Home Uncategorized Who do you trust to protect us?

Who do you trust to protect us?




With National agreeing with the COL, over the gun buyback, and now ACT agreeing with the UN migration pact, WHO DO WE VOTE FOR?

We always knew the COL was a bunch of wankers, but now we can add ACT to that list as well. When I attended an ACT meeting in Hamilton last month, Seymour was saying all the right things about freedom of speech, our rights to own guns, and decrying the gun buyback. The only thing he said that raised concerns was ACTS immigration policy.

The following video reinforced my concerns and has confirmed that Seymour will say anything to get elected. In other words, he is just like all the rest, a fucking toadie to the UN.

Listen and weep for New Zealand
Previous articleMissing in In-action.
Next articleHave Your Say


  1. I will be going to my local National M.P’s meeting later this month and intend to ask her specifically on this subject. I don’t expect to be sworn out but I also do not expect to hear any condemnation of it, after all I never received an answer to my email at the time.
    I was once an ACT voter – the question put is WHO DO WE VOTE FOR? I see at this stage I am the only one to have bothered God.



    • Im wondering if I could move to any European countries get free stuff and then move on to the next thus seeing the world on a free pass. Just wondering if is this how it’s going to work? Guess the minister of immigration will be redundant then? If it wasn’t so frightening it would be funny.



    • It’s a good thing that ACT is one of the few parties opposed to the UN Migration Pact then.

      “This agreement takes us in the wrong direction. There is too much scope for these provisions to be abused by parties who wish to shut down free speech.”


      Mr Berry stresses that ACT’s long-standing support for immigration isn’t changed by his party’s opposition to the agreement.



  2. ACT has always been pro-immigration, it is written in their policy. They are in favour of immigrants that want to come to New Zealand and be New Zealanders. People like me, my wife, Ducklin, RightOverLabour (I think a fellow Saffa) and more. ACT are opposed to immigrants that want to come here and bring their shithole Sharia law with them.

    They have also spoken out against the UN Migration Pact, for the restrictions it places on New Zealand. Publically.

    Yet, “Crossing the Rubicon” makes an allegation on Youtube without any evidence except his/her word, and suddenly ACT is a liar? Despite all the evidence to the contrary?


    Go and read the actual damn policy.



    • Yet, prior to the 2017 election when Seymour was queried specifically about Islamic immigration, Seymour was pro-Islamic immigration.

      Because of this, it would not surprise me that “Crossing the Rubicon” has accurately recorded Seymour’s current stance on the UN Migration Pact.



      • I have tried and tried to find a statement to that effect from ACT or David Seymour. (Don’t conflate the two) My internet search skill is not up to it, all I can find is opposition to the UN Migration Pact – to which ACT is opposed by all indications. The closest I can find to support what you say is a press release from David Seymour in late 2016 where he re-iterates that immigration is okay for people, irrespective of religion (freedom), who subscribe to NZ values.

        He goes so far as to say, from Wayback:

        All immigrants should accept the most basic values of New Zealand society: namely freedom of speech, equality of gender and race before the law, that spirituality is a private matter of personal conscience, and that LGBT people should be allowed to express themselves.

        If they don?t like or agree with the most basic of rights, they can find somewhere else to go.

        Fundamentalist Islam is incompatible with New Zealand values. We need to focus our efforts on protecting ourselves from these individuals who share such incompatible views. These values tend to accumulate into dissent and eventual violence, and have no place in New Zealand.

        He extended that to refugees as well, btw. To such a degree that blogs were calling him a racist / channeling Donald Trump for his words against Islamic migration.

        So again, he is pro-immigration for people that want to be Kiwi. Opposed to fundamentalist Islam and their shithole Sharia law. That seems to be a logically consistent position for a person who believes as he does. And as I do, for that matter. My religion (if any) has no bearing on my ability to be a Kiwi, to want to be a Kiwi, to contribute to this society.



        • At the time when I still visited Slater’s website, it appeared that Seymour was quite pro-Islam. Having searched for it, it appears (especially from Pete George’s blog), that Slater was playing loose with Seymour’s response.

          Still, I’d prefer a stronger stance against Islam and would prefer less immigration, or rather limit immigration to useful people.



    • Several things:
      1) None of our parties stand by their policies (they ignore it when it suits them) it’s naive to put all your faith in their policy statements (Seymour is a swamp dweller – he will do anything to hold on to migrant dense Epsom – including failing to take a principled stand and lead on a national issue that could get ACT over 5%)
      2) It’s not just Rubicon’s video. Others on YSB have reported similar experiences and I suspect over the coming months we’ll hear more
      3) Seymour has form on this. He supported the increase to the refugee quota – that doesn’t sound like he’s opposed to shithole Sharia law immigrants here
      4) Seymour has bad judgment. He turned down a Minister role – he had a chance to really do something with Charter Schools and he ‘little-boyed’ it by not going the whole hog. If there were 500 Charter Schools Cindy would’ve had a revolution on her hands if she’d tried to kill them all off. I don’t trust his coming to Jesus over free speech (he doesn’t resonate because he’s not trustworthy – he’s a big part of the reason ACT are stuck on 1%)



      • The exception is Seymour. He is the only politician in NZ to stand uo to the woke left, irrespective what they call him. Same as what Don Brash did.

        Not a one in National has stood up for us. They rolled over not only on policy but party principles as well.

        And that is why I trust ACT enough to take their policy at face value. They will stand by their principles in the face of hatred.



  3. Mr Berry stresses that ACT’s long-standing support for immigration isn’t changed by his party’s opposition to the agreement. “ACT welcomes migrants who share New Zealand’s liberal values. We value people who want to create new opportunities with the freedom New Zealand affords them.”

    Key thing there. ACT is OPPOSED to the UN Migration pact. ACT is in favour of immigration for migrants that share our values.



  4. It may seem ok for some more migration, with vetting.

    How many people should live in New Zealand, and over what time period should this happen?

    It does seem that some industries want a right to more immigration, like farming to plant, to pick and harvest.
    Building industry, so more houses, can be built with carpenters, plasterers, painters and do not forget the “tilers”
    Roading industry, to make more safety barriers, more truck drivers, etc.
    Educationalists, to keep universities, tertiary institutions, needing more bums on seat with a wallet of money.
    All with their lobbyists chasing the rainbow.

    It seems that GDP is a lobby set up, as an excuse, if a hair dresser, barista, but then it is part of the “well being” GDP economy.

    At the same time there is talk how much more robotized, automatic things will become, needing less workers.

    Then it is said every one needs a ‘universal benefit’, that is only a way to being a great leveler, that is downwards.

    Yet I am not into a ‘command economy’ or the top down directives, so just how is a view of commonsense, for the good of all NZ citizens to be worked out.

    I did have a feeling that socialist Bill English, was getting the measure, with targets, gathering data, prioritizing.
    The only problem was what seemed to be the doctrine of increased immigration, that is buckling infrastructure.
    Then the adjustment of the current NZ citizens and the new migrants comes into question.



    • I’ve always said that we need about 20 million good kiwis here.
      To make NZ more vibrant, more self sufficient, more economic.
      But they need to have our values, be English speakers and come from countries with good laws and little corruption.



Recent posts

Nature Does It Best

Two-Billion-Year-Old Only Known Natural Nuclear Reactor Written by Laura Gil Physicist Francis Perrin sat at a nuclear fuel-processing plant down in the south of France, thinking...

COVID Vaccine Injuries Compensation

COVID Vaccine Injuries Quietly Being Compensated Around The World Written by Jennifer Margulis and Joe Wang Programs in countries around the world have begun quietly compensating...

More Evidence Of Covid Vaccine Effects

Thousands of Jabbed Teenage Girls Are Developing Tics, Doctors Baffled Thousands of fully jabbed teenage girls in Australia are being struck down by a mystery...

Be Prepared

FEMA Warns US To Prepare For 10 Years Off Electricity Grid After ‘Perfect Solar Storm’ A perfect solar storm similar to one that slammed into...

Recent comments

Rachael Membery on Have Your Say
Odakyu-sen on Have Your Say
Odakyu-sen on Have Your Say
Komata on Have Your Say
Odakyu-sen on Have Your Say
nasska on Have Your Say
nasska on Have Your Say
Odakyu-sen on Have Your Say

The way we all feel about this useless government

overcast clouds
12.4 ° C
13.5 °
12.3 °
73 %
95 %
12 °
13 °
12 °
13 °
14 °
NZD - New Zealand Dollar