Snitches Get Stitches (if They're Lucky)

Cutting out a man's tongue doesn't make him a liar; it only proves you're afraid of what he might say.

Dec 10, 2023

When I was a kid and my older sister Laurie did something heinous and unforgivable like chop off my favorite Barbie doll’s hair or steal my Super Hits of the ‘60s 8-track and then claim I’d gifted it to her (as if!), there was no sense running to our mother hoping for justice.

Aside from the one time I informed my birth giver that Laurie had in fact attempted to drown me (Mom’s patently erroneous reply, which I took with me as fact into adulthood anyway: “Next time she does that, just keep swallowing water. Water has oxygen in it, so you’ll last longer.”), my old lady’s response to any unseen crime was to sing the same gruesome English nursery rhyme:

“Tattletale-tit, your tongue shall be slit, and every single dog in town will have a little bit.”

If I tried to resume my ratting, Mom would smile and sing the slaughtered lingua song even louder until I accepted the futility of the exchange and grudgingly gave up. (Being a parent was way easier in the 1970s.) Then she’d go back to sipping her Tab and smoking her Kool Super Light and watching Days of Our Lives, and I’d vow that one day I would become a famous writer and expose them both. (Hahahahaha just kidding. I’d stick my tongue out behind her back and proceed to scrub underneath the rim of the toilet seat with Laurie’s toothbrush [I know it’s disgusting this is not a recommendation it’s a confession so back off clearly my childhood was a trainwreck which is probably why I’m funny so maybe quit being judgy and count your blessings if you had a mostly functional upbringing instead].

Lesson learned: Being a whistleblower didn’t pay.

It turns out, it still doesn’t.

Just this week, New Zealand informant Barry Young was arrested for the “unauthorized disclosure and misuse of data” after publishing damning government data linking COVID jabs to excess deaths Down Under. Young, a data analyst and former employee of New Zealand public health agency Te Whatu Ora, was charged with “accessing a computer system for dishonest purposes.”

The “dishonest purposes” in question involved making the country’s shocking post-vaccine death rates available to the public.

The dictionary definition of dishonest is “a lack of truthfulness, integrity, or fairness in one’s actions, behavior, or communication.” You’d think the finger-pointers could have at least come up with an accurate adjective to describe Young’s ostensible purposes here. You know, like career-ruining or unselfish or potentially lifesaving or something.

While employed by Te Whatu Ora, Young helped build and implement a “pay per dose” vaccination system that incrementally rewarded the jab-happiest doctors. As he was accumulating the data, Young noticed not only the massive spike in Kiwi deaths but their suspicious proximity to the decedents’ vaccination dates.

The numbers-cruncher began doing his job—analyzing data—in increasingly horrified earnest, going on to rank the country’s 20 deadliest vaccination sites. The numbers were chilling.

In an interview with attorney and journalist Liz Gunn titled M.O.A.R (Mother Of All Revelations), Young [at the time going by the alias Winston Smith] shared the appalling stats.

(Screenshot taken from Rumble video)

For perspective, New Zealand’s average death rate is .75, meaning that in a given year, seven of 1,000 people would be expected to die. The top ten vaccination sites Young studied saw post-jab fatalities ranging from just under twenty-four percent to nearly thirty-one percent, the top end of that range meaning almost one in every three people who were vaccinated there are no longer living.

(I’m purposely not including the deadliest site, a hospice facility, for obvious reasons.)

The “fact-checkers” are having a field day, of course, even though a Google search for the story turns up a paltry 210 results.

Think about that for a second. In the entire journalistic universe, Google would like us to believe there have been just a few dozen efforts to cover the tale of a whistleblower accusing government officials of an alleged mass genocide. “Yeah, but it’s New Zealand, and the guy’s a nobody,” a skeptic might argue. Conjuring the most obscure and not newsworthy thing I could think of for reference, “syrup flow study” generates 1,140 Google news results, with three of the four referenced “research events” happening just this year. Which means that more than five times as many so-called reporters found the analysis of a sticky breakfast topping more remarkable than the possible wholesale murder of thousands of human beings.

“You can’t deny it,” Young told Gunn. “It’s real, hard data. It’s the government’s own data. And these are only deaths. We have no idea of the number of adverse reactions.”

To be fair, others have analyzed Young’s data with mixed results (brilliant attorney Jeff Childers, who pens the daily fact-packed Coffee & Covid newsletter I highly recommend, put together a nice summary), although even one noteworthy skeptic concluded that the data “provides evidence of lack of safety of the vaccine.”

In unrelated news: Hurricanes can be sort of windy.

Childers also points out several interesting aspects of the official reporting, including the fact that officials have not denied that Young was an employee or asserted that his data is false or compromised in any way. His accusers are hanging their legal hat on the claims that Young “illegally accessed the data” and “spread misinformation” by accusing the jabs of being unsafe—which as Childers points out, is not a crime, even in New Zealand.

Young is facing seven years in prison (a holiday weekend compared to famed Wikileaks founder and inmate Julian Assange who if extradited to the US could be looking at an additional impossible 175 years of imprisonment for publishing classified military and diplomatic documents related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) pending a trial, which has not yet been scheduled. This even though whistleblowers are technically protected by New Zealand’s Protected Disclosures Act 2000.

“What we’re seeing is a Christchurch massacre every other day and nobody’s talking about it,” Young lamented, referring to the horrific 2019 terrorist attacks that targeted two mosques, leaving 51 dead and dozens more injured. When asked why he would risk his life, employment, and reputation to share his professional findings, Young got emotional. “Bad things happen when good people do nothing.”

Indeed, sir, they do.

If the government of New Zealand had (or has) nothing to hide, why wouldn’t they simply come forward with some sort of explanation, or better yet, proof to the contrary? “But he stole our data!” is a handy way to deflect attention from what that stolen data reveals, isn’t it?

As the saying goes, cutting out a man’s tongue doesn’t make him a liar; it only proves you’re afraid of what he might say. (Also do you see how I managed to bring oral butchery full-circle there? You’re welcome.)

Here’s hoping the judicial system does something it fails to do with depressing frequency: Exonerate the good guy and hunt down and punish the real criminals.