Updated: Dec 9, 2022
I write this blog because it is about time that I properly put pen to paper to address the issue abut Baby Will and also Baby Rosaly.
Working and researching on our “River of Lies” documentary, one of our reporters Samantha Edwards interviewed Doreen Rudolph and her husband about the story of their 18 month old daughter Rosaly who has a serious heart issue requiring a life-saving operation that requires blood transfusions during the procedure.
Rosaly's parents were rightly concerned about the fact there was zero data about the risks Covid-19 vaccinated donor blood could pose to a very sick baby.
The issue of greatest concern was the fact that myocarditis is acknowledged as a known side effect of the Covid-19 jab. And if these mechanisms which caused myocarditis from the jab are present in the donor blood, then it could potentially cause a risk to a small child who is already facing heart issues. It could potentially be lethal to baby Rosaly.
Deeply concerned I became involved with the whanau over this matter. Little Rosaly had captured my heart with her tractor beam eyes and smile.
Upon first scan of this issue I thought it was about jabbed blood versus un-jabbed blood. I wanted to expose publicly through the media the NZ Blood Service and the Government’s risky approach to dealing with a growing public interest health issue. We know by now that when the Government says something is safe – you had better check thrice.
My dear friend and trusted colleague Tiamara Williams then entered the cause along with her partner Dr Machim Maanu who runs a health clinic. They were already working in the blood service area in New Zealand, developing a directed donor blood community program called ‘Live Blood’. (www.liveblood.me).
With my commitments to working tirelessly on the documentary, I asked Tiamara to join the team to help Doreen and little Rosaly. Without any hesitation or need for attention Tiamara threw herself into helping at the expense of her own business needs and demands.
After countless hours of conversations and getting to know the family, Tiamara was also asked to help Samantha and baby Will – which she selflessly agreed to do.
Tiamara and I then launched a deep dive into addressing and formulating a strategy to address the issues with the Government and medical establishment. We set ourselves on course for discussions with the offices of the relevant Ministers and their Ministries.
Tiamara performed an exemplary job of opening the door to meaningful dialogue and respectful conversation with the Minister’s office and the NZ Blood Service. Both Tiamara and I attended meetings with a number of health clinicians dealing with this issue. Given the grave nature of the issue, many hard conversations were had, which were all executed with a calm and respectful tone.
Having assessed the playing field we created a clear fighting ground upon which the issue could be addressed with respect and open dialogue. It was never going to be on the basis of vaccinated versus unvaccinated blood. Never. Not a mention of it.
Our research revealed that there was a strong and clear argument that the issue was actually about the Human Rights Act, the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Care of Children Act 2004 Section 36, the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 and the Children’s and Young Person’s Wellbeing Act 1989. This was cemented with the application of the Medical Code of ethics, especially the adage ‘Do no harm’. Other strong aspects of advocacy were the UN Convention for the Rights of the Child.
It is from here that we held the basis of the fight
The issue of focussing the argument with the NZ Ministry of Health upon jabbed and un-jabbed blood was a dangerous and unresolvable path, fraught with real risks to the wider issue of medical sovereignty and parental rights. To argue this matter upon ‘jabbed blood issues’ was naïve and frankly a very unwise course of action.
Respectfully and circumspectly addressing the issue was the best approach to an undefeatable argument.
Due to the weight of the Governments core tenets of their Covid-19 response, and the strength of their claims of the vaccines effectiveness and safety, an admission would never be made that there could actually be something wrong with the vaccine.
It wasn’t hard to come to the conclusion that asking them to admit there was even a small risk to recipients of donor blood, which may or may not carrying remnants of the covid-19 jab, was never going to happen.
With all of this under consideration, Tiamara continued to work very closely with Doreen and Samantha to ensure a safe route was being taken in order to get the result we all wanted.
During discussions with the Minister’s office a few weeks ago, we received word that Liz Gunn had attended a meeting with Will’s clinical team and his parents. My heart sank as soon as I heard the news, especially after hearing a sound recording of Liz’s behavior during the meeting.
Essentially a very emotional Liz attempted to hold the medical team into account in a very aggressive way. This led to her telling them that she would blow the story open by going to the mainstream media if they did not give in. Threats never work.
The Doctor and clinical team members abruptly ended the meeting and left.
Hours later the medical team approached Samantha with a lawyer and served notice upon her that they would begin court proceedings to legally uplift baby Will and proceed with the surgery. This was the epitome of the disaster we had worked so hard to avoid.
Immediately what followed was worse.
The matter then proceeded to the New Zealand High Court, where baby Will and his parents were represented by lawyer Sue Grey, which was also of great concern to me.
Sue decided to use the ‘jabbed versus un-jabbed blood’ argument in her submissions while being remiss of the medical data required to mount this argument. Sue’s team eventually asked Tiamara Williams for the required data to further their case, which Tiamara gave over. Although she had recently been effectively and rudely ‘dismissed’ from this issue as if she didn’t exist.
However, to the families detriment, the first of two court appearances cast the dice of fate and the judge’s decision was sealed.
The seriousness and nature of the real issue underpinning this case of baby Will and countless others, was lost sight of in the absolute frenzy which ensued via the mainstream media and the so-called ‘truth broadcasters’. A sight that has finally cemented my low opinion of the ‘freedom alternative’ media forever.
In my view Sue handed over the higher ground to the Government by fighting on their terms, where they held all of the cards using a flawed argument that proved fatal to the defence and progression of rights for the parents.
Only when pressed after the first court appearance did Sue present the Human Rights aspect in any light but it was far too late. The claim of ‘Anti-vaxxers’ had been gleefully adopted by corrupt media and a new national anthem adopted.
So what is my point here?
My point is that two people weighed in on this matter woefully un-researched, with no due diligence. Approaching it without the necessary supporting medical data and with a total misunderstanding of what the issue is really about.
They launched a fatally flawed case and the result is that a beautiful yet very sick baby boy has been alienated from his parents and their God given rights.
Tragically, at 11.30 pm last night, police took little Will from Starship hospital into state custody. This is tyranny in action.
The consequence of this outcome is broad in reach and dangerous in affect.
I believe that the Government has used the media and judiciary to appear to have the ‘moral’ high ground in this matter and it is this outcome that may open the door to wider parental rights abuses and the development of legislation that may give powers to the Government to enact hugely distressing actions on children against the parents wishes. Only time will tell.
And that is why I take such a deeply grim view of Liz and Sue’s approach here and why a deeply considered and calm approach was needed. No amount of media exposure will make up for these mistakes.
The next steps must be to pray for this little boy’s well-being and that of his parents and reset to an argument that may give us a much better chance of winning what is a God given human right for all to choose what goes into our bodies – isn’t this what this fight is all about?
I know that people are going to read this article and ask 'What the heck is Billy on about?”, "What is he doing?”, “What an idiot!”, “He’s just got sour grapes”.
The mere fact that someone might ask and say these things and not see the important point being made here is why I believe these types of issues are going to continually plague this freedom movement. In fact the outcome here may embolden the enemy because it was shot from the hip.
I have always said I would be honest about myself, the issues and how I see them and that I would always speak up about what is wrong with our Government. But the same must be applied to ourselves otherwise we are as bad as they are aren’t we?
I had someone recently wisely say to me; “Saying we are a freedom fighter does not make us a wise or good person – it just makes us a fighter for what we want”.
My well-known catch phrase “Be cool, be calm, be factual and stand on solid ground” seems like a chant of no to little value these days and the ship of commonsense and calm has sailed away into the sunset...
The door has been opened but lets pray that what comes through it does not end our right as parents to defend and choose for our babies and ourselves.
This is my prayer – make of it what thou wilt.
Register with https://www.liveblood.me