NZ - Boycott tourism in NZ: More fluorides? Bye bye.

A reader emailed me the letter he just wrote:

Dear Tourism New Zealand executive staff,

My name is Michael Blanshan. I am a naturopathic doctor in New Mexico, U.S.A. Years ago a group of friends and I were discussing New Zealand and all it has to offer as a country. Many of our group travelled to New Zealand and two families moved there, one to Nelso and one to Christchurch. These were good families with children and much to offer their local communities, not retirees looking for a country in which to retire.

In my own travels I often run into New Zealanders (aka kiwis). They are generally great travelers, good people, kind, open-minded, intelligent, and generally fun. The very spirit of New Zealand which most kiwis embody seems to me to serve as New Zealand’s best advertising.

Being a naturopath, I am keenly aware of the history of the fluoridation of drinking water, those who promoted this policy, their motivations for doing so, and the forms of pressure they use to continue the policy despite compelling scientific opposition. A local organization in New Zealand calling itself Fluoride Free NZ has worked tirelessly with communities to educate them on this issue. They worked diligently and the majority of those communities have chosen not to fluoridate their local water supplies. In response to this group’s effectiveness, the NZ federal government is now acting to take the decision making authority away from local councils and communities and put the power into the hands of District Health Boards (DHB), who are under the direct control of Central Government.

This action has profound implications, though it may seem inconsequential to you, especially considering that you are a department for tourism. Though I stated that the people of New Zealand are its best feature, this is a black mark on New Zealand as a country. It points to a corruption of your federal government and its purported goals of serving its people. To the contrary, the government is showing that it has a will of its own and that it acts in the interests of other parties.

The policy of fluoridation originated in the U.S.A. in the 1940s. Many European countries have rejected this policy, knowing it was not about health but rather that it was the result of corrupt influences. For the New Zealand government to force this policy shows that they’re not interested in science or the natural rights of the people and worse, that the New Zealand government is caving to pressure from either American or UK interests.

Please understand that the irony of an American writing about corruption in government does not escape me. Educated Americans know all too well the workings and techniques of a dictatorship which presents itself as a democracy. It is as a result of the extreme corruption of the leadership of Western countries that we look to New Zealand and still see it to be a land of free individuals who can run their local communities as they like.

If the New Zealand federal government goes ahead with this decision, I personally will not visit New Zealand in the future. If any of my friends or clients discuss the possibility of travelling to New Zealand, I will do my best to dissuade them. Potential visitors to New Zealand should know that all is not well in paradise and that behind the scenes you have the same dictatorship we see in the West. Despite all its physical beauty I still contend that the best part about New Zealand is its people. If the people of New Zealand are forced to stand in the shadow cast by a dictatorial federal government, something vital and essential will have been lost.

Sincerely,

Michael Blanshan

Thank you, Michael.

Thank you, Fluoride Free NZ, for showing the way.

I keep hearing this thing called the Internet is a wonderful apparatus with many uses. Well, here’s one.

Boom.

Jon Rappoport