Barry Young appears in court 11 December 2025
Click here to return home UPDATED, 13 DECEMBER, 2025 On Thursday the 11th December at about 9:45am, Barry Young made his long awaited return to the Wellington District Court in front of a crowd of around 100 people. Mark Freeman summarised the day. Whistleblower Barry Young says he’s not trying to break the law or harm anyone: he’s trying to do the right thing. Mr Young appeared in the Wellington District Court on Thursday and Friday in his case, in which a judge will determine whether his leaking of anonymized mortality data related to the Covid-19 vaccine is protected under legislation. It’s a test case for the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022. Mr Young is the former administrator of one of Health New Zealand’s payperdose Covid vaccination databases, and claims the data showed a sharp rise in deaths after people were vaccinated. Before the hearing started, Mr Young told an enthusiastic and noisy crowd of well over 100 supporters that with the truth he will not lose. “I will force them to see that our people are dying and we need to stop this horrible, horrible vaccination. We need to end it right now.” He has a right to do the right thing, he said. “The Protected Disclosures Act says that by doing the right thing I am allowed immunity. I am not to be retaliated against. So why are we here? We’re here because they retaliated.” “We have to expose this. We have to show the world that this should not be happening. And this is corruption. This is breaking an act of Parliament, and it’s happening in real time before your eyes. The fact is I made a legitimate protected disclosure. Under the terms of the act, I ticked every single box. I was allowed to disclose it, and they retaliated immediately.” Health New Zealand have confirmed they never once looked at his data, he said. At the end of the second day of the case, Mr Young’s lawyer Sue Grey told supporters the case is about whether the whistleblowers’ act applies to normal people who work for the government who disclose information in good faith or whether they have to be a professional who does a complicated legal or epidemiological analysis. The act was made to facilitate whistleblowing, she said. “There was no dissent. All of the political parties recognised that there should be considerable protection for whistleblowers, and much more than there had been so they felt safe.” This is the first case that’s tested the act, Ms Grey said, adding that the Crown has indicated it’s likely to appeal if it gets a decision it doesn’t like.” “The next steps are basically clarifying exactly what evidence is relevant and then the judge clarifying exactly what issues he wants legal submissions on and making a time frame for when that has to be done. It’s going to take till the end of January to get through that process, and then it will normally be a month or so for submissions after that.” UPDATED, 23 NOVEMBER, 2025 At 9:30am Thursday 11th December, 2025, Barry Young will be making a long awaited return to the Wellington District Court defending charges for releasing data related to the New Zealand Covid Vaccine Rollout. The former Ministry of Health worker who built the database (pay per dose) that monitored and showed excess deaths during the covid vaccine rollout, is being charged by the New Zealand Police after a complaint by Te Whatu Ora (Health New Zealand) led to an investigation by the New Zealand police, resulting in Young being charged by the police with “accessing a computer system for dishonest purposes.” NZ Police acting on evidence? The complaining agency itself (Te Whatu Ora) initially said the data “appeared to have been anonymised.” This suggests that the data publicly released did not obviously include easily readable personal identifiers and therefore raises questions over why the Police have initiated charges of “accessing a computer system for dishonest purposes”. When: Thursday 11th December, 2025 Where: Wellington District Court: Address: 49 Ballance Street, Wellington Central, Wellington FreeNZ put up a 4 part series investigating the covid vaccine data you can find part one here Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 ALLEGATIONS The allegation is that Barry Young unauthorisedly accessed and downloaded a large volume of vaccination-related data from Te Whatu Ora’s systems, then published the data online (on an overseas website). The leaked data reportedly included information about individuals — including vaccinators and possibly vaccinated people — and triggered a data breach affecting thousands. The offence he is charged with carries a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment. LEGAL STATUS AND PLEA Young pleaded not guilty in December 2023. A trial has been requested — Young elected jury trial. Liz Gunn interview with Barry Young Liz Gun sat down with Barry Young to discuss matters ahead of his court hearing in Wellington on December 11, 2025. Click here for video
Top 10 reasons the Covid Vaccine was a complete scam
1. New Zealand’s Government knew from the very beginning that the Vaccine didn’t work and STILL pushed mandates Group of people activists with raised fists protesting on streets, strike and demonstration concept. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Read More Read Less
Racial Division
Contrived Gender Confusion
Return to Media Page Contrived Gender Confusion Table of Contents INTRODUCTION:The argument here is that LGBT education, as designed, is a harmful and malicious programme being used by Government to fracture family values and the rights of parents in decisions around their own children. We argue the reason for this is because strong and independent families subtract from any Government’s ability to maintain psychological control over the society that they govern. Selling points of Gender education for children Advocates for LGBT education in schools argue that it provides: Inclusion and Support: LGBT-inclusive education helps create a safer environment for students who identify as LGBTQ+ by reducing stigma, bullying, and isolation. Awareness and Understanding: Early education on diversity helps students develop empathy and acceptance of differences, contributing to a more inclusive society in the future. Mental Health: LGBT students are at a higher risk of mental health challenges like depression and anxiety, and inclusive education can provide them with the support and validation they need. Concerns against Gender education for children Only 1 in 20 New Zealanders identifies themselves as LGBT or Q, so WHY is such an emphasis on transgender education, for example, happening when only 0.7% of the population identify as such? The topic of LGBT education in schools has been the subject of considerable debate. Some concerns are often centered around the following points: CONCERNS & RISKS OF GENDER EDUCATION Gender education damages the family unit by blurring male and female roles Traditionally men have been the protectors and women the carers of families. Jointly, the mother and father’s deep understanding of their own individual role has allowed them to foster the healthiest environment for young children to grow from. While some boys are more nurturer and carer, and some girls more hunter and gatherer, that is the exception rather than the norm. These kids should be taken care of, and guided towards their strengths. But to force all kids into entertaining the idea of NOT following their natural instincts – then you’re contriving ideology into their minds at an age that interrupts their nature, and this creates an environment for stunted growth and confusion, among other things. Sexual Perversion of Children Schools have been hosting Drag Queen Singalongs in school libraries and classrooms, and not just men wearing dresses, but men wearing completely sexualised and inappropriate clothing into learning environments. The persistent allowance of these kinds of people into schools begs the question as to whether school policy makers are doing something that is knowingly harmful to the psychological health of a certain number of children at school? If so, the next question would be WHY would they be trying to harm the psychological wellbeing of children? It could be to undermine the critical thinking skills of future generations so that populations in the future can be easier controlled. This might sound like a conspiracy theory to some, but to dismiss it as impossible would be deeply negligent. Age Appropriateness Should discussions around LGBT be introduced to younger children, and are certain concepts like gender identity or same-sex relationships even necessary for young age groups? Critics argue that children are not ready to understand these topics, and believe it will confuse them or introduce ideas they aren’t ready to deal with. The result could be a child succumbing to a perversion of their own thoughts, leading to decisions and behaviours that they will likely come to regret in the future. Parental Rights and Consent Schools are now starting the process of a child’s gender transition without even informing the parents of that child that such a process is taking place. This essentially means that the rights a parent has to oversee their own child’s decisions are being ignored. On a general note, some parents believe discussions about gender and sexuality should happen in the home, not at schools. They believe they should have the right to control what their children are taught about these topics. Some even push back against laws or policies that might prevent them from opting out of certain lessons, or from being informed about what their children are learning. Religious or Cultural Beliefs For some, the concern arises from conflicts with religious or cultural values. Many religious traditions have specific beliefs about marriage, gender, and sexuality, and individuals who hold those beliefs may see LGBT education as inconsistent with their teachings. They worry that such education could undermine or challenge their deeply held beliefs. Increased Focus on Gender and Identity Some argue that the growing focus on gender identity and expression might lead to confusion among children, especially those who may not yet have a strong understanding of their own identities. Critics sometimes feel that an emphasis on gender fluidity or diverse sexualities might pressure students to think more about these topics than they are developmentally prepared to handle. Potential for Bullying or Division There’s also a concern that certain LGBT topics, while meant to promote inclusion and understanding, could lead to division among students, especially if they are introduced in a way that makes some feel excluded or uncomfortable. Critics worry that teaching about LGBT issues might inadvertently cause more bullying, rather than reduce it. Political and Ideological Concerns In some cases, the opposition stems from broader political or ideological divides. Some individuals view the teaching of LGBT topics in schools as part of a larger “agenda” to promote progressive or left-leaning ideals. In this sense, the concern isn’t necessarily about the content itself, but about what it represents in terms of societal values. DEMOGRAPHICS Regional Variations The proportion of LGBTIQ+ individuals varies across different regions in New Zealand: Wellington City: 11.3% Dunedin: 7.3% Christchurch: 6.0% Palmerston North: 5.8% Hamilton: 5.6% Auckland: 4.9%1news.co.nz+7rnz.co.nz+7miragenews.com+7 These figures highlight Wellington as having the highest proportion of LGBTIQ+ residents among New Zealand cities Closing thoughts The majority of New Zealand Media and Government strongly push for “inclusive” compulsory Gender education at school while ignoring the risks and conflicts of interest, while labelling anyone who
Why the Climate Crisis is a Scam
Updated 11 October, 2025 Something to get straight from the outset: Questioning the legitimacy of existing climate narratives does not make one selfish or reckless. There are many variables at play, and to ignore them can empower a very parasitic few while disempowering and in some cases destroy the many. The section below is a summary from Clintel.org – an organisation that has gathered over 2000 signatures of scientists and professionals who declare that there is no climate emergency – just a manipulation of facts. The page can be accessed here. Overview Concerns Calls for debate The 5 factors below are a good starting point in rebuttal against the “climate change is an imminent threat” argument that is posed by mainstream narratives. 1. Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as earth has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming. 2. Warming is far slower than predicted The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change. 3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial. 4. CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide. 5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared. The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change. Find a .pdf of their declaration and signatures here. Why have their positions on climate change been banished from the corporate mainstream information sharers? What are the conflicts of interests and who benefits from climate change policy? * It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts The message you’ll hear from climate alarmists If we have to summarise IPCC reports in one paragraph, it might sound like this: Current warming is unprecedented in at least 125,000 years and the current CO2 concentration is unprecedented in at least two million years. CO2 and other greenhouse gases have caused all or most of the warming since 1850. As a result, some changes, like sea level rise, are already irreversible for centuries to come. Climate change is already making the weather more extreme. Around half of the global population is very vulnerable to climate change. Only urgent climate action, i.e., reducing CO2, and other greenhouse gases, can secure a liveable future for all. Luckily, renewable energy has become much cheaper in the past decade, so we can do it. An even shorter summary would look like this: The current warming is unprecedented, is caused by us, is very dangerous, and we should stop it by reducing our CO2 emissions, preferably by enhancing the production of renewable energy. PROBLEM None of this is accurate. Please see the video below for more context. Breaking down the climate crisis deception, point by point. The Suspicion: New Zealand’s Government, Corporate News Media, and Corporate Industry Leaders, are pushing a narrative that man made carbon dioxide emissions are the primary cause of an existential climate threat to humanity. Data: Carbon Dioxide accounts for 0.04% of the earth’s atmosphere. Human caused carbon dioxide accounts for a heavily debated range of between 5 to 35% of total Atmospheric C02. New Zealand accounts for 0.09% of the world’s carbon dioxide (C02) emissions. SUMMARY OF NZ’s WORLDWIDE C02 EMISSIONS: New Zealand accounts for 0.09 % of 5-35% of 0.04% of Worldwide Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. Questions: Why is there so much urgency towards reducing man made C02 emissions in New Zealand if New Zealand accounts for less than 1/10,000th of a percent of total CO2 emissions? Who benefits the most (profits the most, gains the most power/influence) if New Zealand adopts a C02 reducing strategy. Why are fact checkers biased and why is there no open and balanced public debate? What are the risks and costs of implementing policies and strategies aimed at reducing C02? Why is New Zealand’s corporate media not pointing any of this out? How much are New Zealanders currently paying in taxes and other expenses towards Net ZERO climate policy decisions in New Zealand? What other sacrifices will New Zealanders be asked / forced to make in order to meet these (completely unnecessary) Net Zero goals?
Top 10 reasons Covid-19 is a Scam
COVID-19 was a Scam (bullet points) Suspicion: New Zealand’s Government, Corporate News Media, and Commercial Enterprises of Influence, collaborated in pushing a false pandemic for the purposes of a political agenda aimed at controlling populations with far greater surveillance. COVID-19 is one excuse to allow for that extra scrutiny. This is a living web page, meaning that as more up to date and / or reliable information comes through – it will be added to the page and unclear or inaccurate information will be taken down. 100% accuracy is not promised, but over time best efforts are being made to achieve as much accuracy and clarity as possible. ARGUMENT POINTS THAT COVID-19 IS A SCAM: COVID-19 Biometric Tests were patented in 2017, by Richard Rothschild. ->> Question: How could it have been known in 2017 that there would be a pandemic declared in 2019 exactly named COVID-19? Is this not more than a coincidence? On October 18, 2019, the John Hopkins Center for health security, in partnership with The World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, hosted a multi-million dollar exercise simulating a public response strategy to a worldwide pandemic. ->> Question: How much of a coincidence is it to host an exercise of this nature just months before an ACTUAL pandemic was declared, the first such pandemic with at least 1 million deaths recorded since 1968? The World Economic Forum and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation were to become key authorities and benefactors of the COVID-19 pandemic, through powers granted and Financial Benefits received. ->> Question: Is it not a massive coincidence that the very people who gained power and wealth from the pandemic were also principal promoters of Event 201 preceding the declared pandemic?
Was COVID-19 a Scam?
Return to Government Sponsored Harm Page LATEST UPDATE, 22 MAY 2025 There are a number of factors around COVID-19 that place its legitimacy under serious question. How much were mainstream media paid by organisations connected to pushing the pandemic narrative? What political and financial connections did New Zealand politicians and health bureaucrats have with the likes of the World Health Organisation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Pfizer, and the International Monetary Fund? How much were doctors and medical outlets paid to inject New Zealanders with the COVID Vaccine? Was it isolated and defined and proven to be the cause of adverse health effects and even death? Elaboration: Current Situation: New Zealand Food Safety, under the authority of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and in collaboration with Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), is proposing to adjust the MRL for glyphosate in specific food products. Proposed Increase: The proposal aims to increase the allowable levels of glyphosate residues in wheat, barley, oats, and dry field peas. Concerns and Justification: The increase in MRL is being proposed based on the use of glyphosate as a pre-harvest desiccant on crops like wheat, oats, barley, and peas. This practice can speed up drying, but it also results in higher glyphosate residues in the final products. Public Consultation: Organics Aotearoa New Zealand is urging people to submit their opinions on the proposed changes to the MRL. Safety Assessment:New Zealand Food Safety has previously stated that it aligns with the conclusions of the Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization (JMPR) reports, which have assessed glyphosate’s dietary risk as very low, according to the Ministry for Primary Industries.
Barry Young Trial
06 May, 2025 What’s going on? Ministry of Health whistleblower Barry Young is currently facing criminal charges related to the release of patient information connected to the Covid Vaccine Rollout beginning in 2021. His defence is that he was exercising his right as a whistleblower because to his judgment he viewed serious adverse effects of the COVID-19 Vaccine, while the Crown’s prosecution lies on the accusation that Barry released sensitive data that should not have been released. Where we stand: There is now ample evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine caused harm to large amounts of people, including death – as the New Zealand Government and Media remain largely silent while still encouraging New Zealanders to receive the Covid Injection. We see this as very suspicious behaviour from both Media and Government, and therefore we believe that the information Barry revealed deserves proper respect and investigation, rather than Barry himself. Furthermore, Barry anonymised the data that he released, meaning that no names of any patients were disclosed among his findings. We believe the Crown are endeavouring on a wild goose chase. What is strange? Mainstream Media have been eerily silent in their reporting of this case in recent months. Are they avoiding giving it publicity because they know they were in the wrong by going against Young? SOME IDEAS OF WHAT YOU CAN DO: Support Barry Young – Barry’s court appearances are a great opportunity to show support for someone who dared question the safety of the Covid Vaccine. By showing up to his court appearances in person, you are sending a message to the Crown that Barry does not stand alone, and that their decisions carry weight that will not go away any time soon. Push the message – Whether it is sign holding at supermarkets or on roadsides, by demonstrating that yes, the covid vaccine has caused damage and that despite this the Government and Media have largely ignored it, you are reaching into the subconscious minds of those kiwis out there who have held suspicions, but haven’t quite allowed themselves to fully embrace the idea. Bumper stickers – “Yes, the COVID Vaccine killed people” or “Yes, COVID-19 was indeed a Scam” are two types of stickers you can slap on the back of your car… or anywhere else you can creatively imagine. Facing two Crown prosecutors and new charges, Barry feels up against a rather unfair system. Please click the video link below for Barry’s read on the situation. Credit to John Ansell for the footage. Click HERE
Antifa at home and abroad
Anti-fascists use fascist methods to fight “fascism”
Let Kids Be Kids
Penny Marie is urging parents to find out what their child’s school is teaching their child about sexuality and gender.