Guest

Jacinda Ardern

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know if there has been , and where we can find full disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest, of shareholdings in Pfizer that the Director General of Health Ashley Bloomfield has?

Ditto any shareholdings Stuart Bloomfield , Counties Manuaku/ Waitemata DHBs may have in IT companies they have key roles in?

Are these 2 men, and other Bloomfields in key Healthcare roles related?

Who did they use as Character References?

Who signed off and oversees their contracts?

If Politicians have to declare their Interests in their roles, shouldn't those who have overtaken their roles to 'run the country during Covid19 have to do the same?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, meomy said:

Does anyone know if there has been , and where we can find full disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest, of shareholdings in Pfizer that the Director General of Health Ashley Bloomfield has?

Ditto any shareholdings Stuart Bloomfield , Counties Manuaku/ Waitemata DHBs may have in IT companies they have key roles in?

Are these 2 men, and other Bloomfields in key Healthcare roles related?

Who did they use as Character References?

Who signed off and oversees their contracts?

If Politicians have to declare their Interests in their roles, shouldn't those who have overtaken their roles to 'run the country during Covid19 have to do the same?

 

OMFG. Get a life? (Assuming every sentence has to end with a question mark?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Idolmite said:

OMFG. Get a life? (Assuming every sentence has to end with a question mark?)

Seems to ask a lot of very relevant questions. Most here are being proven right as time goes by , but you are being left behind 😐 it’s like the ad years ago with the smoker always trailing behind lighting up another Fag. C’mon Mites get up 😯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Gruff said:

Seems to ask a lot of very relevant questions. Most here are being proven right as time goes by , but you are being left behind 😐 it’s like the ad years ago with the smoker always trailing behind lighting up another Fag. C’mon Mites get up 😯

I'm watching you in my rear view mirror right now Gruff. There is nobody on this board I need to catch up with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Idolmite said:

I'm watching you in my rear view mirror right now Gruff. There is nobody on this board I need to catch up with. 

Hey as long as you feel confident that’s a win 😀 ignorance is Bliss 😍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gruff said:

Hey as long as you feel confident that’s a win 😀 ignorance is Bliss 😍

Well it appears to have served you well over the past few years 🤣 Especially in the days when you were a Hundy devotee, until he went just a little, or maybe a lot, too far. At least you had to good sense to stop pursuing the big lie publicly, even if you still believe the election was stolen privately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Idolmite said:

I'm watching you in my rear view mirror right now Gruff. There is nobody on this board I need to catch up with. 

There’s a reason the rear view mirror is smaller than the windscreen Idol….most of us prefer to look forward…..😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Idolmite said:

Well it appears to have served you well over the past few years 🤣 Especially in the days when you were a Hundy devotee, until he went just a little, or maybe a lot, too far. At least you had to good sense to stop pursuing the big lie publicly, even if you still believe the election was stolen privately. 

Dont have a very Strong opinion on any ‘stolen election’ but given what’s transpiring wouldn’t be at all surprised Mitemeister, certainly thought 100 was in the Ballpark but sometimes he ended up in the Stands 😆 Keep checking you’re rear view mirror , only a matter of time before you run off the road  🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dividing Our Nation

 

In his iconic book Free to Choose, Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman provided an insight into human aspiration:

“A free society releases the energies and abilities of people to pursue their own objectives. Freedom means diversity but also mobility. It preserves the opportunity for today’s disadvantaged to become tomorrow’s privileged and, in the process, enables everyone, from top to bottom, to enjoy a fuller and richer life”.

As a pioneering society, New Zealand embraced freedom. New immigrants flocked here seeking a better life for themselves and their children, many escaping from countries with hierarchical class systems. In our equal opportunity society, it didn’t matter where you were born or who your parents were. If you worked hard and did your best you could get ahead.

Times have changed. It seems we have regressed almost two hundred years in the last twelve-months. Now who your ancestors are does matter – according to Jacinda Ardern’s Government. The consequences will be severe and long-lasting.

As Once Were Warriors author Alan Duff, a strong critic of Maori tribalism, explained in 2006:

“A Stone Age societal model patently does not work in this modern world. When are we as a nation, starting with the Government, going to say enough is enough? To continue with the collective, whanau, hapu, iwi societal model is a fatal mistake. For in not developing individuality we continue down the declining slope of anonymity in a collective. Of no one willing to make decisions, especially unpopular decisions, for fear of standing out from the crowd, going against the collective will. Individuality is as fundamental to a society’s development as property rights.”

Former US President Barack Obama was also an outspoken critic of tribalism:

“Ethnic-based tribal politics has to stop. It is rooted in the bankrupt idea that the goal of politics or business is to funnel as much of the pie as possible to one’s family, tribe, or circle with little regard for the public good. It stifles innovation and fractures the fabric of the society. Instead of opening businesses and engaging in commerce, people come to rely on patronage and payback as a means of advancing. Instead of unifying the country to move forward on solving problems, it divides neighbour from neighbour.”

Tribalism is insidious and destructive. It divides families and communities, and it is dividing our nation. It’s also a class system that enriches the iwi elite, while leaving the most vulnerable mired in disadvantage. Yet this is exactly what our Labour Government has embraced and it is accelerating the pace since gaining an absolute majority in October last year.

The Prime Minister’s masterplan is outlined in He Puapua, a document prepared in 2019, under the guise of implementing the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. That report is a blueprint for the tribal control of New Zealand by 2040.

While the Government claims He Puapua is not policy, its objectives are being rolled out now.

One key aim is to introduce “tikanga” – Maori customary values and practices – into the law. He Puapua states, “Tikanga Maori will be functioning and applicable across Aotearoa under Maori (national, iwi, hapu, whanau) authority and also, where appropriate under Crown authority.”

A leading advocate is Justice Joe Williams. Appointed to the Supreme Court by Labour in 2019, the former head of the Waitangi Tribunal delivered a lecture entitled “Decolonising the Law” to the Otago Law School in April, that promoted the concept.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator former Judge, barrister, and law lecturer Anthony Willy, has examined the address and questions the wisdom of introducing ‘tikanga’ into the law:

“I can find nothing in the Judge’s lecture which defines what tikanga is or that it has anything to do with the law; indeed he says it is impossible to do so. At rock bottom the law is all about the resolution of disputes between citizens, and between citizen and the state. There is much talk in the Judge’s address of community practices by which the tribes historically regulated their dealings but when it is all boiled down seems to amount to no more than some tribal elder remembering back 160 years in the oral tradition, and what he now thinks were the solutions adopted by the tribes in 1840 to the problems of that time.

“Apart from the insurmountable evidential difficulties inherent in this approach it fails to recognise that the problems of the tribes in New Zealand in 1840 are not those confronting them today and whatever the practices were then they cannot provide an answer to the complex forces at work today.

“That said the insuperable problem which the Judge does not confront is that the law must be certain, impartial, and knowable in advance by all citizens. Ignorance of the law be it civil or criminal is no excuse but, if a citizen cannot know when, or if a strain of tikanga will be relevant to some proposed conduct until some tribal elder in litigation says it is or is not then there is no certainty and no impartial rule of law and the law collapses.”

Another He Puapua objective is ‘Maori ownership’ of ‘takutai moana’ – the foreshore and seabed: “There will be an enlarged iwi/hapu/whanau estate supported by increased return of Crown lands and waters, including takutai moana, to Maori ownership.”

By prioritising tikanga in the law, that objective is now being realised.

With 200 Marine and Coastal Area Act claims covering the entire New Zealand coastline currently before the High Court, Justice Churchman’s decision in April on the first case – Edwards – which awarded tribal applicants ‘shared’ Customary Marine Title to a 40 km stretch of Bay of Plenty coastline, is having a significant precedent effect.

While claimants under the Act are required to satisfy two stringent property rights tests: firstly, that they have held their claimed area in accordance with tikanga, and secondly, that use of their area has been exclusive and without substantial interruption since 1840 – the Judge ruled that tikanga takes precedent over common law requirements.

The influence of this Churchman decision can be seen in last week’s finding in the Rangataua claim for an area of the Tauranga Harbour:

“Justice Powell ruled that to hold an area ‘in accordance with tikanga’ did not require a proprietary ownership in the western legal sense. Instead, evidence of a group’s use and occupation would be judged on the basis of their own tikanga. As to the second part of the test, Justice Powell found that ‘exclusive use’ of an area did not require an iwi to prove that no other groups had used the bay. Instead, it was enough to show that they had the authority to do so under their own tikanga.”

Essentially, the Churchman decision has not only lowered the bar for what constitutes tikanga evidence, but it has also overridden the intention of Parliament, since, at the time, the National Government had assured the public that few tribal groups would satisfy the stringent property rights tests in the law, and that no more than 10 percent of the coast would end up under tribal control.

The reality is that if the Churchman ruling stands, private tribal corporations will end up controlling most of New Zealand’s coastline.

The Churchman decision has now been appealed to the Court of Appeal by an Interested Party in the Edwards case, who was opposing the claim in the public interest. But their right to appeal the judgment is being challenged by claimants. A decision on whether the Churchman appeal can proceed is expected before Christmas.

If the decision to prioritise tikanga over common law property rights in these coastal claims is not overturned, the Marine and Coastal Area Act itself should be urgently repealed and Crown ownership of the foreshore and seabed restored – I am calling on ACT and National to say that’s what they would do should they become the government after the next election.

By embracing Maori tikanga – which differs from hapu to hapu and iwi to iwi – the judiciary is radically altering the meaning of the law, and undermining the foundation of certainty and codification on which the whole legal system is based.

Another key concept that underpins He Puapua, is the claim that Maori are ‘Treaty partners’ with the Crown. Since it is constitutionally impossible for a subject to be partner to a Sovereign, the concept is bogus, yet it is being given official authority by the Prime Minister.

This Treaty partnership fiction is driving the Three Waters proposal to give control of billions of dollars of freshwater, wastewater, and stormwater assets to iwi.

In health, it underpins the planned abolition of District Health Boards, since a Maori Health Authority that gives Treaty partners veto rights over the entire health system can only operate in a centralised framework.

Meanwhile, new guidelines from Pharmac reveal that as Treaty partners, “Maori are the priority population”. Essentially, those with Maori ethnicity will now be guaranteed priority treatment ahead of others with greater health needs.

In education, the Tertiary Education Commission’s proposed changes to the Performance Based Research Fund – to better reflect the Maori partnership agenda – not only strengthen race-based incentives for Maori, but they change the focus from ‘research excellence’ to ‘cultural inclusiveness’.

In conservation, an Options Developments Group set up by the Department of Conservation to better recognise the ‘Treaty partnership’ recommends “the delegation, transfer and devolution of functions and powers within the conservation system to tangata whenua”.

One significant policy change still in the pipeline is the Government’s response to the Waitangi Tribunal’s Wai 262 report, which categorises as Maori ‘taonga’ a wide range of ‘treasures’ including intellectual property rights, genetics, and all living species in the country – both native and introduced. In 2020, $6.2 million was allocated to develop a Treaty partnership programme to ensure Maori ‘participate in, benefit from and make decisions’ over anything identified ‘taonga’.   

Scrutinising the bogus claim that Maori are Treaty partners with the Crown – that is being used by Jacinda Ardern’s Government to justify the transfer of significant public resources and power to Maoridom’s elite – is off limits to all media who receive funding from the Government’s $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund.

The reason is that under condition three, all fund recipients are required to “Actively promote the principles of Partnership, Participation and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi acknowledging Maori as a Te Tiriti partner”.

In Austria, Chancellor Sebastian Kurz recently resigned over allegations public money was used to buy favourable media coverage for his party’s policies.

It’s surely not too much of a stretch to apply the same principles here as there is a direct link between the funding and the promotion of Government policy.

With the Fourth Estate effectively silenced by Labour, it’s now up to every New Zealander to alert others about what’s going on. Only when everyone who is concerned “does” something to spread the word – whether sharing information around their networks, talking to family and friends, contacting MPs and councillors, writing letters to newspapers, calling talkback, delivering fliers, using social media- will the message start to hit home.

Collectively we not only need to call the partnership agenda a fraud, but we also need to end the insult of being defined by race.

We should demand that New Zealand follows the lead of European nations and removes race from our Statute books, so we too can become a ‘colourblind’ society, where everyone is treated as equals under the law, and support is provided on the basis of need not race.

Removing all references to ‘ethnicity’ from legislation and regulation would stop He Puapua, the Maori Health AuthorityThree Waters, Maori seats in local government – and Parliament – and all other race-based initiatives.  

With all of this in mind, George Orwell had it right – when asked whether the nightmarish future depicted in his novel 1984 could become a reality, he said: “Don’t let it happen. It depends on you.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2021 at 10:42 PM, Gruff said:

Hey as long as you feel confident that’s a win 😀 ignorance is Bliss 😍

 

Oh, I thought I should let you know Gruff, since I know you'll be interested. Severely immunocompromised people became eligible last Friday for a "third primary dose" (not a booster) based on studies in the US and UK that such people produce very few antibodies from the two jabs when compared to your average human being. I had mine on Saturday morning, and once again I'm still alive to tell the tale. Arm a little sore, although not as sore as the first time, and I was quite tired for a couple of days but then I am getting old but still try and sit up and watch Moto GP and Formula 1 live in the middle of the night, so I'm normally knackered on Mondays and Tuesdays anyway. As Dave Dobbyn sang, "Otherwise fine!!". Can thoroughly recommend it f you ever wisen up and hoping the party 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Idolmite said:

 

Oh, I thought I should let you know Gruff, since I know you'll be interested. Severely immunocompromised people became eligible last Friday for a "third primary dose" (not a booster) based on studies in the US and UK that such people produce very few antibodies from the two jabs when compared to your average human being. I had mine on Saturday morning, and once again I'm still alive to tell the tale. Arm a little sore, although not as sore as the first time, and I was quite tired for a couple of days but then I am getting old but still try and sit up and watch Moto GP and Formula 1 live in the middle of the night, so I'm normally knackered on Mondays and Tuesdays anyway. As Dave Dobbyn sang, "Otherwise fine!!". Can thoroughly recommend it f you ever wisen up and hoping the party 🤣

Good to hear Mites , most have made their minds up justifying it for all sorts of reasons and consider it the wise move but many coerced. All the best 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We Don’t Love You Anymore Jacinda

By Dr Muriel Newman   

 

One year into Labour’s three-year term as a majority government, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s honeymoon is coming to an end. The public now know the destination she is taking our country, and it is not where we want to go. Finally, we, the people, are saying enough is enough.

The latest Roy Morgan poll shows support for Labour slipping from 50 per cent on election night to 39.5 per cent. That would result in fourteen Labour MPs losing their seats. Confidence in the Government has fallen 15.5 points to 109.5 – the lowest rating since the Prime Minister came to office four years ago.

If we were to write to Jacinda Ardern, to outline why New Zealanders don’t love her anymore, we’d probably say something like this: 

Dear Jacinda,

When you became Labour Party leader, seven weeks before the 2017 election, you had been a little-known list MP.

We now know that nine months before being elected to Parliament in 2008, you had become President of the International Union of Socialist Youth. The fact that instead of immediately resigning from that role after becoming an MP, you continued on as President for a further fifteen months, should have caused concern – especially after a video emerged showing you referring to conference attendees as “comrades” fifteen times in seven minutes.

Being trusting people, we didn’t think that meant you were a communist.

We saw the media fawning over your elevation to Party leader so enthusiastically that the term “Jacindamania” was coined. And we noted that these media cheerleaders, gave you favourable coverage during the election campaign.

In spite of that, Labour received 956,000 votes or 36.9 percent, while 1,152,000 New Zealanders – 44.4 percent – supported National.

That result showed the country had overwhelmingly voted for conservatism and stability.

But Winston Peters, holding the balance of power and ignoring the wishes of the majority of voters, anointed you as our 40th Prime Minister.

Kiwis are fair minded, and you were given the chance to prove yourself. But while you had great communication skills, and what appeared to be genuine empathy, it soon became clear that true to your hard line roots you intended to impose destructive socialist extremism onto New Zealand.

The first indication of your intention was your unilateral decision to ban new deep sea oil drilling to effectively close down New Zealand’s oil and gas industry. This was done without warning, without consultation, and without Cabinet approval, on the eve of your first overseas trip as Prime Minister – allegedly so you could look decisive on the world stage.

We saw this again following the Christchurch terror attack – even though the perpetrator was a deranged foreigner, you cracked down on the rights of law-abiding Kiwi firearm owners without warning, consultation, or proper justification. Driven by a seemingly insatiable desire for international recognition, you appeared oblivious to the livelihoods and lifelong interests you were destroying.

We then became concerned in 2019 to hear you tell a meeting hosted by Bill Gates, that without our knowledge, you were imposing the United Nations Agenda 2030 onto New Zealand: “My Government is doing something not many other countries have tried. We have incorporated the principles of the 2030 Agenda into our domestic policy-making in a way that we hope will drive system-level actions. I believe that the change in approach that we have adopted in New Zealand is needed at a global scale.”

But while you were successfully embedding the UN’s socialist agenda into every regulation and law change, your election promises of building affordable housing, reducing homelessness, and eliminating child poverty were all turning into dismal failures.

And even though the media had largely stuck by you, by the end of 2019 the growing discontent – especially within the business and farming sectors that were facing a tsunami of restrictive rules and regulations – was so widespread it was reflecting in the polls, indicating yours was likely to be a one-term government.

That is until Covid-19 came along early in election year.

Covid became a socialist leader’s dream. It enabled emergency measures curtailing freedom and liberty to be embedded into every facet of our lives – with minimal Parliamentary scrutiny.

Under the guise of fighting Covid you hired a multi-million-dollar Rolls Royce communications team to provide you with expert advice: as long as you could keep fear of Covid top of mind right up to voting day, your re-election was assured.

And that’s exactly what happened.

Winning over 50 percent support from New Zealanders was a remarkable achievement.

On election night you assured the country you would govern for ‘all’ Kiwis: “We will not take your support for granted. And I can promise you, we will be a party that governs for every New Zealander.”

We wanted to believe you.

But we now know, those words were a lie.

The separatist agenda you unleashed is unprecedented in New Zealand’s history.

We now know that you concealed the ‘He Puapua’ blueprint – to replace democracy with tribal rule – for 12 months prior to the election.

That report reveals your plan is to introduce 50:50 co-governance, to give the Maori elite, who represent just 15 percent of the population, disproportionate power and unimaginable authority over the lives of the 85 percent of other New Zealanders.

Why did you not tell us during the election campaign that you intended to transfer democratic power to an unelected and unaccountable tribal aristocracy so they can control New Zealand for their own benefit?

Since you didn’t reveal those intentions before the election, you have no mandate from New Zealanders to replace democracy with tribal rule.

And while you have denied ‘He Puapua’ is Labour Party policy, it’s clear that is another lie.

New Zealanders are not stupid – we have read the He Puapua report and we can see that the laws you are now enacting are part of this agenda for tribal control.

In health, when you realised that a Maori Health Authority with the right of veto over the entire health system couldn’t be established under the decentralised District Health Board model, without any consultation you announced that DHBs would be abolished. You have no mandate to replace community control of health with a centralised apartheid bureaucracy prioritising Maori over those with more serious medical needs.

Putting race ahead of need is not the New Zealand way. It is shocking and callous. How can anyone with genuine empathy and a clear conscience possibly think it’s OK? And restructuring the entire health system during a pandemic is not only ideological madness, but it borders on being criminally reckless.

In education you are allowing Maori extremists to dictate the curriculum and indoctrinate children with a worldview that denigrates our history and the people who helped build our nation.

In local government, you abolished the democratic rights of local communities to reject plans to divide them by race. It seems clear that this was the first step towards the He Puapua goal of tribal control of local authorities.

You have no mandate for your disastrous Three Waters proposal to give control of ratepayer-funded water infrastructure and services to the Maori tribal elite. Communities up and down the country are outraged at this blatant seizing of local assets – and the transfer of democratic control that will undoubtedly lead to the imposition of royalties to Maori whenever a Kiwi tap is turned on.

And what about your plan to silence opponents through proposed hate speech laws? You did not seek a mandate to ‘criminalise’ someone for political views – such as criticising Labour politicians or Maori supremacists – yet that is what your draft law changes are proposing.

Nor did you seek a mandate to effectively buy media support for your plan for tribal rule. You campaigned on funding the media, but you did not explain that the $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund would be contingent on supporting the fabricated Maori ‘partnership’ claim that underpins He Puapua. In some countries, political leaders who attempt to unduly influence the media through taxpayer funding, are being accused of corruption.

What hold does the tribal elite have over you? Why are you prepared to sacrifice the democratic rights of all New Zealanders, so they can have power? Kind people may think that you are simply naive and being duped by your Maori caucus. Others believe that creating disunity is part of your socialist DNA.

When it comes to your management of Covid, we are now witnessing the loss of liberty on a scale unimaginable from a New Zealand Prime Minister.

You have given yourself the authority to control our lives, even to the point of allowing police – or their ‘agents’ – to enter our homes and businesses without a warrant.

Now, through vaccine mandates – that you promised before the election you would not introduce – you are dividing our nation and trampling over sacred civil liberties and democratic rights protected by the New Zealand Bill of Rights.

In 1990, when Labour Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer was introducing the Bill of Rights in Parliament, he explained that it was a safeguard to protect New Zealanders against the unbridled power of future governments: “It is unlikely that there will be a wholesale disregard of human rights in New Zealand in the  foreseeable future, but… we cannot afford to wait until rights disappear before we take action, because it is too late by that stage. It is better to have a Bill of Rights when it is not needed than to not have one when it is needed.”

Now, twenty-one years later, you are leading a government that is doing exactly what he believed would never happen in New Zealand – you are stomping on the basic human rights of New Zealanders.

This is not the New Zealand way – and it is not what voters thought they were getting when they gave you the responsibility of leading our country for the benefit of all.

You have betrayed us, and we have lost trust in you and your Government.

That’s why we don’t love you anymore, Jacinda – and why we want you to resign.

Yours sincerely…

So, what can be done?

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator is UK based Mark Hanson, a New Zealander with a legal background and vast international experience, who is so deeply troubled by the destructive socialist agenda he sees being rolled out, that he has proposed a new type of law:

“New Zealand faces a major challenge to the future of its democracy which it has never experienced since the coming to power of the current Prime Minister Jacinda Arden. Arden, who comes from a communist, socialist and dictatorial background, has changed the history of New Zealand by closing down both the economy and Parliament with the excuse of Covid.

“By the time the next election comes along in 2023, it is expected that a number of ‘power-sharing’ laws will have been passed by the Ardern Government, that will change the nature of New Zealand democracy forever…

“There are two democratic ways of dealing with this. First, is to draw up a list of amendments to every relevant law or regulation in need of repealing. This however, would take years to achieve and would not restore democracy on a timely basis.

“Secondly, the most time efficient and democratic approach is to draw up one Repealing Act of Parliament to repeal every law and regulation she has enacted, before the next election. In addition, all persons who have been appointed under laws and regulations should be removed from office the day the repealing legislation is passed into law.”

Mark’s suggestion is powerful.

After three years of Jacinda Ardern’s destructive agenda, the immediate repeal of their unmandated and undemocratic law changes by the next government is imperative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ohokaman said:

Another $165m given away…how long does this keep going on……???
https://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=343262&fm=psp,tsf

I had been patient with Adern... and sleepy joe, as its in my nature to allow people to show their goodness...

unfortunately, Adern and Biden...have just been outright wreckers!! of pretty much everything they touch!!

Arise President Trump!! Arise Winston Peters!!

For The Kingdom of God & Righteousness 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ 6xes! You're such a hypocrite. You promote Christianity then you state support for Trump and Peters WTF??

Peter 5:5  "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble."   There's none more "proud" than the two politicians, Trump and Peters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Uriah Heap said:

Jesus Christ 6xes! You're such a hypocrite. You promote Christianity then you state support for Trump and Peters WTF??

Peter 5:5  "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble."   There's none more "proud" than the two politicians, Trump and Peters.

As much as i appreciate your, use of Peter 5:5 scripture ... theres a context to understand it in

God opposes those who are in opposition to God....  thus the pride or proud comment... however if Trump & Winston are aligned with God and his ways, how can that be pride?

 

your thinking is its the pride in relation to your ways, that is where your error is!!

Bless you son!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to follow on from the 1 peter 5:5..

you should note 1 peter 5:6   *winks

now doesnt that just fit the Arise comment concerning President Trump and Winston Peters!!

 

exalted.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

see the funny thing about that Tweet, is Seymour is referencing 2017

the smaller parties dont make the final decision concerning forming of the Government.

Jacinda made the decision!!

she could have said..No.. we do the election process again.. but she didnt

So the logic and understanding of Seymour is backward, twisted and incorrect!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 6xes said:

see the funny thing about that Tweet, is Seymour is referencing 2017

the smaller parties dont make the final decision concerning forming of the Government.

Jacinda made the decision!!

she could have said..No.. we do the election process again.. but she didnt

So the logic and understanding of Seymour is backward, twisted and incorrect!!

 

 

No it’s not you idiot. The only reason Ardern got into power was because Peters went with Labour rather than National.

Why ? Because he held a personal grudge against them, it certainly wasn’t to benefit New Zealanders. And here we are…..

Twisted is right……😠

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.