Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 67

Thread: Is the Council simply a thief ...Questions of Accountability -> Crown?

  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by BarryCowlishaw View Post
    On the bright side.... these kids have displayed the quality of education this (post coup) regime, turns out. I would recommend they apply for a full refund if the educators cannot get through their thick sculls the difference between a relationship of stewardship to property and owner of property.....

    They could do with learning a little about Equity and its various meanings as well ....

    But Fee education probably comes with a Caveat emptor?
    BC you are pathetic.

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by John "Brockovich" View Post
    BC you are pathetic.
    Hi- there "Little Dick" I see you are still sniffing around the subject but its a breakthrough that you can learn new words- well done two smiley faces for you lil Dick...

    Still got a bit of a jock itch though I see...... not doing you much good so far is it? [desire to get on ones "High Horse"]

    Did you see anything significantly different from The "Corporate Toddler" which the Constipated/Bound Crown gave birth to and the average human toddler that has real Parents capable of observing behavioral patterns?

    Toddlers Rules of Possession
    1:- If I like it it's Mine
    2:- If I can take it from you, its Mine
    3:- If its in my care/hand, it's Mine
    4:- If I had it a little while ago, it's Mine
    5:- If its Mine it must NEVER appear to be yours in any way.
    6:- If it looks just like Mine, it is Mine
    7:- If I am doing or building something, all the pieces are Mine
    8:- If I saw it first, its Mine
    9:- If you are playing with something and put it down, it automatically becomes mine.
    10:- If its broken its yours

    Yes- I copied it just for you Dick- you juvenile delinquents might want to support the toddler thieves with your wind ...... But I would prefer to just take the toys all back and put them out of reach of toddlers - it was presumed that investors interests were protected by the Crown or the Laws ...... but that would require Honour ....

    Little Dicks like you probably think that means an erection?

    Honour really relates to integrity, ethics, duty and such like .... not necessarily sound commercial qualities but they are great Human qualities which should count on a forum with Justice in the title
    Last edited by BarryCowlishaw; 21-07-2019 at 11:40 PM. Reason: was a tad razors edge :)

  3. #53
    Hi- Yoda
    The Children have stopped their silliness for now- it appears

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    I personally think that this matter needs to be discussed in the wider public than this tiny forum.

    Editor of New Zealand Herald, please make sure that this matter be reported in the newspaper.

    I am sure that this will generate a considerable interests among the readers of the newspaper.

    ... Isn't it Interesting that the (Australian Owned) "New Zealand Herald" would rather maintain an outward appearance (intended to conceal a less pleasant or creditable reality)... a "false front" or "facade" formed by denying the truth its rightful place and so enabling the Criminals who hijacked the Crown to continue to completely Ignore Rule of Law .... I suggest that credible investigative journalism has been discouraged for some time... (along with expressing the truth) to the advantage of the same CLASS OF PERSON that was either involved in the theft, benefited from the theft or intends to yet benefit from the Proceedings- of Crime

    I am concerned that there is no apparent "Duty of Care" to protect the Ratepayers Interests in their Investments and no concern displayed for the maintenance of some form of reasonable credibility for Crown Law by engaging the Crown in Criminal Activities involving Deceit and Fraud as set out rather clearly in the Crimes Act 1961 Section 243 money laundering..... note also Section 408. 25
    Last edited by BarryCowlishaw; 21-07-2019 at 11:44 PM. Reason: missed mentioning section 25 :)

  4. #54
    "At the end of the day, ordinary people of New Zealand need to initiate meaningful reform on the judiciary and legal profession of New Zealand."

    A huge call Yoda ... "Ordinary People" need to trust others, but unfortunately others are not always trustworthy (despite the trumpet blowing) that is how we got into this situation- Trust = Catch 22 (damned if you do and damned if you don't do) apparently .... Codes of conduct are all very well in theory but in practice? -

    "But my problem is that I don't live in Auckland and cannot investigate the situation myself."

    It is my belief that all of the "Regional Councils" have been similarly used by the Crown- trickle down effects resultant from the 1984 coup d'é·tat so although there is nothing unique about the Auckland situation- it does provide clear examples and I can source some pre-corporate rates demands for this region naming the loans the ratepayer was assisting to pay off.

    "I am not sure if there is any journalist nor lawyer who is willing to uncover the corruption"

    You are a character .... Are you suggesting there might be a conflict of interests in them doing so? .... I agree (Pandora Box)

    "Reliability of the judiciary is questionable."

    I reached the same conclusion years ago... but I reckon we should just take our properties back (avoiding consultation with the Courts) Which can be achieved peacefullyas in "Legal of intent" .... let the thieves initiate their own "Legal Challenge" in "THEIR" Courts.... as I see it the publicity from that would awaken the Court of Public Opinion .... which could then be complimented by exposure to the truth the media seemed incapable of communicating..... Some things need to be brought to the Public's attention in a more timely manner- especially matters of Mutual Concern resultant from inappropriate trusts leaching Equities....

    "Integrity of Crown Law is very questionable."

    Yes g palmer was one of the architects of this Corporate Regimes Similar UNBRIDLED THEFT of National Investments in Infrastructure formerly held under the "Stewardship of Ministries" is he still behind the scenes influencing perspectives? .... hard to believe whats under the bonnet of some folk eh...

    "Probably, New Zealand has a wrong Attorney General (namely, Hon Chris Finlayson, a list MP of the National Party)."

    Hard to be impartial or fair when you are invested .... that's part of the Problem as I see it or put differently... Some of these positions should be more stable and less able to be blown in the wind from wellington- The Laws should provide a much more stable base than offered by politics - because the politics of the laws are already clearly set out (even if ignored)

    "I think the mechanism, set up in New Zealand, precludes any meaningful checks on the judiciary and prosecution."

    I agree .... perhaps if political parties had less or no hands on control- but instead (when elected) provided those meaningful checks (governing instead of ruling)

    "Well, I am an outsider with very little influence; what I can do is very limited."

    A precedent is being set in regard to property Law ... this effects us all really because interests in the corporate titles to the property (as you are aware) can be traded internationally - The value of the shares would be artificially high as STOLEN PROPERTY is listed as being owned by these laundries and prospective purchasers of shares or interests in the property might not become aware of the theft or fraud as the result of normal methods of due diligence ..... selling stolen property might well be a common practice of certain classes of persons but it is certainly not what one would expect from a nations (said to be legally) elected representatives ..... might be ok in a banana republic though?
    This methodology to Steal Investors Property is probably the same used internationally - The International Legal Community would perhaps benefit from a little intelligence or perhaps a good optometrist?
    I do understand your position though... pretty much the same as mine .... as individuals we are toothless ..... however the Truth is not so toothless - and it's easy to share .... Yet I wonder if the culture of Apathy also plays a part when you state...

    The culture of denial of problems must be changed to the culture of recognizing problems; without this, there won't be any meaningful progress in New Zealand.

    Well put ....

    and a good start would be to recognize and address the "relationships to the Investments/property" and as I have pointed out there is a HUGE difference between being a "Steward" and an "Owner" .... Servant and Principal ..... And the Servant does not usually get to JUST change the ownership of the property to enhance their own position....

  5. #55
    Hi Barry
    I found this on another forum- the poster was discussing the privatization/theft of electricity...

    "Only a fool would argue against the obvious xxxx…. artificial competition set up by the thieves to have you believe it is competitive while it is actually very much controlled by the thieves and receivers to the extent that you are paying more than twice what you should to use your property loud and clear"

    Looks like the seeds of truth are germinating?

  6. #56
    Today we cerebrate the contribution of those brave youngsters that understood honour while helping to build securities and infrastructure for future generations.

    Apparently? so that.......... Thieving sods like "geophrey palmer & Co" could hijack Crown law and steal investors interests in their investments and legacies while undermining aspects of sovereignty etc all with the "stroke of a pen" (and all without a shot being fired).

    For the Crown to honour the ANZAC contributions .... Perhaps the "Crown" should start by honouring the laws or the reasons for Culturing them.... what say you legal profession? (complacent is complicit) and attacking the messenger is not very bright clearly

    Surely the culture of Crown Law was not intended to promote or institutionalize theft or money laundering while disregarding the purpose of those generations in contributing to meeting the Mutual needs .... the legacy was not intended to endow corporations (artificial identities) with the ownership of the peoples investments.... theft and pecuniary advantage were the significant motivating factors there

    Is it just that the thieving NZ Crown wants to be challenged?.... how about..

    Your Corporations/laundries have no Parents ... ANZAC's "DO"

    Does the Legal Profession that gives you spine have parents?

    prove it!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts