In New Zealand, a terrifying situation has arisen around a four-month-old baby who has to undergo life-saving heart surgery The baby’s parents, Sam and Cole, have asked the hospital not to use vaccinated blood in their child Will’s operation. Their baby has pulmonary valve stenosis and needs immediate surgery. Instead of their request being granted, the state is fighting to strip them of their parental rights and seize control of their child.
The baby’s parents recently explained their position during an interview with Liz Gunn, a broadcaster from New Zealand who herself has raised concerns about the safety of the experimental “vaccines.”
“We don’t want blood that is tainted by vaccination,” explained the dad. “That’s the end of the deal – we are fine with anything else these doctors want to do.”
More than 20 unvaccinated people were willing to donate blood for their son’s operation, but the government’s New Zealand Blood Service (NZBS) has refused to approve it, explains the heartbroken father.
Their website states that blood was not divided by whether donors were vaccinated or unvaccinated. It also makes the widely disputed claim that there is no evidence that using blood from a vaccinated person poses any risk.
NZBS requires that those who have received some versions of the COVID-19 vaccine refrain from donating blood for 28 days after getting vaccinated. However, anyone who received the Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, or Novavax vaccines is not subject to the 28-day stand-down period.
The interim director, Dr. Mike Shepherd, at the health service, Te Whatu Ora in Auckland, filed papers in the Auckland high court this past Monday under the Care of Children Act. They are asking that the parents are stripped of their “guardianship.” With this change in legal guardianship, the government can use donated blood for the child’s operation.
On Wednesday, the parties appeared at the court to set a date for an urgent hearing while a group of 100+ supporters of the parents gathered outside the building.
According to the Guardian, the attorney for the parents, Sue Grey, argued in court that their case is unlike most guardianship cases in which parents refuse necessary medical care.
“Because they label my clients as conspiracy theorists, [their position] is that anything my clients say can be ignored,” Grey said.
Federal government is your new ‘Extended Family’
Interim director Shepard said in a statement that he understands how worrying it can be for parents who are dealing with a very sick child, according to the New Zealand Herald.
“The decision to make an application to the court is always made with the best interests of the child in mind and following extensive conversations with whānau,” Shepherd said, using a Māori word that means “extended family.”
Shepard echoed former U.S. Presidential candidate Election Denier, Crooked Hillary Clinton’s socialist sentiments (scheme) when she said, “It takes a village to raise a family.” But unfortunately, the failed candidate and Shepard are trying to replace the family or “village” with a big federal government that dictates all family decisions.
Clinton and Shepard’s phrases are metaphors for the continued expansion of government into every aspect of our lives. They do not trust villages or extended families because they do not trust the people who live in them. As journalist Joseph Pearce explained, the village or extended family mentality, like the small-town mentality, is not open to radical new approaches to traditional human problems. The village is not “progressive” enough. They really believe that it takes a huge city and a burgeoning Federal Government to raise a child. And by raising a child, they mean teaching the child to despise the village, with its local roots and traditional morality, and to embrace the utopian and oxymoronic “global village” in which the child ceases to be part of a genuine local community and becomes, instead, a “citizen of the world,” a mere microcosmic minion among the multiple millions who inhabit the one globalist “village.”
Outpouring of support
The New Zealand couple has received a lot of support around the globe. “Parents do not want their baby to receive vaccinated blood during heart surgery. They have unvaccinated donors ready, but the hospital refuses to cooperate. So now they are at risk of losing custody of their child. This is medical fascism,” tweeted journalist Annelies Strikkers.
Ouders willen niet dat hun baby gevaccineerd bloed krijgt tijdens een hartoperatie. Ze hebben ongevaccineerde donors klaar staan, maar het ziekenhuis weigert iedere medewerking. Nu dreigen ze de voogdij over hun kind kwijt te raken. Dit is medisch fascisme.pic.twitter.com/B97wh7tWb6
— Annelies (@annstrikje) December 1, 2022
Attorney Sietske Bergsma also expressed support for the parents and believes more people will start to demand clean blood, “These parents are absolutely right, especially now that they have come up with a solution themselves. So why are the hospitals not cooperating? Probably because soon many more people will make this demand. And not without reason. Unbelievable that doctors don’t put the child’s life first,” she tweeted.
‘Pure Bood’ is a growing movement
There is a growing movement for unvaccinated blood banks so people can have clean transfusions. Natural News reports that Swiss naturopath George Della Pietra has started a new “SafeBlood Donation” service to provide clean, unvaccinated blood for patients needing transfusions.
Since the general blood supply is now tainted with “fully vaccinated,” spike protein-laden chemical blood, demand for pure blood is soaring. Pietra apparently saw this as an excellent opportunity to provide clean blood, which is now more in demand than ever.
Calling the Covid mass injection campaign “the crime of the century,” Pietra believes that messenger RNA (mRNA) covid shots “contaminate” the blood and destroy the immune system.
Suppose an unvaccinated person receives a transfusion of blood containing mRNA, spike proteins, and whatever else is contained inside those vials. In that case, they could also become contaminated, hence why he came up with the SafeBlood Donation service.
I get hundreds of emails asking me, ‘Do you have blood [available] because I have surgery coming up in three weeks,’” Pietra is quoted as saying.
“We want to be a platform for people who want the free choice of blood donors. Whether they think there is a real conspiracy theory, that the New World Order [is happening], or if they say ‘I just don’t want it for whatever reason.”
Right now, SafeBlood Donation has members in at least 16 countries with the goal of establishing blood banks that provide unvaccinated plasma for their members. The plan also pressures more hospitals and health authorities into allowing “directed donations” of specifically unvaccinated blood at traditional blood donation centers.
“Medical authorities only allow directed donations in specific situations where it is medically necessary, such as to source a rare blood type, but refuse growing requests for ‘unvaccinated’ blood on ethical and medical grounds,” one media outlet reported.
SafeBlood Donation is facing some difficulties because the “official” sources, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), insist that there is no difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated blood.
The expectation is that the current system will not comply with what SafeBlood Donation and its members are trying to do, so the inevitable outcome of this will be the creation of an entirely new blood donation infrastructure where only clean blood is allowed.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Amy Mek
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://rairfoundation.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.