Politicians the Ultimate Cheats

[imported_neo]

When the dictatorial parasitical elite in government made unwarranted changes to our lifetime drivers licenses in 1999, by dileting our lifetime licenses and demanding all citizens re-new to the new digital photo version under threats of blackmail which consisted of $400 fines and immediate seizure of ones vehicle, the majority of readers on these forums will no doubt have capitulated to the new authoritarian demands of the usurpers, con artists, parasites and thieves among us (politicians.), and traded in their contractual Lifetime Drivers License without so much as a whimper for the new photo digitized license.

180,000 New Zealanders have said no way and challenged this fraud. The reality is our lifetime licenses are a contract between to parties (you and the government) and simply cannot be broken.

One of the bogus reason's given for the new change was it would help to reduce the road toll, yet already this holiday period we have had record numbers killed on our roads. By fraudulently using the road toll as a reason is of course the ultimate non sequitur used to con the public. The real reason which most of us are not concerned about and should be is for the parasites, usurpers, thieves, and con artists we call politicians to further encroach on our freedoms and liberties, and of course to further extract unearned revenue from our pockets.

Another reason why many New Zealanders would have sercumbed is the threats, blackmail and intimidation issued by government if you did not conform to their mafioso tactics. A staggering $400 fine plus seizure of ones vehicle for a 28 day period for failure to comply with their fascist demands would have frightened most New Zealanders. The fact that this is indeed happening as hard working innocent New Zealanders are losing their cars to impoundment by the legal mafia (the police). Hitler will be smiling in his grave to know his idiology is alive and well in Aotearoa.

Lois McKiness has been fighting the issue through the courts, the judges do not want to know about it as they are tied up in the government system and you don't bite the hand that feeds you. She is taking the case before the Geneva convention. Ian Wishart is another that has challenged the court hearing and you can read more on http://www.standupnz.co.nz

A stagering new revelation that the government and bureaucrats don't want you to know came from the Lois McKiness court cases, about is the fact there are TWO drafts pertaining to the new drivers license one yellow, one green.

The yellow one was for the driving public, and the green one was for select groups and friends of the LTSA.

The public was not told of the existence of the green draft

An employee of the LTSA gazetted the yellow draft, she did not have permission to do this.

The green draft that is being used as law has not been gazetted and is not legal.

No consultation on the green draft was given to the public to put submissions in on.

72 people put submissions in on the yellow draft. By law if there is a change they have to be recalled to put submissions on the change.

Maurice Williamson states that he had consultations with "this group and that group". There is nothing in writing to back this up. By law there must be.

Maurice Williamson states that he "delegated authority to LTSA to consult and do rules". There is nothing in writing to back this up. By law there must be.

No evidence was put before the judge.

The yellow draft was gazetted and submissions closed in January 1998.

GREEN DRAFT SUBMISSIONS TO SELECT GROUPS CLOSED ON 28 FEBRUARY.

The privacy commissioner asked LTSA to prepare a privacy impact assessment to be done and put out to people. They did not do this. It was kept under wraps and they said if you wannt it you had to ask for it. (of course you had to know it was there)

The privacy commissioner was not sent the draft for submissions until after they were closed.

Joe Public has been totally duped by all this. Gov't literally lied and cheated to get their rules across. I urge everybody to write to the Minister of Transport Parliament Buildings (no stamp required) and ask for copies of the yellow and green drafts of the "driving license rules", and see how different they are.

I should also add, to all those hard working innocent New Zealanders who are having their cars seized by the mafia police.

It is illegal for the police to impound your car before you have been found guilty by the courts. read more on http://www.standupnz.co.nz

FURTHER NEWS.

The director of the LTSA David Wright made a sweeping statement today in a press release saying that record numbers of cars being driven by unlicensed drivers (180,000 have not got the new digitized photo license.) are being seized by the police and is oneof the reasons why the road toll is the lowest in 37 years. (10 less than last year)

This does not compute, and simply shows how parasitical politicians and bureaucrats con the public with non sequiturs to justify their nonthingness overpaid jobs. Wright makes that pseudo statement when in fact a record number of people have been killed on our roads this holiday period. 22 so far killed.

Use of Non Sequiters By Politicians and Bureaucrats: The Premier Cheaters.

Even more pervasive, destructive uses of non sequiturs arise from politicians and bureaucrats. Throughout history, politicians have been the premier professional cheaters operating on grand scales.

Essentially all their public statements and "career" actions are dishonest. And, while all their dishonest actions are harmful to society, most are deceptively hidden behind good-sounding non sequiturs. But once non sequiturs are understood, examples of political dishonesty become so clearly obvious and plentiful that further illustration is as unnecessary as pointing out patches of sand in the Sahara Desert.

Wrights press release statement on the drivers license issue, to justify the seizure of property from innocent citizens is the ultimate in non sequiturs.

With the record number of cars being illegally seized by police it is important that individuals know their rights. If you know of anybody in this situation, this taken from the http://www.standupnz.co.nz website will be of use and will enable innocent individuals to get their stolen vehicles back from impoundment almost immediately, instead of having to wait the 28 days. Already there has been some success for those aware of the law. Unfortunately too many have no idea of their rights and police are also ignorant of the law.

LOIS MCINNES CONTINUES HER FIGHT

Lois McInnes is now waiting on a decision from the Judicial Complaints Lay-Observer Office and Sir John Robertson. Lois has laid a complaint against the Judges on her Court of Appeal case and after six weeks has had no reply, even though hers is the only complaint they have. Why the delay? Lois and her lawyer, Mr John Gwilliam, are requesting a new appeal with three different Judges. There is an indication that observers of the original appeal were amazed at the bias shown by the Judges at that time.

If Lois has no joy with the Judicial Complaints Lay-Observer Office she will be heading for the Privy Council in London.

This all costs money and takes an enormous toll upon the individual. Already Lois is being pursued for costs of $5000. YOU CAN HELP – make a donation to aid Lois McInnes in fighting for you. Donations can be made at any branch of Westpac Trust; Dollar a Driver, Paraparaumu Branch, 030732-0301060-25. We thank you on Lois’ behalf for your support.

Lois has sent us the following information in note form …

Did you know that a notice forbidding people to drive or impounding their cars prior to any court hearing, not only contravene the Bill of Rights Act 1990, but also Section 12 of the Bill of Rights Act 1688, which says that it is illegal for the Government to impose any fines, or seize any property from a citizen before they have been found guilty before a court.

Attorney General Doug Graham did not notify Parliament or the New Zealand people that the Bill of Rights was going to be affected by the new digitised licence laws.

Both the police and the courts have overlooked the requirements of the Bill of Rights to interpret the provisions of the Act in accordance with the Bill of Rights.

It is reasonable to impound the vehicle of a disqualified, drunk, or never licenced motorist.

Is it reasonable to apply the same penalty to a person who has not transgressed any traffic laws that would result in disqualification?

In the case of Section 5(A) of the Land Transport Act 1998, the words that must be interpreted by the court in light of constitutional principles are "Without an appropriate current Driver Licence".

It is open to the court to determine that as the Act would otherwise contravene the Bill of Rights, the old Lifetime Licence remains appropriate and current. Therefore, the Government saying the Lifetime Licences are not appropriate Licences are violating our constitutional Rights.

When the Government have the police take our cars from us, they are violating our constitutional Rights.

When the Tow companies tow our cars, when we are told we don't have an appropriate Licence, they are violating our constitutional Rights.

When the police say they forbid us to drive they are violating our constitutional Rights, they don't have the right.

FEEL OBLIGED TO PASS THIS INFORMATION ON




[Edited by neo on 2nd January 2002 at 20:22]

[imported_neo]

his little piece of literary mastery was taken from the
http://www.fatalblindness.com web site and sums up to a capital T our contractual drivers license issu.....

New Zealand is Falling To State Control

The immoral and reckless indifference of so much of the New Zealand public to statists obliterating freedom in one area after another brings to mind the quote attributed to Protestant minister Martin Neimoller, who reflected upon Germany’s fall to the Nazis: "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

If you are like most New Zealanders, you didn’t bother to notice that when statists came for the owners of "public buildings," violating the property rights of these owners, that, in principle, your rights were undermined, undermining what you may do in your own home. You didn’t speak out because you are not an owner of one of these "public buildings."

When statists came for the owners of tobacco companies, infringing on their right of ownership and restricting their freedom of speech, you didn’t speak out because you are not one of the owners of a tobacco company or you are not a smoker or you consider smoking to be an evil which must be wiped out at all costs, even at the cost of your freedom, your freedom to follow your own judgment.

When they persecuted and imprisoned innocent individuals for "abuse," you didn’t speak out because you were not the one being persecuted. When they imprisoned those individuals for disturbing the "wetlands," you said nothing because you thought it would never affect you, oblivious to the fact that your backyard is a "wetland."

When they searched, without warrant, the private property of business owners, you said nothing because these were only business owners and you are not a business owner. When they seized property without due process, you said nothing because it wasn’t your property being seized, even though it could be and will be tomorrow. When they imposed arbitrary fines, you said nothing because you were not the one victimized. When they kicked in the door of the home of someone suspected of drug possession and arrested the innocent owner, you said nothing because your loved one was not the one arrested and because you believe anything goes when it comes to fighting drug use. When they drove an innocent man, his son, and an innocent man’s wife to suicide in their attempt to collect taxes never owed them, you said nothing because the victim was not someone you knew and valued.

When they bullied television network executives into accepting a ratings system, you said nothing because you are not an owner of a television station. When they, in the name of children, came for the producers of children’s television programs, making it criminal to express certain ideas, you did not speak out because you believe anything can be sacrificed in the name of children, even though these children will not be free when they become adults. When they suspended the right to trial by jury for accused "deadbeat dads," you said nothing because you are not a deadbeat dad. When they changed the laws to allow unions control over business, you said nothing because you were either not in business or your business was not involved and you thought you could control such evil.
Even though you oppose socialized medicine, when they passed legislation further regulating doctors, you said nothing, dismissing it as only a "small step," perhaps hoping it would not affect you in your lifetime, hoping that "somehow" it would not result in socialized medicine.

When they got you to accept the idea that your money is not yours, that they may forcibly take "your" money and dictate to you how much you may keep for your own needs, you said nothing because you consider taxation to be a necessary evil. When they came for the online news organizations, you said nothing because you are not a user of online services.

When they increased your taxes and rates, you said nothing, because you thought it was their (statists) right to enact such evil. When they introduced legislation to make it difficult for productive people to prosper, you said nothing because you were just starting out.

When they decreased spending on our armed forces, and did away with the Airforce, you said nothing, as you thought wars were a thing of the past, and private property rights no longer needed defending, besides it would save money.

When they forced you to change your original legitimate contractual drivers licence for a new digital version, in order to further impede on your freedom and privacy, you said nothing because it did not seem such a big deal. When they introduced legislation to deprive you of your rights to insure yourself with competitive market driven insurance companies and forced you back into government controlled manopoly ACC, you said nothing because you were not up to speed on this issue.

And when they and their evil finally come for you—and they will, if New Zealand continues down this road to hell—will there be enough left who will care about your plight, will there be anyone left to speak out for you, to defend you? You already know the answer: there won’t be, if this country continues to sink into the cesspool of statism, if most New Zealanders continue to maintain an indifferent silence about freedom’s decline. And if you are one of those who have said nothing, then your silence and the logic of your bad premises will finally avenge themselves on you in practice…when they finally come for you.

http://www.fatalblindness.com

http://www.libertarianz.org.nz

http://www.lp.org