Would using gold like this be legal in New Zealand?
Can any reader advise (Mark Hubbard perhaps)?
Would using gold like this be legal in New Zealand?
Can any reader advise (Mark Hubbard perhaps)?
When people give insults or compliments they are giving an insight into what they consider to be important.
If someone compliments your looks it’s because they value looks. If someone compliments your honesty it’s because they value honesty. If someone compliments your intelligence it’s because they value intelligence.
If someone calls you ugly it’s because their own looks are important to them. If someone calls you an amateur it’s because their own importance is important to them. If someone says you have a nasaly voice it’s because how they sound is important to them. Insults like these come from vanity.
With insults – the more harm the insulter is trying to do the higher the value of insult they will give. That is, the higher value is to the insult giver not necessarily the insult receiver.
So… next time you get insulted don’t just ignore it – consider what it tells you about the giver.
And, more importantly, if you happen to give an insult or a compliment consider what it tells you about yourself.
Proverbs 3:30-32
Do not contend with a man without cause,
If he has done you no harm.
Do not envy a man of violence
And do not choose any of his ways.
For the devious are an abomination to the LORD;
But He is intimate with the upright.
I took a dispute to the Disputes Tribunal which was heard yesterday. I found the experience extremely disappointing.
The Tribunal has a policy of encouraging people to settle their disputes by negotiation rather than making rulings – this policy favours men of violence, bullies and disadvantages the weak and vulnerable. This policy also says to me that the Tribunal is not confident in its own ability to make just rulings.
My opponent was articulate and he did not share my impediment of having to tell the truth (note to self: don’t envy the man of violence). At my hearing the Judge made it obvious that he was favouring my opponent and he encouraged me to settle by crushing any hope I had that the evidence (not that my opponent presented any evidence other than his “professional” opinion which the Judge seemed to be lapping up) and arguments would be examined methodically and carefully enough to expose the truth and the Judge also crushed any faith I had in the Tribunal system.
My opponent caused me to lose a few thousand dollars but the loss I suffered from the Tribunal was greater. I lost confidence that the Court will be there to reliably enforce any contract that I make.
Media Release
The Police and CYF say they are entitled to contact an employer, make damaging statements and refuse to provide any evidence. On Monday 11 March 2013 Johan Aarts will be taking on the Commissioner of Police and Others in the Employment Court in Auckland.
“If the Police are allowed to get away with this then you could be next innocent person to lose your employment and career on the basis of untested and falsified evidence” says Aarts
A secret High Court hearing was held in Rotorua on 20 November 2012 from which the media and members of the public were excluded. An article was published in the Sunday Star Times of 25 November 2013 and was also published on the www.stuff.co.nz website. However the article was removed from “Stuff” the same day following a complaint from The Crown Law Office who are representing the Police and CYF in this matter.
Chief Employment Court Judge Colgan has confirmed that this hearing on Monday will be conducted in open court and the media will be allowed to report on proceedings.
Mr Aarts will be represented by lay advocate Robert Lee who has called Defendant Police Commissioner Peter Marshall as a witness.
Johan Aarts
ph 027 6331284
A call for civil (servant) obedience
State rapes former Barnardos counsellor
1 Peter 2:13-17
Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.
I’m blogging on the wrong site.
Eternal vigilance sounds stressful – I think occasional vigilance is my limit. 🙂
Anyway… I just realised that Rotorua District Council never answered my questions… so I just emailed this follow up. Unfortunately I’m 5 days too late.
Hi XXXXX
I asked these questions of Council in December and was given contradictory answers – I needed authoritative answers to be able to make a submission regarding the Proposed District Plan designations.
I see the Proposed District Plan is now closed for submissions.
The Council has acted unfairly by not answering my questions before ending the consultation process.
I’d still like to know the answers to these questions.
Regards
Reed Robinson
On 16 December 2012 22:35, Reed wrote:Hello
I have spoken with several Council representatives concerning the Proposed District Plan – in particular I have been enquiring about the proposed rural road designations.
Most recently I was advised by Council that the statutory authority being relied upon was the RMA (sections 166 to 186) and that Council will be seeking the designations in its capacity as a network utility operator under the Act.
This explanation doesn’t make sense and it contradicts an earlier explanation I was given by Council. The earlier explanation I was given was that Council was seeking to correct rural road (or road reserve) widths; that Council considered some roads too narrow and was seeking to widen roads (or road reserves) from 15m to 20m as part of the District Plan.
Can you please clarify the following points…
1. Is the Council proposing these designations in its capacity as a local authority or in its capacity as a network utility operator?
2. For what purpose is the Council proposing these designations?
3. What statutory authority is the Council relying on to propose these designations?Regards
Reed Robinson
People from the Crown Law Office have been reading this blog. Specifically they have been reading State rapes former Barnardos counsellor.
It’s not clear whether the Crown Law Office want the blog post taken down or whether they just intend to use its existence to try and deprive Johan (the former Barnardos’ counsellor) of his relentless advocate. I won’t explain more because an explanation might breach a suppression order (I think sometimes suppression orders are deliberately vague and not made in good faith).
You can read more about this on Chris Wingate’s blog.
I think it’s fitting to pay tribute to Johan’s relentless advocate Robert Lee who has spent thousands of hours at his own expense fighting for justice for Johan…
A message to those at the Crown Law Office –
You serve the Crown (the Queen) and she took an oath to cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all her judgements
Presumably you all took an oath similar to the following…
“I, [name], swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors, according to law, in the office of []; and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of New Zealand without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God.”
To truly serve the Crown and do your duty you need to betray your colleagues that defy the Law and cause injustice.
Approx 1.8m High by 20m long.
I am selling this on my Aunt’s behalf. The fence is on her property in Mangere Bridge.
There is a bit of a back story which bidders need to know…
This fence was put up unlawfully on my Aunt’s cross-lease property by the other cross lease owner. He was told not to put up the fence, he knew he had no right to put the fence up and he knew it would make life difficult for my Aunt. My Aunt is 75 and has deteriorating mobility and health.
The fence is blocking my aunt’s access to her front door. The fence has to go and the co-owner won’t take it down.
I’ve checked with the Police and they are not interested in helping my Aunt nor are they interested in hindering the removal of the fence.
I’ve checked with a lawyer and they said it was fine to remove the fence – proceeds of this auction will go to the person who put the fence up.If you buy this fence you really will be helping out someone in need.
Buyer must take the lot.