A NZ Republic and the Treaty

[wtf?]

Following on the from the Queen's Jubilee and the shit stirrers threads...

What happens to the legitimacy of all the Treaty bullshit NZ'ers have been subjected to (and paid for) over the years when we finally become a Republic?

After all, if the general NZ populace get rid of the Crown then who is it exactly that the Maori activists should have their treaty arguments with? And don't say "The People", USA style. "The People" didn't sign the treaty.

:finger:

Flame me out with an intelligent argument for either way.

[oldrider]

Wishart has a new publication on this subject ... has anybody read it yet? :shifty:

Supposed to be controversial! ... I haven't seen it on sale anywhere though! :wait:

[iYRe]

We will never become a republic, unless the poms do away with the monarchy. And at that time, we'd have to become part of Australia, because we're too small to look after ourselves.

My family settled in NZ in 1838, and we are proud of our heritage and history. I will be the first one to fight any change to the our political status. It just doesnt make sense.. there is no benefit to being a republic, and a lot to lose.

[GrayWolf]

Following on the from the Queen's Jubilee and the shit stirrers threads...

What happens to the legitimacy of all the Treaty bullshit NZ'ers have been subjected to (and paid for) over the years when we finally become a Republic?

After all, if the general NZ populace get rid of the Crown then who is it exactly that the Maori activists should have their treaty arguments with? And don't say "The People", USA style. "The People" didn't sign the treaty.

:finger:

Flame me out with an intelligent argument for either way.

I think you'll find in the legal sense the treaty is a 'living document', not unlike the American Constitution, he is reputed to have based it on. So if that is the case the treaty will 'change' with the times so to speak. I dont know if the 'treaty claims' will be affected, but I am going to guess the 'much argued' Sovereign rights, will not alter with a change to a Republic.

[Headbanger]

Write a new "founding" document, burn the treaty.

Rename the country and declare everyone present on (insert new name here) soil at this time to be (insert clever name for the people here) and as such everyone is to have the same rights.

The race based policies and divisionary monetary policies have to end, the only way to do that is to remove race from the equation.

[Winston001]

All our laws would be adopted by the new Republic and references to "the Crown" would be deemed "the State". Easy.

[Flip]

NZ will become a republic over my rotting corpse.

[wharekura]

Treaty is the least of your redneck worries - "give me back my flag" Green Party Norman may have a point - maybe we'll have our currency with a translucent mao tse tung on it soon?

[wharekura]

Here you go, feed on this - line up and please, no pushing in
http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/7062718/Petition-launched-against-Maori-seats-on-council
(I have made a new thread to keep things on topic)

[Akzle]

Write a new "founding" document, burn the treaty.

Rename the country and declare everyone present on (insert new name here) soil at this time to be (insert clever name for the people here) and as such everyone is to have the same rights.

The race based policies and divisionary monetary policies have to end, the only way to do that is to remove race from the equation.+1.

but i don't know why they bother arguing with the government/"crown", if they claim to be sovereign then they dont recognise the legitimacy (rightly so) of the government.

what you describe would be a constitution, and so long as the next "leaders" were actually REPRESENTING THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE and respecting the constitution, they would be lawful.

what i don't get is that everyone goes and gives these people (the politicians) the idea that they want them to make decisions for them. the only way they actually have legitimacy is a) force (their gang enforcers wear blue and carry guns) and b) consent....
why do people do it??


NZ doesn't need to suck australian teet, there is no reason we should be playing on a failing "world economy" anyway.
the thing about playing games where others make the rules (rather than being affected by, say, fairness or nature) is: they usually make rules so they win.
my dollar is worth .73 of that dollar, your national debt is 40 thou per person (NZ), this barrel of oil. that bar of gold.
WTF?


All our laws would be adopted by the new Republic and references to "the Crown" would be deemed "the State". Easy. pretty much :weep:
(but laws -> legislation)

[imdying]

The problem will not change. The solution will not change either. All fucking niggers must fucking hang. No man, no problem.

[wharekura]

The problem will not change. The solution will not change either. All fucking niggers must fucking hang. No man, no problem.Please sir, say what you really mean - don't hold back.

[Flip]

The problem will not change. The solution will not change either. All fucking niggers must fucking hang. No man, no problem.

264684

Please?

[SMOKEU]

The problem will not change. The solution will not change either. All fucking niggers must fucking hang. No man, no problem.

:corn: :corn:

[mashman]

The problem will not change. The solution will not change either.

Half right :)

[SPman]

NZ will become a republic over my rotting corpse.

Fair enough!

That can be arranged........

[haydes55]

We will never become a republic, unless the poms do away with the monarchy. And at that time, we'd have to become part of Australia, because we're too small to look after ourselves.

My family settled in NZ in 1838, and we are proud of our heritage and history. I will be the first one to fight any change to the our political status. It just doesnt make sense.. there is no benefit to being a republic, and a lot to lose.

So maybe you can name me a single benefit of belonging to the monarch? I can think of one, we compete in the commonwealth games as well as the Olympics! Cool right.......

Even the name of the "Commonwealth games" makes you wonder surely? "Common Wealth", in simple terms that basically means a competition for all people of the same wealth... As in owned by the one person.... As in the Queen owns you, me, us, the land. Seriously if you buy any land in any commonwealth nation you buy the lease off the queen. At any stage the government (acting on behalf of the Queen), the Brittish army or any other person/organisation representing the Queen can legally take your land for what every reason they want. And that is 100% legal.

Being part of the Commonwealth means nothing for trade either, England is in the European Union which is pretty strict on imports from any country, whether they are in the commonwealth or not. Our exports to England are taxed fairly highly compared to what an export from Germany to England would be.

[Winston001]

As in owned by the one person.... As in the Queen owns you, me, us, the land. Seriously if you buy any land in any commonwealth nation you buy the lease off the queen. At any stage the government (acting on behalf of the Queen), the Brittish army or any other person/organisation representing the Queen can legally take your land for what every reason they want. And that is 100% legal.



Yeah man, you are correct. In our jurisdiction it's eminent domain but don' be mislead - republics have the same thing. Ultimately the State/Crown controls all land and can take it in the name of the public interest. You don't think republics can take land for motorways? Or for hydro dams?

[oldrider]

Funny how people get brainwashed into believing that the Status Quo is the way that life has always been and that there is no other way! :shutup:

Right now the world needs a financial paradigm shift to free up and support whatever political "ism" they adopt and actually start to move forward again! :2thumbsup

The treaty and the monarchy are probably best abandoned and left with the paradigm of the past or simply carried forward as recorded historic facts. :kick:

The old adage "money makes the world go round" can't work if all the money is choked up and stifled by a now defunct debt system! :crazy:

Take a chance make a change and move right along with the flow of the new age, it just might be more fun than you ever imagined! :corn:

[mashman]

Funny how people get brainwashed into believing that the Status Quo is the way that life has always been and that there is no other way! :shutup:

Right now the world needs a financial paradigm shift to free up and support whatever political "ism" they adopt and actually start to move forward again! :2thumbsup

The treaty and the monarchy are probably best abandoned and left with the paradigm of the past or simply carried forward as recorded historic facts. :kick:

The old adage "money makes the world go round" can't work if all the money is choked up and stifled by a now defunct debt system! :crazy:

Take a chance make a change and move right along with the flow of the new age, it just might be more fun than you ever imagined! :corn:

can't bling you again John :not::2thumbsup. What's the worst that could happen?

[oldrider]

can't bling you again John :not::2thumbsup. What's the worst that could happen?

Stay as we are and just wait for the chaos of the final financial collapse .... social disorder and civil disobedience will run riot! :confused:

Have you ever watched a rabbit at the final stages of it being cornered by a weasel? ... The human equivalent, in mass! :wacko:

[Akzle]

Even the name of the "Commonwealth games" makes you wonder surely? "Common Wealth", in simple terms that basically means a competition for all people of the same wealth... As in owned by the one person.... As in the Queen owns you, me, us, the land. Seriously if you buy any land in any commonwealth nation you buy the lease off the queen. At any stage the government (acting on behalf of the Queen), the Brittish army or any other person/organisation representing the Queen can legally take your land for what every reason they want. And that is 100% legal.
yes. 100% legal, 100% unlawful.
the crown CLAIMS by legislation all this shit. and i'm not kidding, in one act or another it says "the crown claims all the land and the animals thereon"
what you get when you "buy a house" in NZ is fee simple title, that title comes with conditions (you MUST pay rates, you MUST not construct tall towers or drill for oil, or keep sheep if your title indicates a muncipal zoning etc etc etc) the crown retains alloidal title, which is why they can march in, put up pylons, house troops, whatever.

the only way a claim stands as fact is if it goes unrefuted. (or, supported, at very least consented to)

so, your homework today is to find out exactly what legal construct/fiction construes "the crown"
and how and why you do what you're told (by parliamentarians et al) when NZ Legislation/statute states, quite clearly, that "this act binds the crown" - surely for that act to be binding on you, you'd have to be an actor, and/or, employee, delegate, agent or the owner of "the crown"...


Yeah man, you are correct. In our jurisdiction it's eminent domain but don' be mislead - republics have the same thing. Ultimately the State/Crown controls all land and can take it in the name of the public interest. You don't think republics can take land for motorways? Or for hydro dams?
as above. but the governments, as they exist today, don't give half a flying fuck about "public interest"

[mashman]

Stay as we are and just wait for the chaos of the final financial collapse .... social disorder and civil disobedience will run riot! :confused:

Have you ever watched a rabbit at the final stages of it being cornered by a weasel? ... The human equivalent, in mass! :wacko:

heh, brilliant eh. At least the rabbit knows that it has been cornered :brick:

[Winston001]

... "this act binds the crown" - surely for that act to be binding on you, you'd have to be an actor, and/or, employee, delegate, agent or the owner of "the crown"...


as above. but the governments, as they exist today, don't give half a flying fuck about "public interest"



Not very long ago some of our laws did not bind the Crown. For example local authorities could not strike rates on Crown land meaning that some councils missed out being able to spread the load across the whole district.

Geoffrey Palmer bless his cotton socks believed this was wrong and pursuaded Parliament to start binding the Crown. Quite right too.

As for the Crown/State taking land, its much more difficult these days. The last major effort was under Muldoon to build the Clyde dam. Compare that with the governments recent efforts (Meridian) to create another hydro scheme in the Waitaki Valley. The RMA and local land owners made it so difficult, the scheme was abandoned which clearly shows governments can't just grab land even when they want to.

[oldrider]

The RMA and local land owners made it so difficult, the scheme was abandoned which clearly shows governments can't just grab land even when they want to.

Sorry Winston, the scheme was abandoned because of lack of suitable foundation on which to anchor the powerstations on the canals!

The water hammer effect of the column of water under emergency shutdown procedures would have dislodged and destroyed them! :mellow:

The prohibitive costs incurred by RMA just to get to that stage of the investigations was also a contributing killer for "that" particular scheme! :bash:

[Road kill]

My understanding is that the term "Crown" refers to the Crown Bank of England,,or the Templer Bank in other words.
What ever the truth is,so long as New Zealand remains the property of England in what ever form,,,they own us.
I could see the logic in changing that,,,and it has nothing to do with the continuing chip on the shoulder about the place of Maori people in NZ society.

[oldrider]

My understanding is that the term "Crown" refers to the Crown Bank of England,,or the Templer Bank in other words.
What ever the truth is,so long as New Zealand remains the property of England in what ever form,,,they own us.
I could see the logic in changing that,,,and it has nothing to do with the continuing chip on the shoulder about the place of Maori people in NZ society.

The Bank Of England is "not" owned and has nothing to with the Crown or the British government or people! :oi-grr:

The Bank of England is a private independent financial institution!

Fear not you are not alone ... most people think it belongs to England! :confused:

http://the-tap.blogspot.co.nz/2010/02/who-owns-bank-of-england.html

[Road kill]

Thanks,that's a very interesting link.
Learn something new every day:niceone:

Then again,I didn't actually belive the British Gov't owned NZ,just the bank of England which also appears to own the UK.
On another site I visted they make the claim that the Queen is a major share holder in the bank of England.
I didn't really make any connection myself to the Bank being owned by the English Gov't as such,,that just came across wrong.
It sort of goes around,,if it's true and the Queen is a major share holder of a bank that has so much power over NZ,,then in effect we are owned by the English,,,she is a pom right ?,,,,or
Solution,,fuck them all off and watch the shit happen.
What ever,,we only live for so long and it could be the best show for a long time.

[Akzle]

"city of london" anyone?