that, it simply describes itself as:

SDG 16.9“The promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, the provision of access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable institutions at all levels.”

The devil is in the details.  Drilling down a level to target 16.9, the goal is “By 2030 to provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.”

The World Bank states that birth registration alone is not enough. Health treatments need to be tracked, including vaccinations.  It will be needed for banks and households where there’s “more than one family.”
Source: The criterion problem: Measuring the legal identity target in the post-2015 agenda

The World Bank argues that SDG16.9 is “key to attainment of many other SDG goals.”

Note: “What’s the end goal?”  film producer the late Aaron Russo asked his friend Nicholas Rockefeller.  Rockefeller replied, “The end goal is to get everybody chipped.”

You’ll find Russo’s warning at 10:40 on the clip “Rockefeller Reveals 9 11 FRAUD and New World Order to Aaron Russo.

ID2020

So the U.N., Microsoft, the Rockefeller Foundation and a host of other stakeholders came up with ID2020, a program aimed at giving every human on the planet a digital ID, like a fingerprint, in order to keep everyone connected.

ID2020 banner

When I first mentioned ID2020 in my post ID2020, the Global Digital ID I didn’t know it was part of U.N. Agenda 2030.

I should have realised from the weird conference room the stakeholders were meeting in.  I later learned it was a United Nations Council chamber.

On May 18th, 2018 the World Bank Group and the United Nations signed a Strategic Partnership Framework (SPF), which consolidates their joint commitment to cooperate in helping countries implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Microsoft have positioned themselves to spearhead the ID2020 initiative.  The initiative helmed by Bill Gates is aimed at “getting Digital IDs right.”

“As companies are only now defining what a proper, official online ID looks like, ID2020 seeks to help define what a “good” digital ID is. Gates and the Board of the Alliance have a “Certification Mark” that they award to companies and technologies that meet the criteria of being “good” digital ID tech.

Gates

WHAT’S THE CONNECTION TO VACCINATIONS?

The idea behind some of ID2020’s more controversial technologies is a digital ID that can be implanted into someone in chip form. Ostensibly, this is to help homeless people or people in developing countries by giving them access to blockchain-powered identification.

In theory, the practice would have people receiving free vaccinations through the Bill Gates foundation if they have an ID chip implant. In turn, these implants would carry encrypted, blockchain-backed data that allow for easy access to services you can’t normally get without an ID.

It could also help social workers and researchers keep up with who is up-to-date on their vaccinations.”

Source: Medium – IMPLANTABLE DIGITAL ID VACCINATION SYSTEM IN DEVELOPMENT, YIKES?

Would you agree to have a microchip implanted into your body? That’s the question that Microsoft and a group of pharmaceutical companies are asking.

Implantable device

The Microsoft Certification Mark

Governments, NGO’s and charities have been beavering away on technology projects in order to get their Microsoft Certification Mark.

I was wondering why the Red Cross had disbursed only a third of the donated funds to the victims of the Australian bushfires.  Those expensive Agenda 2030 goals and technology projects will no doubt be costing a lot of money and the public would never donate for a thing like this.  I’ll put the links to the Red Cross at the bottom of the page.

The reason I’m picking on them is because the Red Cross has been in the news about the Australian Bush fire donations and I notice they’ve adopted the green-tape of Agenda 2030 in their practices.

The 169 Sustainable Development Targets

The devil really is in these targets, which you can find here and drill down on by clicking on each of the 17 goals.  Why 169, I wondered?

169 = 13 x 13.

Revelation 13 describes the mark of the beast and the deceiver who forces it on the world.  Will we be the generation to contend with the mark we’ve been warned about in the Bible?

Here’s another unwelcome thought: will the mark alter our DNA?  We’re on the cusp of another technological revolution so I believe it’s possible.  I’m mentioning it so we can be aware of it.

Altering Human Genetics Through Vaccination

“The emergence of this Frankenstein technology is paralleled by a shrill push to mandate vaccines, across the board, for both children and adults. The pressure and propaganda are planet-wide.”

Source: Jon Rappoport


Finally, I believe this will lead to a totalitarian state.  If we refuse the ID, we won’t get access to any services.

The Sustainable Development Goals, Identity, and Privacy: Does their implementation risk human rights?

While birth registration is the only form of identification specifically mentioned in SDG 16.9, in the initiatives that have emerged from the goal seem to have barely considered it. Rather, they are concerned about other technologies: the likes of national ID cards, biometrics, and more exotic and untested technologies like blockchain.

“Identity” is an important part of all our lives and having the ability to prove who we are is empowering. Having control over our identity can help not only achieve the necessities of life, but also more fundamental concerns of dignity and autonomy. Implementing SDG 16.9 could be done in a way that does not risk this. Yet, if the push is towards greater implementation of some centralised, unique, insecure, one-size-fits-all identity systems which fail to consider the individual, their needs and rights, it can prove to be the opposite.

ID systems can lead to surveillance, tracking and profiling by states and private companies; they can exclude rather than include; they can limit opportunities and become a tool for control and repression. Without proper consideration, SDG 16.9 could lead to a move against not only the broader Goal 16 for peaceful and sustainable societies, but also be damaging for human rights, and ultimately harm the very people it was intended to help.
Source: Privacy International


The Red Cross

Red Cross Accused of Withholding Millions of Dollars in Donations Meant for Australian Bushfires

COMMENT: Red Cross Using Social Media Spin Doctors To Screw Bushfire Victims

Red Cross director admits that almost $11million from bushfire donations WON’T go to victims and will be used for ‘administration costs’

The Australian Red Cross  – Submission to the Human Rights and Technology project

Red Cross NZ: Red Cross welcomes UN global goals for sustainable development

Former Australian Politician Ann Bressington EXPOSES UN’s AGENDA 21

Have you ever heard of the Hegelian Dialectic?  It’s what the Technocrats use to advance their agenda.  They …

  • create a problem (for instance, “Global Warming” – now called “Climate change”),

transformation

  • cause a reaction,
heads-in-sand

Four hundred Australians protesting their Prime Minister’s stance on global warming, Nov 2014.

  • and present a solution – “Agenda 21” (now metastasized into Agenda2030).

agenda-21

See if you can find it here in Ann Bressington’s speech, where she warns of the effect it is having on Australia.


(Reblogged from Rangitikei Environmental Health Watch)

tenkingdomsbeast“The origins of the environmental movement as we see it began back in 1968 when the Club of Rome was formed.  The Club of Rome has been described as a crisis think tank, which specializes in crisis creation.  The main purpose of this think tank was to formulate a crisis that would unite the world and condition us to the idea of global solutions to local problems.

… … All these dangers, of course, will be caused by human intervention that will require a global response.” That’s the origin of global warming, ladies and gentlemen.

Agenda 21

The words “Agenda 21”, ladies and gentlemen, were never meant to be spoken, and if they were, then of course it would be dismissed as a Conspiracy Theory, because if people knew Agenda 21 and what it stood for, there’s plenty of information out there where they could actually learn what the end game was, and governments didn’t want that to be known.

… Agenda 21 is about controlling every aspect of our lives: How we eat, what we eat, how much we eat, how we move around, food production, the amount of food and where we even live.

… Agenda 21 seeks to establish a mechanism for transferring the wealth from citizens to the Third World. Fear of environmental crisis would be used to create a world government and UN central direction” – Dixy Ray, former Washington State Governor and Asst. Secretary for Oceans and International Environmental & Scientific Affairs.

“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective” – Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chair of the Wildlands Project.

Participating in a UN-advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society.” And here we are. “This segment of our society, who fear One World Government and UN invasion, through which our individual freedoms will be stripped away, would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined the conspiracy by undertaking Agenda 21. So we will call our process something else. We will call it comprehensive planning, or growth management, or Smart Growth. We ended up with Sustainable Development” – J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

“I first stumbled across Agenda 21 in about 2008, and quite frankly, my first reaction was to dismiss what I was reading, because I didn’t believe that any government in Australia would take us down this road. Then I began to see a legislative pattern emerging in Parliament which concerned me greatly, and I also […]

via Former Australian Politician Ann Bressington EXPOSES UN’s AGENDA 21 — Rangitikei Enviromental Health Watch

 

 

Signs from the Papacy

Does lightning strike twice?

When Roman Emperor Nero committed suicide in AD 68, a 120 foot high painting of him in the gardens of Maius, four kilometers away, was destroyed by a bolt of lightning  … on the same day.

 

Lightning strikes twice

Nero was infamously known as the Emperor who “fiddled while Rome burned.”  He blamed the Christians for Rome burning, and had many of them thrown to the wild beasts or crucified. He also burned them to death at night, where they served as ‘lighting’ in his gardens, while he mingled among the watching crowds.  It is this brutal persecution which immortalized Nero as the first Antichrist in the eyes of the Christian church.

Emperor-Ratzinger

The lightning bolt is associated with Lucifer, who Jesus saw fall from heaven like lightning.  It’s also a symbol for Zeus (who is the same entity as Lucifer).  The symbol was used in the swastika (turn the Z’s around) and in the Waffen SS.

Which brings us to the modern-day Roman Emperor.  When the last Pope suddenly resigned, a lightning bolt hit St Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican repeatedly.

I think there’s more to that sudden resignation than we’re being told.  But I don’t think Ratzinger went to Hollywood.

Cool Pope

Pope Francis, the latest Roman Emperor, is very popular.   He looks gentler and softer than the previous Pope.

Here’s Pope Francis being promoted in this kid’s cartoon by Fox.  But see the lightning bolts on his sunglasses?  Interesting.  My daughter tells me I’m seeing too much into that, she says the lightning bolts are simply used in cartoons to denote reflections.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTC_yvYdfNE

The sign of the hammer and sickle

The Pope will be addressing the U.S. congress on the day the French Foreign Minister warned we’d have ‘climate chaos’.  The next day the Pope will be addressing the U.N. when it launches its ‘sustainable development’ agenda for the world.

Sustainable development” is a communist buzzword that means population control, which is not what the Pope should be about, unless he’s changing the Roman Catholic church’s stance on family planning, amongst other things.  Religion should have nothing to do with Agenda 21.

No wonder president Morales of Bolivia, himself an Atheist Marxist, clearly seemed to think the Pope would be pleased with a hammer and sickle crucifix.

After The Pope has spoken at the UN and Congress this month, he leaves for Rome on the eve of the last blood moon.  I see a bad moon arising.

Let’s see what he’s got planned.  He may look like a lamb but he’s speaking like a dragon.

pope-francis-attacks-capitalism-demands-world-share-wealth-socialsim-now-the-end-beginsGreen is the New Red