"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts

Until we have legislation adopted into law to ensure fiduciary accountability and transparency in public affairs we will continue to have human rights breached because the existing crown immunity and lack of any independent oversight invites corruption to flourish.


"Question authority, and think for yourself" - Timothy Leary


"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts


"Information is the currency of democracy" - Thomas Jefferson


‎"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." - Margaret Mead

"The truth is like a lion, you don't have to defend it. Let it loose, it will defend itself."

"I = m c 2 [squared] where "I" am information" - Timothy Leary

"Ring the bells that still can ring, forget your perfect offering, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Leonard Cohen

"The internet is a TV that watches you"

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Joanne Ufer's open letter to help keep workers safe:

Joshua-Ufer2-1.jpg

Joshua Ufer's mum has worked tirelessly to make working conditions safer for all in the mining industry, in Australia, New Zealand and around the world, following the death of her only son Joshua, aaged just 25 years old when he was killed in the Pike River mine explosions, after a litany of criminal negligence and failure by the corporations running the mine and the government agencies who should have ensured that the mine was shut down long before the day it exploded, killing Joshua and twenty eight other working men, family men, dearly loved men.

Joanne Ufer has written the following open letter to the Australian mining industry - it should be mandatory reading in a range of New Zealand industries and framed and hung on the wall in every smoko room and workplace, and every office of what used to be called the Department of Labour (now known as the MoBIE dicks) - particularly our forestry industry.  Joanne's approach is a holistic one, and while it's not heavy on sentiment, focusing on constructive action, this letter touches deep into the heart of any parent, any wife or partner, any mother, grandmother, and any bereaved child, it's profoundly moving, and deserves to be published far and wide in my humble opinion, and re-read often.
To all in the Australian mining industry,

It has been with a heavy heart that I have watched the news over the past two weeks. Four fatalities in the industry in nine days, Western Australia, New South Wales, with the most recent the two fatalities at Mt Lyell in Tasmania on Monday. 

This brings the total fatalities in Australia’s mining sector to six in 2013.

Firstly may I say that my thoughts and condolences go out to all the families, friends and colleagues affected by these tragic and what would appear to be totally avoidable deaths. 

I know all too well the feeling of hopelessness, despair and grief associated with losing a loved one in a mining accident. I have been there and I am deeply saddened that it still appears that the lessons of the past, the lessons given by all those who have given the ultimate sacrifice are not being taken note of.

My son died in an underground coal mine disaster but the environment doesn’t really matter.
In any sector of the mining industry, coal or metalliferous, underground or open cut - it is a risky business.

Many of us get up, go to work, do our day’s toil and go home with little thought to the enormity of that risk.

I myself did not for one minute ever think that there was the chance that my son would go to work one day and that would be it, I would never speak to him, or see him or hold him ever again but that is the reality for me and for all those who have suffered the same loss, parents, partners, children and friends.

While this time of year brings with it much joy, it is also a time that brings added stresses to many.
Allocating time to spend with all the family, spending too much money, not having enough money, going on holidays, not getting holidays approved, the fatigue that comes with the additional socialising inherent with the festive season.

For the companies, it means pressure to reach end of year targets, ensuring staffing levels are adequate when employees may be throwing the odd sickie.  I have worked in the industry myself and witnessed first-hand the pressures that are felt from all sides.

A lot of people may say: ‘it won’t ever happen to me’. But do you know what?

It can and does happen to ordinary people.  My son said not long before his death that he would be around forever and sadly that was not so. I am now looking at spending my third Christmas without him being a part of it, and it does not get any easier.

My little grand-daughter never got to spend one Christmas with her Daddy, she was born six months after he died.

Can you imagine never seeing the joy on your children’s faces on Christmas morning?

As a parent can you imagine never seeing your child’s face ever again, it is still something even after three years I find hard to comprehend.

So I plead with you all please, please remain vigilant.

Look out for the signs that things may not be all right.

Watch yourself and have your mate’s back.

Don’t be afraid to say something if you feel your safety is being compromised. 

Remember too that safety doesn’t begin the moment you clock on.

As soon as you step foot out of your home, or your camp, it begins.

Don’t become another statistic.

Don’t let your family face Christmas and New Year without you.

Stay safe over the festive season and always.

Kind regards,
Joanne Ufer


 This is the ladder that the corporate Scrooges deemed adequate for Joshua and his workmates to escape from the mine in an emergency - workmates like Joseph Dunbar - killed on his first day of work, aged just seventeen years and one day - this ladder was NOT fit for the purpose and management KNEW that and so did the Department of Labour and the Union!  Indisputable evidence was given at the commission of inquiry that the ladder was NOT fit for the purpose!

There is more information at these links about the Pike River mine, including a link to the Trust fund set up for the families of the miners, to provide for their children.  Please spare a thought for these families, now facing their third Christmas without their loved ones, their sons, brothers, husbands, fathers and friends, used as a pawn by this government, the innocent victims of corporate greed and systemic government failure, incompetence and corruption.

Sunday, November 24, 2013

South End school Carterton - update on the ongoing corruption and incompetence:


The ongoing corruption and incompetence of the Ministry of Education and the administration and governance of the South End school is exposing the lack of oversight of our schools, which presents a massive risk to our children and is particularly relevant as the implementation of Charter Schools looms.

Hekia Parata is completely incompetent and has dealt with this matter in a deliberately corrupt manner.  There is no misunderstanding, just a deliberate and ongoing attempt to lie and decieve, on the part of the school Board of Trustees, the Ministry of Education, and the Minister herself.  Here's the most recent correspondence regarding this matter - the complaint is ABOUT the Board and any attempt to pass it on TO the Board is ridiculous - they have refused to respond to communications since sending me the slanderous and defamatory letter sacking me in 2009!  Furthermore, the incompetence and corruption has continued to be revealed and I was handed private correspondence between the Principal and another staff member showing that he was sacked in a similarly outrageous manner, and his privacy breached in a disgraceful manner.
Jilly Tyler knows perfectly well that I have sent over thirty emails to the Board of Trustees regarding this matter, and made numerous attempts to resolve the matter according to their 'procedures' and they have REPEATEDLY refused to respond or engage with me in any manner whatsoever - which is why I wrote to the Minister in the first place!  Jilly Tyler also knows perfectly well and so should Hekia Parata, that a Statutory Manager was appointed specifically to deal with "personnel matters" and that the appointment of the Statutory Manager was a direct result of the incompetence and dishonesty of the Board of Trustees!

When I complained about this insulting response from Jilly Tyler of the Ministry of Education to the Minister, Hekia Parata, I received this equally ridiculous response, which shows that the Ministry is seriously dysfunctional and the Minister is seriously incompetent - this matter is clearly a breach of natural justice, it clearly involves a conspiracy to lie about the original false allegation, which has now been compounded by the further defamatory and untrue allegation regarding the documentation regarding the sacking of the former groundsman Mr R and the correspondence between Mr R and the former Principal, which was handed to me by another concerned parent, and the continuation of the lies and the bullying from the Board and staff at the South End school.  Here's the totally inadequate response from the Minister:



There's been no response whatsoever from the Board - as Parata well knows!

Labour MP Chris Hipkins was asked to present a petition to parliament regarding the matter - here's his response - cunningly referring to the matter as "the manner in which you were dismissed from the school - blatantly ignoring the REST of the problem!  And how it's not just me - the former groundsman was dismissed in the exact same incompetent and unlawful manner and it's not just the dismissals - it's the unlawful BULLYING - and the blatant and ongoing DISHONESTY and attempts to PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE - and the fact that this matter directly involves some of the most vulnerable children in New Zealand!  Wairarapa regularly has over TWICE the national rate of suicide in a country with some of the highest rates in the world and while the mainstream media are fond of reporting all sorts of happy clappy school garden 'stories' as 'news' they refuse to report on THIS matter because it inconveniently exposes the truth about our so called community leaders and representatives and exposes the fact that the Emperors have no clothes and are masquerading - if a simple matter like this is beyond the scope of their abilities, they need to STEP DOWN:

Transparency in New Zealand are documenting this outrageous abuse of taxpayers money - spent corruptly covering up gross incompetence and a pack of slanderous LIES!  Nothing but a great big gravy train!  The Emperor has no clothes and Hekia Parata and Chris Hipkins and others have NO integrity!  No wonder New Zealand has such a disgraceful record of child abuse and child mortality!

Here's why the Ombudsmen's Office is snowed under and not dealing with complaints - they need to just stop covering up corruption, because it's obvious that this matter could have been sorted out at the FIRST complaint I made back in 2009 and that the only reason it is NOT being dealt with is because of the level of blatant corruption and incompetence funded by the taxpayers of New Zealand and the lack of any accountability.


Corrupt local Police officers lied to the Board of Trustees and it's time everyone involved admitted it and put it right!  I will be filing action in the Court within the next two weeks regarding this matter and every parent and every taxpayer in New Zealand should be outraged and sickened at this blatant ongoing corruption!

Saturday, November 23, 2013

More on violent fraudster Michael Francis Murphy and taxpayer funded litigation:

More on the secret life of information, and how the media mediate between us and reality:

The local 'news media' recently 'reported' the fact that local woman Michelle McGreal, and her partner Michael Francis Murphy (who committed a violent home invasion and physical attack on me in my home in 2009, for which corrupt local police officers refused to charge him) stole at least $77,800 of taxpayers money by defrauding the Ministry of Social Welfare.  The report states:
"Roll of shame:
Carterton woman Michelle McGreal was sentenced to six months home detention and 200 hours community work after being convicted on fraud and dishonesty charges in June 2010. She was overpaid by $77,800 after not informing Work and Income that she was living with her de facto partner."

Conspicuously absent from this 'news report' is any mention whatsoever of whether or not Murphy and McGreal were required to repay any of this money.

Murphy has been boasting loudly that not only have he and his partner not been required to repay ANY of the money they stole, but that he has ALSO recently received a sum of money believed to be well over $50,000 as a result of a claim he made about being abused in foster care when he was younger, on top of the nearly $80,000 he and McGreal stole.

After a number of local people contacted me enquiring how they could find out whether any of the money had been repaid, I made an Official Information Act request to the Ministry of Social Development, which was refused.

The Ministry of Social Development advised me to write to the Ministry of Justice, which I did - the Ministry of Justice refused the request and told me to write to the Ministry of Social Development.

The responses are published below to show you how your taxes are being spent - covering up blatant corruption - the taxpayers have a right to know whether or not any of this money was repaid, and whether or not any attempt whatsoever was made to seek repayment of ANY of the money - particularly as Murphy is boasting of receiving a very large payout from the Ministry of Social Development as a result of his unproven allegations of mistreatment - it is outrageous that the amount of the money he and McGreal stole was not deducted from this payout, which indicates that Murphy has received over a million dollars by fraud, he seems to be immune from prosecution for the violent attack on me and other crimes he regularly commits, and even when he is prosecuted, it seems that the prosecution, as well as the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Social Development and other parties involved will go to any lengths to cover up the fact that Murphy and his partner were virtually let off without penalty for this deliberate fraud.

It seems that the same lawyers who are telling me that they can't do anything about the gross injustices documented on this website unless I pay them exhorbitant sums of money, have no such qualms about assisting Michael Francis Murphy steal even MORE money from the tax payers of New Zealand, while the same public servants whose incompetence allowed Murphy and his partner to steal our money, refuse to tell us whether or not they even sought reparation and if not why not - read it for yourself:







The responses from these government departments are shameful!  It is obviously in the public interest to know this particular information and clearly ridiculous time wasting procrastination to refuse or delay the provision of it - particularly as the media have released all the other information but not the vital bit about whether McGreal and Murphy were even asked to pay any of this money back!.

We have today sent the following email to the Court:
To the Registrar,
Masterton District Court:   masterton.dc@justice.govt.nz
I request a copy of the judicial decision and any other information regarding whether Michelle McGreal was required to repay any of the reported $77,800 she was found guilty of defrauding the Ministry of Social Development of, according to this newspaper article.  It is in the public interest to know whether McGreal was required to repay the money or whether any attempt to have any of it repaid was even made by MSD and if not why not.  The article refered to is at this link:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=11065521

Friday, October 11, 2013

Standing Up For Democracy in NZ – by Lewis Verduyn:

Standing Up For Democracy in NZ – YOU Hold The Key

by Lewis Verduyn - October 11, 2013

We are all born equal, and sovereignty resides in the People, whose power is the source of law. But if you don't know the basic rules of the game, you will be incapable of defending your rights and freedoms, while your Public Servants will become your government masters.

People create governments to serve, not rule. Our representatives are elected into office, not power. So when our government repeatedly defies the will of the People, rolls back democratic processes, avoids debate by acting under urgency, and passes legislation that violates our Bill of Rights, it's time to examine our “democracy”.

The John Key government has dismissed widespread opposition to asset sales, the secret TPP talks, the planned cuts to RMA protections, and the controversial GCSB spying act which rejects the democratic precept that natural rights cannot be overridden without demonstrable cause. Ministers have ignored and demeaned the Law Society, the Human Rights Commission, and the Privacy Commissioner. Even more concerning is the apparent suppression of critical resource consent information in favour of vested interests.

So is our Kiwi democracy being steadily eroded by those who would take advantage of their positions of trust, and what are the fundamental principles that underpin our rights and freedoms? What exactly is a democratic government?

Some basic principles of democratic governance:
• All people are created equal, with inalienable rights and freedoms.
• Sovereignty resides in the People, whose power is the source of Law.
• Private people institute public governments to serve them with Public Servants.
• Officer holders of governments are accountable to their employers, the People.
• The State cannot grant any privilege that is not already a sovereign right.
• A government that ignores the inherent right of consent is not democratic.
• Rights carry duties, starting with the eternal vigilance needed to protect them.

The right to self-determination is an imperative principle of democratic governance and national sovereignty. But it is easier to describe the inherent rights and freedoms of the People than it is to design and protect a democratic society.

In any governing arrangement it is essential to define the roles of those involved to clearly establish duties and responsibilities.

A democratic government is a Public Trust:
• A freely-elected government is a Public Trust instituted by private sovereign people, together called “the State”.
• Government officers are Trustees called “Public Servants”. All Public Servants have a Fiduciary duty to serve the best interests of the Beneficiaries, called “the People”.
• As grantors and underwriters, the People are burdened with the ultimate responsibility for their Public Trust.

The People delegate limited powers to their Trustees, giving them authority to act on their behalf in the role of Public Servants. These Public Servants perform their management duties subject to their jurisdictional authority.

Public Servants often presume that they have authority over you, which is not always true, such is their conditioning, and ours.

Jurisdiction follows a natural hierarchy. The order of jurisdiction is logical:

Nature/God > Man/Woman > State/Government > Corporation/Person

Men and women live in the jurisdiction of the Common Law, which is de jure “in law”.

The jurisdiction of the State is de jure Common Law.

New Zealand's system of government is a de jure constitutional monarchy. Every office holder including the Head of State, the Queen – who governs “in the right of” the People, swears an oath to serve “according to law”, which is de jure Common Law. Therefore, the highest recourse is to the People directly, not their government, hence the constitutional importance of Trial by Jury.

The People's Common Law power of justice is “Judicial”, while the government's delegated power of management is “Executive”, and exercised as “Legislative”.

From the beginning, the People knew that the democratic State would be destroyed if the power they vested in the Judiciary was ever corrupted by self-serving interests through the Legislature, for in this way the People's access to the Common Law could be restricted, and their democratic rights and freedoms could be eroded, quietly reducing them to a life of servitude. As a precaution against corruption, the People have separated the powers and functions of the State.

The three branches of “democratic” government:
• Legislature: Enacts statutes to regulate legal entities in society, prescribing “terms and conditions” which depend for their effect upon the consent of the governed. Statutes franchise benefits and privileges in exchange for freedoms and rights, as services that should promote order, welfare and equality.
• Executive: The Cabinet with Departments. They are the managers of the government answerable to their employers, the private sovereign People, who will either support their Executive by giving consent, or will oppose their Executive by withdrawing consent, which can be done at any time, not only during a government election, because democracy is not a three-yearly event.
• Judiciary: The People's Courts, for the preservation of the State and Justice. Lower courts apply “the statutes” to the legal entities created and approved by the government according to prescribed legislation. Higher courts, with Juries, decide “the Law” according to evidence and precedents in the Common Law.

Notably, over time, “administrative courts” have arisen in commerce presided over by “commercial list” judges.

The Law and Statutes (Statutes are not “Laws”!)

We hear almost every day that the government is “passing a law”, which strictly speaking is not true, because governments enact statutes, not laws. Statutes are not called laws for the simple reason that they are different in origin and effect. In practice, statutes only have the “colour of law”, not the “power of law”. The use of the word “law” in respect of statutes, without clarification, is misleading.

Statutes are Acts, Bills, and Legislative Instruments:
• 'Act, civil law, contracts. A writing which states in a legal form that a thing has been said, done, or agreed.' – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
• 'Bill, legislation. An instrument drawn or presented by a member or committee to a legislative body for its approbation and enactment.' – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856
• 'Instrument, contracts. The writing which contains some agreement, and is so called because it has been prepared as a memorial of what has taken place or been agreed upon. The agreement and the instrument in which it is contained are very different things, the latter being only evidence of the existence of the former. The instrument or form of the contract may be valid, but the contract itself may be void on account of fraud.' – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

All statutes are legislation prescribing “legal” instruments, which are contracts. The origin of all legal jurisdiction over you is your given consent.

The foundation of democracy is the consent of the governed.

If you accept that we are all created equal, and presumed innocent, then how can anyone have authority over you without your consent? It's not possible.

Statutes, by right, require consent. The New Zealand Police website correctly says: “It's important for us to know what people think of our service - in New Zealand we police by consent and cannot afford to lose the support of the people we serve.”

You can never be forced to give your consent, because that would be “under duress” which is not genuine consent. Your right to contract, or not to contract, is unlimited. The State cannot remove a right without due process of law, including notice and opportunity to defend. Otherwise, you retain the right to say: “I do not consent”.

Implicit in the right of consent is the right to withdraw consent. Indeed, the People have a duty to do so in order to defend their rights and freedoms, because only the People can redress the corruption of their democratic government. These people may waive societal benefits. But when the imposition of liabilities outweighs the benefits, such a waiver may be justifiable. The choice must be theirs to make.

The de jure jurisdiction is the last line of defence. It divides living men and women from the inferior “legal fiction” government.

Governments create and control legal fictions.

The government is but an agency created by the sovereign People, which therefore cannot rise above its creators. It is brought into our consciousness from nothing. It has no life or will of its own. It is something created and perpetuated in the minds of the participants – it is a “legal fiction”.

A government, as an artificial construct, can create more artificial legal fictions such as corporations or “legal personalities”, over which it has control.

You are born into your own sovereign jurisdiction, as a living entity with inalienable rights and responsibilities. This is your “private capacity”. The government later creates a second legal entity on the Birth Certificate, providing you with a “public capacity”. Since the government controls what it creates, anyone who “acts” in a “public capacity” as a “legal personality” is giving their consent to the government.

Public Servants routinely make the presumption that we are all “in the public”, which is why retaining your rights “in the private” is difficult. To achieve “lawful standing”, as a living man or woman, it is necessary to “rebut the presumption” that you are acting in “joinder”.

Since jurisdiction equates to power, and power equates to money, it is not surprising that a mysterious language has evolved for all legal and lawful matters, called “legalese”. Inevitably, the most important knowledge is obscured and manipulated by those who would subvert the de jure State for their own purposes.

Any court without a jury is an “administrative court”.

Importantly, any court without a jury is an administrative court, without the Common Law authority of the sovereign People. Administrative courts require the free and genuine consent of living men and women, and otherwise have no jurisdiction.

'The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is NO authority for administrative courts in this country, and no Act can be passed to legitimise them.' - Halsbury's Law 2011

Administrative courts operate with a subordinate de facto “in practice” jurisdiction for the quasi-administration of statutes.

The de facto jurisdiction is Admiralty Maritime, also called the “law of the sea”. It is essentially for settling commercial disputes among publicly registered corporations, including people who consent to “act” as “legal personalities”.

The de jure jurisdiction is Common Law, also called the “law of the land”. It is for the provision of justice among living men and women, whereby decisions of law are made by living men and women on juries, who are not “actors”.

“You get the democracy you are prepared to stand up for.” - John Key, 2007.

We the People are responsible for the failures of our government. Every power exercised by our government is delegated from us.

As a culture, we have become increasingly dependent on the government, and wary of its inflated power. We have been deceived by the corporate media, psychologically conditioned to be subservient, and trained to be material consumers and debtors even if we destroy ourselves and our planet while enriching a parasitic hegemony.

We have forgotten that our Public Servants are indeed our “servants”.

Democracy, by definition, requires the active participation and oversight of the People. If we are not prepared to “stand up” for what we believe in, our lack of rebuke allows corruption to take hold, eroding our democratic rights and freedoms.

However, the People should remember that the “legal personality” has no arms and legs – it has no “standing”. It cannot “stand up”. It is a servant of the State.

People commonly surrender their inherent democratic rights whenever they do not expressly reserve their rights in everyday legal matters, in documents and verbally.

Your consent is your signature. Your consent is your silence. YOU hold the key ...

[IMPORTANT: This article reflects the considered opinions of the author, a jurisprudence researcher, and should not be construed as legal advice. By: Lewis: Verduyn, All Rights Reserved, Without Prejudice, UCC 1-308]

______________________________________


The Law    Statutes
PEOPLE make The Law
by the acceptance/validation of Jury verdicts    PARLIAMENT makes Statutes
by the en-Act-ments of Legislation
“The Law” is the People's “Common Law”,
unlike Statutory “Colour of Law”    “Statutes” are “Legislative Instruments”,
unlike the “Common Law”
Laws are moral CUSTOMS made effective
by the CONSCIENCE of the People    Statutes are offered CONTRACTS made effective by the CONSENT of the Governed
'LAW. As a compound adjective “common-law” is understood as contrasted with or opposed to “statutory.” ' [Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition]    'STATUTE. The written will of the legislature...; This word is used in contradistinction to the common law.' [Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856]
THE LAW PROTECTS THE PEOPLE
from harm, loss, and deceit    STATUTES GOVERN LEGAL ENTITIES
as a franchise benefit to the State
We are ALL EQUAL
in the eyes of The Law    We are NOT ALL EQUAL
in the books of Statutes
Laws are based on PRINCIPLES    Statutes are based on PRACTICALITIES
Laws evolve over TIME and often endure    Statutes can QUICKLY come and go
LAWFUL refers to THE LAW    LEGAL refers to LEGISLATION
A Jury of People can overturn a Statute    The Legislature cannot overturn Case Law
Laws can be taken into Statutes
but if repealed in Statute they remain in Law    Statutes can serve The Law
but cannot diminish or expand The Law
De jure “in law”    De facto “in practice”
The People's Common Law
“Law of the Land”    Admiralty Maritime Commercial
“Law of the Sea”
           

Inalienable Rights
Inalienable Rights are the Inherent, Sovereign, Natural Rights that existed before the creation of the State, and which, being antecedent to and above the State, can never be taken away, diminished, altered, or levied by the State, except by Due Process of Law. Nor can any Inalienable Right be fundamentally removed or waived by contract, whether by non-disclosure, which is fraud and unenforceable in Law, or knowingly by sufferance, which is contrary to the Spirit of the Law and prejudicial to Sovereignty.

The Original, Permanent, Inalienable Rights of every Man or Woman, include:
The Right to Life, Freedom, Health and the Pursuit of Happiness
The Right to Contract, or Not to Contract, which is Unlimited
The Right to Earn a Living Income by being Compensated with Wages or a Salary in a Fair Exchange for one's Work
The Right to Travel in the Ordinary Course of one's Life and Business
The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality, free from Unwarranted Invasion
The Right to Own, and Hold Property, lawfully without Trespass
The Right to Self-Defence when threatened with Harm, Loss, or Deceit
The Right to Due Process of Law, with Notice and Opportunity to Defend
The Right to be Presumed Innocent, suffering No Detention or Arrest, No Search or Seizure, without Reasonable Cause
The Right to Remain Silent when accused, to avoid Self-Incrimination
The Right to Equality in the eyes of the Law, and to Equal Representation
The Right to Trial by Jury, being an Impartial Panel of one's Peers
The Right to Appeal in Law against Conviction or Sentence, or both
The Right to Expose Knowledge necessary to one's Rights and Freedoms
The Right to Peaceful Association, Assembly, Expression, and Protest
The Right to Practice a Religion, and to have Beliefs, of one's choosing
The Right to Love, and to Consensual Marriage with Children, as a Family
The Right to Security from Abuse, Persecution, Tyranny, and War
The Right to Refuse to Kill under command, by reason of Conscience
The Right to Live in Peace and be left alone when Law-Abiding

Surely, the most critical failure of The People is their failure to ensure the teaching and common knowledge of their Inalienable Rights. If you do not know your Rights, you effectively have none. By the path of Ignorance, whether by Apathy or Deception, The People arrive in a State of Exploitation, Oppression, and Tyranny.

Friday, October 4, 2013

Independent report damns EQC as they gang up with Her Majesty's Solicitor General and the Clown Law Orifice to persecute whistleblower:

Marc Krieger cast transparency over the 'work' of the Earthquake Commission (EQC), and provided an independent report into their activities , and was recently served with an application by Her Majesty's Solicitor General in respect of alleged contempt of Court for his efforts.  The application is astounding - and deeply concerning if it indicates the calibre of the writers and the focus of their efforts.

Wellington consultancy Martin Jenkins (MJ) and Associates and insurance expert Derek Scott were asked to conduct an independent review of EQC’s response to the Canterbury earthquakes.

They have reported that the Earthquake Commission planned poorly for a major catastrophe and therefore lacked the leadership and systems needed to cope with the Canterbury earthquakes.

The consultants interviewed 75 EQC staff and contractors late in 2011 and early 2012 and found:
  • Only three of the theoretical list of 20 executive support people for EQC were available on September 4, 2010, the date of the first major earthquake.
  • It took a year for EQC to appoint a general manager with the management capabilities to deal with a large scale disaster effort. 
  • EQC’s poor response was determined by its pre-earthquake family culture – “nothing will happen until I retire.”
  • People were tossed into the field which worked well where individuals were highly experienced and capable … But there were many cases “where initially we had no idea what we were doing.”
  • iPads using Comet software were introduced with minimal cost benefit analysis and proved incompatible with EQC’s IBM claims software (ClaimCenter). The iPad application could deal with only one assessment per property and was therefore unsuitable for multiple events.
  • Despite EQC having invested in a web-based, field orientated software system, it initially used paper data recording in the field.
  •  Input staff did not fully understand ClaimCenter and by November 2011, ClaimCenter had 112,000 entries against which no activity had been entered. There was also a discrepancy of 40,000 building exposures between ClaimCenter data and Canterbury-sourced data.
  •  Apportionment of damage between events was “largely subjective” despite best efforts.

EQC had a permanent staff of 22 and outsourced all core functions – call centres for claims lodgement, claims administration and processing (to Brisbane) and field operations.

“In the absence of overarching direction individual solutions were created on the spot with negative downstream consequences,” the report said.

It also criticised EQC for its lack of expertise on its systems capability. The expertise “needed to be at hand to constantly advise the management of realistic possibilities”.

“Without adequate reflection new challenges were often met with more resources or new teams rather than working smarter eg experienced staff claimed better use of the ClaimCenter system could have saved 100 staff.”

What happened was that a group of greedy public servants saw an opportunity to create a lot of overpaid jobs for their mates and because of a total lack of accountability in NZ at present regarding the public sector, they got away with it, to the cost of all NZ taxpayers, and the people of Christchurch and Seddon in particular.

EQC’s lack of planning and project management skills meant suppliers took advantage charging premium rates, the MJ report said. Hourly rates were set which were more costly than fixed-term contracts and the report gave the example of Datacom charging a scanning cost of $6 per page.

The Scott report said EQC found it difficult to maintain standards as leaders at its various field offices and imported assessors were inconsistent and the pods were all managed differently.

“The training function experienced difficulties in responding to continual changes in form and work processes made by individual field offices, whilst the Canterbury Events office frequently changed the names and functions of teams.”

Further thought also needed to be given to better prescribing jobs to the provider agencies.

“… A number of assessors provided by Verifact (Brisbane-based firm that supplied 210 Australian assessors) were either physically unsuitable for the job or lacked the necessary skills including those of basic numeracy. Many assessors and estimators appear to lack knowledge of EQC cover, the 1993 Act, building code or repair strategies even after induction and training,” the Scott report noted.

Unrest occurred when inexperienced and untrained staff were paid the same rates as personnel previously contracted to EQC.

Effective performance management did not appear to be part of EQC culture, Scott said, with the focus on quantity rather than quality.  Judge Noble said "I'm left with the uneasy impression that the understanding of accountability is blurred" regarding Crown accountability.

The NZ High Court sits on shaky ground records the application of Her Majesty's Solicitor General and the Clown Law Orifice, and Mr Krieger's response, and other reports show that lawyers and Judges are fiddling with themselves while New Zealand democracy and human rights go up in a puff of smoke and flames.

Corrupt Police prosecutors like Garry Wilson and Gregory Peters regularly conspire with Wilson's partner, Masterton Court registrar Liz Harpleton, and other Police, lawyers and Court staff, etc, to pervert the course of justice in the Masterton Court - they are incompetent and corrupt in the extreme. 

Complaints are routinely fobbed off and ignored, and the social and economic costs mount up - a dysfunctional legal system masquerading as a 'justice system' - used as a trough for pigs like Bryan Yeoman and the above mentioned police officers, ex police officers, lawyers, etc, and some of the highest rates of suicide in the world. 


Saturday, September 21, 2013

Southland Police settle out of Court for unjustified thuggery:

Inspector Lane Todd, Southland Area Commander, NZ Police
Southland Police have elected to settle out of Court with an Invercargill farmer after attacking him in his own home following a vague and apparently unsubstantiated allegation.  They also demonstrated why arming police with guns is a very bad idea indeed.

On 18 March 2012 Les Cooper of Greenhills, Invercargill, rang Police alleging that one of his neighbours, Corey Vreugdenhil  had threatened him as he drove past Cooper on his tractor.  The transcript of the phone call does not stand up to scrutiny, it's simply not credible that the words and gesture involved could have been distinguished at the distance, over the sound of the tractor's engine - the report states that Mr Vreugdenhil "said" the words, not 'shouted' or 'yelled' them, and pointing at a person is certainly not a criminal offence.
Mr Cooper seems to have a history of aggressive and violent behaviour toward Mr Vreugdenhil.  In June 2007 Mr Cooper attacked and assaulted Mr Vreugdenhil as he was erecting a fence on his property.   In October 2007 Mr Vreugdenhil made a complaint to Police after Mr Cooper chased him at high speed in a vehicle and ran him off the road, ramming Mr Vreugdenhil's vehicle three times, as Mr Vreugdenhil was dropping his young daughter off at the school bus at 8 in the morning.  Apparently, local Police (Sgt Olaf Jensen) refused to press any charges against Mr Cooper, despite Mr Vreugdenhil making a formal complaint.  In fact, the Police tactical report (link below) states that there were around 15 previous incidents between the pair which involved the Police.

This incident occurred days after the local body elections in 2007 in which Mr Vreugdenhil stood against Tim Shadbolt, whose involvement with Mr Vreugdenhil also warrants scrutiny.  Mr Vreugdenhil was part of a group of farmers that battled the Invercargill Council for lower rates in 2009.  The Council used exactly the same tactics as they used against me - misleading the group regarding the Council meetings instead of engaging in constructive dialogue to achieve a solution.  It seems that many others shared Mr Vreugdenhil's concerns, protesting rates rises of around 400%.

Corey Vreugdenhil
This bears a disturbing similarity to the incestuous relationship between local politicians and police in the Wairarapa, and the matters involving myself and disgraced ex MP Georgina Beyer. Certain senior members of the NZ Police are clearly acting as private mercenaries in campaigns of politically motivated corruption, and demonstrating extreme prejudice and bias.

Back to Mr Vreugdenhil.  In 2011, someone deliberately vandalised a dam on Mr Vreugdenhil's farm, wasting about 250,000 litres of water.  This reminds me of the sort of thing Ewen Macdonald and his mate Callum Boe got up to while Macdonald's wife and children slept.  Again, police seem to have refused to investigate the matter and no charges were laid.

Following Mr Cooper's phone call to Police - for which it seems there is enough evidence to charge him with making a false complaint to Police, wasting Police time, perverting the course of justice, etc, local Police decided to launch a major operation and 'arrest' Mr Vreugdenhil - for some vague unspecified charge.  I'm pretty sure that if Police arrest you, they have to tell you what exactly it is that you're under arrest FOR.  This is even more or an insult to the intelligence when you read the Police tactical report, at the link in the next paragraph, in which Police allege that (as well as being "a very large statue") Mr Vreugdenhil "is very hard to reason with and explain to the reason for any Police procedures and actions that they undertake." (sic):


This report also demonstrates the lack of basic literacy evident among the NZ Police.  Literacy is very important when it comes to Court and highly underrated by the NZ Police.

So Police armed themselves with guns and tasers and went to Mr Vreugdenhil's home, where he and his wife were quietly going about their lawful business, not causing any disturbance or offence to anyone, refused to tell him what he was 'under arrest' for, pepper sprayed him, handcuffed him, THEN punched him in the face while he had his hands handcuffed behind his back, and tasered him and held him in the cells overnight.  It's unclear whether any formal charges were ever laid against Mr Vreugdenhil as a result of the incident, which seems to have been completely unjustified, and the result of a malicious and vexatious complaint.

Police alleged that Mr Vreugdenhil attempted to grab a Glock pistol from one of the officers, however the claim isn't credible when the documents are examined, it's clear that Mr Vreugdenhill was blinded by the pepper spray, was handcuffed, and that he "became compliant" when the taser was aimed at him - making it unnecessary to actually fire the taser - of course that didn't deter the Police from firing it.  The tactical report makes it perfectly clear that the Keystone Cops were panicking, that they had a very poorly thought out plan, and acted like a bunch of amateur thugs.  It's compelling evidence of the reasons why we should NOT routinely arm the NZ Police!

Mr Vreugdenhil's wife was present at the time and made a statement to Police, which is at this link.

The officers involved were Inspector Lane Todd - Southland Area Commander, Senior Sergeant Terry, Sergeant Ng, Constable Terry, and Constable Elder, among others.  The $10,000 should come out of their severance pay - why should taxpayers have to fork out for this vicious thuggery!


This post will be updated shortly.

Friday, September 20, 2013

Rob Harris latest scam raises ethics concerns at Universities

Rob Harris stood as a candidate in the local body elections in Carterton, and approached me for support.

I found him to be a devious and untrustworthy man, with his own agenda, which focuses on filling his own pockets and those of his mates by ripping off vulnerable people and scamming the system any way he can, like many of the other candidates.

While the local propaganda publication which passes for a "news" paper refused to publish anything questionable about its favorite candidates and continues to slander me and other worthwhile candidates, a Massey University journalist, Lisa McCauley, reported a more accurate report about Mr Harris, which has since been erased from the internet and made inaccessible, which is why Kiwis who care must copy and keep information and share it constructively regardless of threats about copyright from the media.  I am sharing this report because it is in the public interest that people know who they are voting for
:


Thursday, September 19, 2013

Chris Hipkins refuses to help vulnerable children:

The National government is implementing their 'Charter Schools' plan in the face of widespread public opposition.  The public protest is well founded!  Privatisation of the administration of education has resulted in a lack of transparency and accountability and it's our vulnerable children who are paying the price.  The government is abdicating its responsibilities to the taxpayer - the people who pay the politicians wages - and fobbing off concerns with all manner of pathetic excuses such as the ones from Hekia Parata and Chris Hipkins.

It began with the 'Tomorrows Schools' program, which introduced Boards of Trustees and transferred powers and responsibilities from the Ministry of Education to the Boards of Trustees, but failed to put measures into place to ensure accountability of the Boards, who now appear to be a law unto themselves.  In the interests of transparency, the matter of the bullying and corruption at the South End school is being documented and published, so that New Zealanders can see how their taxes are being spent.

This matter involves bullying, incompetence, corruption, deceit and serious privacy breaches, and all New Zealanders who pay taxes or have children should read it.

Clearly this isn't just my perception of the matter, the reports of the Education Review Office speak for themselves, and are utterly damning.  The hypocrisy of the various politicians who have been contacted is unbelievable!  They say they care about vulnerable children, feeding the kids, etc, but when it comes to actually doing anything constructive about those matters, they refuse.  The only politician who has actually done anything constructive about the matters is Kelvyn Alp, who wrote to the Ombudsmen and demanded that they reopen the so called investigation into the matters, after I received a rude and arrogant letter refusing to reopen the inquiry when I requested them to.  Kelvyn Alp's letter forced the Ombudsmen to reopen the so called inquiry - but over a year later there has been NO action whatsoever from the Ombudsmen, and it's become obvious that they have no intention of doing anything about it and are deliberately corrupt and grossly incompetent.

Recent correspondence regarding the bullying and corruption at the South End school:


Tena koe Chris Hipkins, 

We request that you present this petition to parliament for an urgent inquiry into the situation at the South End School which is completely unacceptable. 

Repeated complaints about this have been fobbed off by the government and various agencies responsible for dealing with the matter. 

I established a vegetable garden, fruit trees, and several other associated projects at the South End school, and running a program teaching the children to grow their own food, prepare it, cook it, preserve it, trade it, as well as using the Let's Get Growing program to teach other important life skills, and deliver an effective suicide prevention program and anti depression program, as well as a school holiday program.  These programs empowered the less well off and more vulnerable members of the community in particular, and were very popular and effective, for individuals as well as strengthening the community, reducing crime, violence, child abuse, etc, as well as raising numeracy and literacy rates and many other positive learning outcomes.   

The Board of Trustees of the South End School suddenly sent me a letter which contained a false accusation, the letter stated that I had been "recently charged by the police with an offence involving a child", this letter terminated my employment on the grounds of this false accusation, and stated that the employment would be reinstated "should the charges be withdrawn or you are acquitted".
I told the Principal and the Secretary and one of the members of the BoT who is known to me that there never were any charges, and requested a meeting with he BoT to discuss the letter and the allegation in it, and the reinstatement of my position.  I told the Principal and the Deputy Principal that the allegation was false, and malicious, and requested that they pass on my request to the BoT for a meeting with them.  The BoT has repeatedly refused to acknowledge this request to meet with me, or engage in any communication whatsoever regarding the matter, and members of the BoT have threatened and intimidated me when I have gone to the school, and someone apparently rung police after I went to the school.  The letter 'sacking' me is clear in the intent to reinstate me if the non existent 'charges' alleged are not upheld, and that is the remedy I seek.  Lawyers have stated that due to changes in legal aid laws they 
Apparently, a Statutory Manager was appointed at the South End School approximately two years ago, his name is Ken Wilson, and he also refuses to engage in communication - I've requested an email address but this has not been provided, and Mr Wilson has refused to respond to telephone enquiries or requests for a meeting, and been hostile and obstructive on the telephone. 

The Principal made a complaint to police, alleging that I called him a "thieving crook", but this was not upheld, the Principal then left the school (and the teaching profession apparently).  The groundsman, who was also the subject of complaints of bullying also left, but it seems the core element of bullies in the BoT has remained, and continues to refuse to engage in dialogue regarding the matter and refuses to do the right thing and reinstate me, and it seems that there is a complete lack of accountability - the letter at this link from "Jilly Tyler" of the Ministry is outrageous!  Our children deserve better than this and so do Kiwi labourers like me - we should be teaching children self sustainability instead of the corporate welfare mentality with Fonterra and religiously oriented Sanitarium handouts - encouraging them to eat fruit and vegetables rather than milk and wheat products, and encouraging them to grow their own food (popcorn for breakfast, vegetable soup for lunch and a big bowl of fruit all day for snacking). 

Since receiving the letter I have tried to resolve the matter and have asked to be reinstated - in accordance with the final paragraph of the letter (at this link). 

These matters have gone from bad to worse, and there has now been another similarly malicious and incompetent sacking of another staff member.  Private, personal documents and correspondence regarding that other staff member and the termination of their employment was given to me by a parent who acquired it because it was mistakenly given to their child to take home by the school secretary - the same woman who is refusing to pass on my communication with the school and the BoT - the school secretary, and her and Ms Brown then unbelievably accused me of stealing the correspondence from Brown's letterbox - despite the witness who gave it to me and who will swear in Court that it was given to her child by the secretary!  Her child will swear it too, and so will the child's teacher apparently!
Local MP John Hayes and Education Minister Hekia Parata have both refused to address the matter, Hayes has ignored all correspondence, and Parata wrote a ridiculous letter which is at this link, together with the letter from the BoT and related information. 

I would like the school to honour the letter they sent me and reinstate me to my position at the school without delay, for the benefit of our entire community, not just me personally, in accordance with the final paragraph of the letter.  Thank you for your attention to this matter, I look forward to receiving your response. 

Yours faithfully, 

Katherine Raue.






The letter's available to view at this link also in case readers have difficulty adjusting it in the embedded document above.  Here is my response:
Dear Chris Hipkins, 
Your letter is an insult to the intelligence!   
Please pass the matter on to one of your colleagues if it's "beyond the scope of your ability"!
- Pass it on to Michael Bott - and the rest of the Labour MPs and candidates with law degrees - and ask him to take urgent action and write to the South End School asking for an explanation - writing such a letter is within the scope of anyone's ability and you know it! 
Our kids are at risk and we will not be fobbed off like this - I am now publishing your letter on the internet and actively encouraging people to circulate it because I am so disgusted by your response and your refusal to act! 

Katherine Raue


And here's what a REAL politician did about this outrageous incompetence and corruption - Kelvyn Alp, co-founder of the OURNZ Party, wrote to the Ombudsmen demanding that they re-open their 'investigation' immediately because it was clearly an orchestrated litany of LIES!  The Ombudsmen did so and this elicited the truth - that the defamatory allegations about me originated from the corrupt local Police, and elicited a pathetic excuse for an apology which is so insulting that Court action is now underway!

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Lawyer Lynching Labelled “Show Trial”

~ Kiwisfirst

Judge Rhys Harrison
Judge Rhys Harrison
Political oppression against those who exercise their freedom to express critical views of judges is set to play out in Auckland District Courtroom 5.3 on 2 September 2013, where the New Zealand Law Society is seeking to have human rights barrister Evgeny Orlov debarred for privately criticising Court of Appeal Judge Rhys Harrison (pictured).

The prosecution has been five years in the making, has cost Society members almost $200,000 and is largely unknown to the public despite procedural appeals having gone to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

The saga began when Mr Orlov made a private complaint to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner concerning what he considered to be racially tainted views of Maoris and foreigners by then-High Court Judge Rhys Harrison.

Though similar complaints have been made by others against Harrison, Mr Orlov’s complaint prompted then-Chief High Court Judge Anthony Randerson to write the Law Society on Court letterhead asking it to investigate Mr Orlov’s fitness as a lawyer.

The Law Society struggled but eventually came up with nine charges to levy against Mr Orlov. They all centre on “false and scandalous charges” Orlov allegedly made about Harrison in his JCC complaint.

Harrison and Randerson JJ both currently both sit on the New Zealand Court of Appeal.
In a mocking and meandering press release this week, Mr Orlov called the debacle a ‘show trial’, noting the Law Society intends to call no witnesses, while preventing him from calling Harrison or either of the two Judicial Conduct Commissioners as witnesses. Orlov draws a comparison with the 1899 Privy Council judgment ofMcLeod v St Aubyn which found; ” Contempt of Court may be committed by publication of scandalous matter respecting the Court after adjudication as well as pending a case before it. In England committals for such contempts have become obsolete: in small colonies consisting principally of coloured populations they may still be necessary in proper cases”.

Even for a colonial backwater, no witnesses and allowing no cross-examination seem a strange court process to prove ‘false and scandalous’ criticisms sufficient for a legal lynching.
Pertinently, Mr Orlov included a link in his press release to a New Zealand Law Society press release which publicly criticised a conviction in Fiji for quoting a report critical of its courts as “a serious restriction on the right to free speech”. In contrast, NZ Society members’ criticisms in Orlov’s prosecution have been few; generally directed at the financial costs being incurred despite few members knowing what the ‘false and scandalous’ allegations are at the core of the prosecution conducted in their names.

Another lawyer similarly attacked by the New Zealand Law Society sees the current policies of the Law Society being representative of broad apathy in the legal community which has turned to fear. He intoned, ‘ Feareverything, do nothing and, above all, be quiet’ is the adopted credo of lawyers in New Zealand.

The Orlov trial raises broader natural justice concerns by preventing inquiry (as scandalous) into the validity of a complaint he has made against a powerful State actor – a complaint which is not unique. Mr Orlov alleged Harrison J sanctioned Maori children being removed from their parents without hearing – oppressively awarding costs against him personally in violation of UN conventions for representing the parents in a claim alleging the Crown acted without due process. In another case, Harrison J ordered a known paedophile to be the custodial parent where the mother was a Russian bride being deported as a result of her marriage breakup. Investigate Magazine said earlier on this misconduct, ” The most stunning aspect of the whole story, however, is why on earth a man with Paul Copeland’s psychiatric history, a man who raped his own sister and tried to murder his wife with a bow and arrow, a man who enjoyed killing cats in the cruellest possible ways – why such a man would be allowed anywhere near a child“.

Judge Harrison’s brother Geoff Harrison was lawyer for that child.

Judge Harrison also criticised Mr Orlov for not being trained as a lawyer in New Zealand, seemingly justifying his complaint Harrison is xenophobic without any explanation from the Judge for this worrisome judicial comment.

Dr Frank Deliu, a U.S. and N.Z. trained lawyer, expresses similar views of Harrison and has provided the Judicial Conduct Commissioner seven sentencing decisions of Harrison J which cite their “host country” and crimes against “people of New Zealand” as factors in sentencing foreign-born New Zealanders. Dr Deliu is also being prosecuted by the NZ Law Society on the recommendation of Judge Randerson, although the charges are still being determined.

Mr Orlov’s press release invites interested parties to attend the “show trial” which is set to begin at 10 am. With no witnesses and a charge of making false allegations, he has billed it as colonial justice at its finest and asked attendees to accordingly wear black tie and evening dress.

Related Posts:

The Inquiry into the Inquiry into the Inquiry into the Inquiry, how it all happened:

How it all happened - the Inquiry into the Inquiry into the Inquiry into the Inquiry:

Guest writer ~  Peter Matthewson

Once upon a time in a country not far away at all, an obese German multi-millionaire, together with his very attractive wife and their children, a household of manservants, maidservants and security guards, a pair of giraffe statues, 18 Mercedes Benzes, Cadillacs, Rolls Royces and other fancy carriages, and lots of computers, wide screen TVs and pretty pictures,moved into a palace in the Prime Minister’s electorate. To celebrate his arrival the German spent $600,000 on a big firework show for the city. The Prime Minister did not notice the big bang. But the Mayor of the city did. The German even invited the Mayor on a helicopter ride to a party at his palace,and gave the Mayor a lovely little gift of two matching $25,000 cheques for his re-election campaign.  Being a polite man the Mayor telephoned the German the next day to say thank you. However the Mayor was supposed to tell important people about this but he forgot, after all he had so many obese German multi-millionaires giving him helicopter rides to parties in palaces and pairs of $25,000 cheques.

Despite all the pairs of $25,000 cheques he got from obese German multi-millionaires, the Mayor lost the election. But never fear, the next year he was elected to the country’s Parliament, after a top secret talk with the Prime Minister in a cafe with lots of photographers and TV cameras to show pictures to tell all the people to vote for him.  But the German had not forgotten about the pair of $25,000 cheques, and when life in the country had started to go badly for him, he told on the ex-Mayor and now Member of Parliament, or MP for short. So the Police had to conduct an inquiry about the then-Mayor not telling the important people about the $25,000 cheques, however they believed him that he had forgotten. Being a talented man, the German wrote and recorded a rap song about it. As far as I know neither the ex-Mayor nor the Prime Minister bought the record, but neither did I.

Yea, I have jumped ahead of myself.  It turns out that the German was suspected of being a bit of a naughty boy. Before he came to our country he had been accused of taking lots and lots and lots of movies and TV programmes and music, and naughty videos and computer programmes from people who owned them, and loading them up in a cloud. This was rather naughty,although he wasn’t plotting to blow up the White House. Nevertheless some people in America were very upset and got their super-duper Police force, the FBI, to start an inquiry about the German.

But the FBI needed help to carryout their inquiry in our country, so they asked for help from our country’s Police and super high tech secret spy agency, the GCSB. Lots of people in our country had only learned there was a GCSB a couple of years before, when a little posse led by a man with a very long beard had popped one of their big balloons at Waihopai, a place most people had never heard of before the balloon was popped.  Anyway the Police and the GCSB were very excited at the chance to help the FBI with such an important inquiry. That didn’t happen every day. The GCSB jumped at the chance to use their super spying and listening gear, which they usually keep hidden under the big balloons at Waihopai. They assisted the Police by listening to all the German’s phone calls, reading all his emails, and seeing where he went in the cloud. They did all this for a month, helping the Police to know when the German would be home so they could pop round to arrest him.

And so it came to pass one day not long after Christmas,a time when the Prime Minister and the Mayor are away on holiday so there isn’t much news on the TV, the Police and the FBI made their move. At 6:45 in the morning seventy six Police and Armed Offenders Squad officers swooped on the palace and arrested the German. They took him away to a big prison run by a multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation,where despite the profits made by the multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation he was given no soap, toothpaste or toilet paper. What’s more the Police seized his eighteen luxury carriages and carried them away on the backs of trucks, along with his computers, his pretty pictures, and lots and lots of money.

This started a lot of arguing in the Courts. The FBI wanted to drag the German back to America, so he could face charges in Court there for loading stuff up in the cloud. The German didn’t want to go. After a few weeks a kind judge let him out of the jail. And Helen the big boss High Court Judge said it was illegal for the Police to search the palace with a warrant saying go have a look around and take whatever you fancy,so she let him have all this stuff back. But other arguments in the Courts continue to this very day.

But here is where the story gets really interesting. Someone told the Prime Minister that it was actually illegal for the GCSB to spy on the country’s citizens and permanent residents,which the German was by that time. So the Prime Minister said sorry. But he decided he wanted to know what was really going on at the GCSB, under their big balloons at Waihopai, so he called up a very clever woman named Becs, and told her to go and conduct an inquiry into the inquiry.

Becs went away and actually read the GCSB Act and lo, verily it did say quite clearly that it was illegal for the GCSB to spy on the citizens and residents of the country. She also had a good look round the office and under the big balloons at Waihopai. To her horror, she found out that not only had the GCSB spied on the German illegally, they had also been illegally spying on 85 other citizens of the country. Becs also found that, despite the impressive looking big balloons at Waihopai (well actually they look like a pair of big boobs) the GCSB was really a Mickey Mouse outfit. So Becs finished her inquiry into the inquiry and wrote an 85 page report all about it, which she gave to the Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister was truly shocked that the GCSB had been spying on citizens illegally, so he said unto his closest advisers “Oops! Quick, we had better pass a law in the Parliament to make it legal!” Which he did. But I am jumping ahead of myself again. Being a believer in democracy and open and transparent government, the Prime Minister decided that he should let all the people see what was in Becs’ 85 page report, at a press conference where he could be photographed holding the report and smiling reassuringly. But first he gave it to his closest and most trusted Ministers and advisers to read, while he went on a trip to China where he would have lots of photo opportunities to smile with rich and important Chinese people.

But while the Prime Minister was away treachery was afoot. Somebody leaked a copy of Becs’ 85 page report to a news reporter named Andy. She was chuffed to get it, and although it took much of the afternoon to read it she wrote a headline story all about it on the front page of the capital city’s morning newspaper. There was no photograph of the Prime Minister holding the report and smiling reassuringly. There was no photograph of the Prime Minister smiling with the Chinese Premier.

When the Prime Minister got back from China he was not smiling. In fact he was very cross, and desperate to know who had stolen his thunder by leaking the report to Andy. So he called a man named Henry (just plain Henry, not Henry VIII or Henry IX) and commissioned him to conduct an inquiry into the inquiry into the inquiry. He told all his ministers and officials that they had to give Henry whatever he wanted for his inquiry into the inquiry into the inquiry. Henry set about his task with great enthusiasm. Some of the Prime Minister’s manservants were very eager to help Henry. With the benefit of modern technology they were able to give Henry a log of all Andy’s movements through the swipecard electronic doors all around the Parliament for the previous three months. Presumably this included all the times she went to the parliamentary ladies’ loo, which is of course where ladies go for a leak. They also gave Henry all Andy’s emails, and he found that in the two weeks prior to her story in the newspaper Andy had exchanged 86 emails with Peter D (not to be confused with your present storyteller), who was one of the Prime Minister’s trusted ministers. They had even kept the emails going while Peter D was away in America on holiday. Unlike the German he wanted to go to America.

But Henry had a problem. Before he could officially read Andy’s and Peter D’s emails, he had to get Peter D’s permission. But despite what the Prime Minister had said about his ministers giving Henry whatever he wanted, Peter D refused. He went on the TV and made a passionate speech about privacy, saying “the sole reason why I did not disclose the full content of my emails was because of my strong belief that citizens, be they constituents, members of the public or journalists, ought to be able to communicate with their elected representatives in confidence if they wish, and we tamper with that right at our collective peril.”  Because he would not let Henry have his emails he had to resign as a Minister. When Peter D found out later that the Prime Ministers manservants had given Henry his emails anyway, he was “shocked beyond belief” and “extremely concerned and angry about this gross, unauthorised breach of personal privacy”. Remember those passionate words for later in the story.

Since Peter D wouldn’t let Henry officially read his emails, his inquiry into the inquiry into the inquiry ground to a halt and he could only write a 24 page report. He gave his 24 page report to the Prime Minister, even though it officially told him nothing. Henry’s 24 page report that told the Prime Minister nothing cost the country’s taxpayers about $42,000, even though he hadn't paid the Prime Minister's manservants anything for Andy's swipecard logs and emails. However the Prime Minister has not said anything much about that, even though his party usually does not like spending government money.

However a very important man called the Speaker, who stands up and says "order" while the Members yell insults at each other across the Parliament, was justifiably concerned that the Prime Minister’s manservants had given Andy’s swipecard  movements and emails to Henry. So he referred the matter to the Privileges Committee, a group of very important MPs, to conduct an inquiry into the inquiry into the inquiry into the inquiry. This very week the Privileges Committee all sat round a big table and called Henry in so they could ask him lots of hard questions and tell him off. This was a bit harsh since Henry really had been only trying to do what the Prime Minister wanted and find out who stole his thunder by leaking Becs’ report. Nevertheless one of the members of the Privileges Committee was a minister named Judy. Judy is probably not one of the Prime Minister’s most trusted ministers because she wants his job. So Judy fixed her steely eyes on Henry and said “It was quite a chilling experience to realise that ministers’ and staff’s emails, and their right to privacy, were treated with what I would say was a contemptuous attitude”. Then that very afternoon she voted for the Prime Minister’s bill to make it legal for the GCSB to spy on the citizens of the country.

For indeed, while all these inquiries had been going on, the Prime Minister had introduced his bill to make the GCSB spying on the country’s citizens legal, into the Parliament. Many of the people didn’t like the Bill, because like Peter D and Judy they valued their privacy. They were scared about the power the Bill gave to the GCSB, and to the Prime Minister who is in charge of the GCSB. Lots of very respected and clever people who know what they are talking about spoke out against the bill, including the Law Society, the Human Rights Commission, the Privacy Commissioner, a famous constitutional lawyer and the former director of the GCSB. The obese German multi-millionaire spoke out about it too. However the Prime Minister said that they were all wrong and tried to distract the people by talking about fish.

And so the fateful day of the final vote in Parliament came. Even with the ex-Mayor and Judy and all his other ministers and party members voting for the Bill, the Prime Minister still needed one more vote to pass it into law. So who should he turn to but Peter D. The reader will remember the impassioned speech he made to the TV camera when he wouldn’t let Henry officially read his emails, and the even more impassioned speech he made when he found out Henry had got them anyway. But even though the reader will remember, Peter D seemed to have forgotten. And so he gave the Prime Minister the one vote he needed to pass the Bill into law. Perhaps Peter D and the Prime Minister will have a nice private chat in a cafe with lots of cameras next time there is an election.

And that is how it became legal for the GCSB to spy on the citizens of the country, with warrants just signed by the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of Security Warrants, a nice retired judge chap the Prime Minister calls up when he wants to commission a security warrant. And here is where the story must end, before the GCSB starts reading it.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Don't spook the herd:




- Emmerson




So the GCSB Bill is supposed to spy on New Zealanders to protect our economic well being, but Fonterra managed to hide the contamination scandal from the government for about six months, while the government was more interested in what Kim Dotcom was doing and what Winston Peters text messages and Andrea Vance's emails said.

Meanwhile, revelations continue to astound the population, the latest being that Fonterra supplied contaminated milk product to a school.

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Wellington protest against the GCSB Bill - 27 July 2013

The nationwide protests against the GCSB and TICS bills - and the implications of the TPPA and other recent and pending legislation were well attended - New Zealanders turned out in force for the Wellington event, which was covered by independent journalist Frank Macskasy and others.

Unfortunately the event was hijacked at the last minute by a couple of amateur "activists", Billy McKee (convicted recently of supplying large amounts of cannabis to undercover police) and Ariana Paretutanganui-Tamati (local political prostitute, formerly a Maori party hanger on, now representing the Mana party - who need to up their game if they want to be taken seriously).  This resulted in attendees being subject to this woman's interminable verbal drivel as she monopolised the microphone and monotonised the crowd with her boring, narcissistic political grandstanding.  Another result of the bullying of her and her 'supporters' was that the crowd was deprived of hearing from other speakers, including the EQC blogger, Marc Krieger, whose address to the protestors is printed below:
"My name is Marc Krieger and I am the EQC Truths blogger.  I too have been a victim of illegal government surveillance because of my willingness to expose official corruption and lawbreaking at EQC.  The New Zealand government illegally spied on me and found out that I was the blogger who exposed EQC’s incompetence, nepotism, and corruption through the EQC Truths blog.

I am unable to be present today in body, but I join you in spirit.  The New Zealand government holds itself to the world as a beacon of transparency yet, in actuality, the government is a bastion of darkness.  The New Zealand government breaks its own laws by spying on its own citizens.

Now the New Zealand government is trying to legalise in law what it has already sanctioned in practice.  The only way to stop the government is if we stand up together and unite.  Governments only get away with things because of the silent majority that fails to speak out and hold its leaders accountable.  To paraphrase FDR, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”.

Many of us make the mistake of believing that governments are innately benevolent.  Yet governments are responsible for the most heinous atrocities including the mass murder of millions.  The reason governments got away with murder is that they gradually and incrementally usurped the rights of the people because the people were too lazy or terrified to stand up.

In a small country like New Zealand, the opportunity remains for people to stand up and fight.  My message to all of you is to stand together to defeat this evil.  Otherwise, New Zealand will go down the slippery road to absolutely tyranny."

- Mr Krieger and myself were prevented from speaking, so were the group who had prepared the skit about Key and Banks tea party and the fuss Key made about being spied on by a journalist (Bradley Ambrose) (- who Key and Banks had invited to report on the tea party in order to manipulate the election protest and buy media attention).  The point of the skit was to show the crowd that charges must be laid against Key and others for spying illegally on 88 New Zealanders and other criminal actions for which they are legally culpable!  - Not to mention the hypocrisy and blatant double standards of all involved to date! 

Instead, the protest was hijacked by Mana Political Party acolyte Ariana Paretutanganui Tamati, also a relative of disgraced former MP Georgina Beyer, (aka Beyer the Liar), in a manner similar that of Jonathon Elliot and Hugh Barr who hijacked the asset sales protest on

the crowd were told at the last minute (after APT had made her malicious complaints to facebook and blocked me from commenting and posting) that the skit was cancelled and been replaced on the order of ceremonies with "a surprise activity" which turned out to be her rapturously clutching a naked effigy of Peter Dunne and mumbling more incoherent nonsense!

Here are a couple of video clips showing the numbers of the crowd, as well as demonstrating the boring and aimless rant of APT, and some screenshots showing the disgust of other independent witnesses - people following the event on facebook were well aware of the development of the attempts by these two to hijack the event and gain control of it for their own personal and political agenda.










The GCSB Bill will not pass all the way through Parliament this week as had been hoped by the Government. 

The Bill is now in its committee stages, where members of parliament are debating it clause by clause.

The National party and their supporters have been trying to rush this Bill through at every opportunity and prevented the committee from hearing from key submitters on the Bill such as Kim Dotcom, one of the 88 New Zealanders who the government has admitted illegally spying on - Transparency NZ believes there are considerably more than 88 and that the government has been engaging in wholesale collection of information - and DNA from the population for the benefit of foreign governments and corporate interests!

An urgent debate on the Fonterra contamination debacle has delayed the debate further.  The Government will have to wait at least two weeks to pass the controversial legislation now, thanks to the tenacity of David Shearer, Russel Norman and other opposition MPs.  The irony of Conman Key's insistence that the changes to the Bill are necessary to spy on Kiwi mum and dads in order to safeguard New Zealand's economic interests - while Fonterra are found to be mired in incompetence and corruption and seriously jeopardising our economic interests, and MoBIE allegedly didn't know about the botulism contamination for over three months.

Meanwhile - from the truth is stranger than fiction files - you couldn't make this stuff up - after changing his mind more times than fellow political prostitute Georgina Beyer and deciding to support the Bill, after the blatant blackmail and deceit regarding his emails with Andrea Vance, Peter Dunne has called Ariana and her seven supporters "irresponsible scum" for 'protesting' outside his house with a megaphone at eleven at night (- it's his neighbours I feel sorry for) saying that all New Zealanders have the right to privacy - how ironic.  And how typical of APT and her seven mates.  Preventing the very New Zealanders who have been spied on and the information used against them from being heard, and preventing the skit being performed, and preventing the protest being taken to the GCSB HQ on the 27th, in favour of a rambling monologue from a silly tart clutching a naked Peter Dunne doll and eight people making a noise outside some private residences one of which happens to be occupied by Peter Dunne - pathetic!