N8WUNZ 20230407 (F) Group v Individual Rights

Tēnā koe, Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. Tēnā koe Emma. The cases that were decided during the last three years, especially the judicial review cases, that involved what were asserted as group rights, and then you had, so, for example, the, let's take the Yardley case, right, because I'm going to talk about the Yardley case a little bit, and in the way that we can use this realisation, right. So the Yardley case was, remember, was the case that was taken by the, was taken by the armed forces and the, the New Zealand Defence Force and the, and the police against, what's his name, work, the work, Indy, Indy, right. Now that should have raised a lot of questions, right. But before we start, what was the government doing, telling workers and their bosses that they had to, they had to, you know, deny, deny workers work and deny workers the right to engage in work, because you had both, you had both situations going. And WorkSafe saying that they were going to fine people, they were going to fine businesses if they, you know, were found to have let people be employed who were on the schedule, right. Now, you remember going back, I've talked about this the last couple of times, Section 191 would be the only way that the CEOs or the head of police or the chief of the defence force would have had a designation to work, to work and, you know, give directions in the workplace about a health and safety matter, right. They didn't have that, as you know, right, so illegal right from the start. But going back again to that case, and why it was so difficult to, to actually, to actually get workers' cases through, or any cases, have them succeed in the, in the judicial reviews, was because there was this constant, what they call balancing of rights under Section 5 of the Bill of Rights Act. Before this time, there hadn't been cases, but there has been one, and this is what I'm going to talk about in a minute, because I think this is quite an exciting idea, we might get a long way with the fluoride problem on this one, right. So there hadn't been cases where, where it was asserted that public health was at risk, right, except the fluoride one, except the fluoride one. So that's the only one. And significantly, the fluoride case was mentioned in Yardley, and it was, so that was the South Taranaki District Council against, well no, somebody against South Taranaki District Council, because South Taranaki District Council were putting the, and they changed the law a bit to let them put it into, into the, into the system. And that was another case of the Crown doing a shifty deal. But I think this thing that I'm going to talk about is the more interesting point, because it's quite clear that that was probably decided wrongly. The other case that was talked about there was, under the rubric of coercion, was the fact of, could you, that it wasn't, Justice Cook said that it wasn't coercion to, against the workers, because they weren't held down and vaccinated, they were allowed to choose, right. However, as we know, we can get coercion on their dinner plate by bringing it in through the Health and Safety at Work Act, our fantastic Health and Safety at Work Act. Now, going back to what's the point about the difference between individual and group rights, well, the most important point is they don't exist in the Bill of Rights Act. So how did they get in there? Mostly because they were never argued not to be in there. The point wasn't, the legal point wasn't made by the people who took the cases, right. So you've got this, what's, it's apparently, it's a piece of legislation that's only in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Now, you've got quite a lot of, sort of, the same sort of Acts of Parliament or, yeah, Acts of Parliament, usually, in other countries, but they don't have a balancing one where you can have a balancing of the rights of two parties. But the parties must always be individuals and that's where the, that's where the cases were, you know, started off from. I think the first case they had was Bajent, Bajent's case, and where the police got it wrong, and I think I've mentioned this one before, where they went and raided Mrs Bajent's house, which was next door to a drug dealer's or arms dealer or something like that, a drug dealer's, I think they were. And the son was at home and they pushed him out the way and he said, I think you've got the wrong place. No, no. But anyway, the other son or somebody in the family turned out to be some highfalutin lawyer and, yeah, and so Mrs Bajent actually got paid out what were called, even though there's no remedies in it, no monetary remedies, got paid out what they call public, public law or Bill of Rights payment, some sort of thing like that. It's basically a payment to say to the state, stop doing what you're doing because you're going to get fined. OK, but it's up to the judges whether they give that or not. One of the places that they did pay out, of course, was when Hipkins and his mates, back when he was a student, got dragged away by the cops from a demonstration they were doing on the grounds of Parliament, got kept in the cells for the evening. I don't think any of them were in overnight and they got, I think there was quite a good size payment because it was about, I think there were about 40 of them and they each got about nine or ten thousand dollars each and this was quite a few years ago. So, you know, yeah, there is money to be had. But the important thing is that those people were suing the state, right, and they didn't, there was no comeback from the state that said, oh yeah, but there's a group, there's a group right, how would you say it? There's some sort of right in other members of the public that you shouldn't be demonstrating there. It's upsetting the school children going to school or what was all, you know, rubbish about, they were talking about the Freedom Village, that children going to school were afraid and all of, and being intimidated and stuff. There's none of talk of that at the time, of course, when Hipkins and Co. got dragged away because there's no such thing in the Bill of Rights Act, right? You have the right to protest, you have the right of freedom of movement, you have all of these things and they're individual to you and that's why it's always named for individuals who take the cases. But they threw up this idea and this hysteria and it was never questioned by the people who took it to court. Now, going back to the fluoride thing, right, in the South Taranaki District Council fluoride case, they were saying that it wasn't, that they could put medication in the water, yes, medication, because there were studies overseas that said it was good stuff, right? But there are a number of things that you can fight that against, back against that on, because you can't name anybody who you've got on the other side who's right, you can put up against the complainant, the plaintiff, right? So, it's always, any balancing has got to be between individuals, named individuals, identifiable individuals, so that that other individual can come into court and answer your claim, right? It's just like, for example, when you're doing an employment case, right, you've got a claim against your employer. Now, they'll usually put up the name of the company as the other side, but they're not asserting a group right, they're asserting the right of the director of that company to answer your claim, right? So, there's no group rights against individuals, right? That's why when you go to your, they actually, say there's a group of you got caught in a robbery or something, each person has to be tried on their own, okay? Well, they can all be in court together, but sometimes you'll see defendants drop out because they're pleaded guilty, or they're still in because they're pleaded not guilty, or the police haven't got enough evidence, or et cetera, et cetera. There is no group right of society, even, against those people. They have, well, there is a group right, and basically, so society is protected from criminals, there is a group right there, but they actually have to be named individually. You can't just say, oh, well, you know, all of those unvaccinated people, they're terrorists or something like that, you know? This is, they're trying to assert group rights all of the time against us as individuals, and we've got to realize this when we're arguing these cases, right? Now, I think that the fluoride case is a possible one that can be overturned, but here's the interesting thing. I think that the one to start off with is the fact that prisoners in prisons in New Zealand, and you can find this if you do a Google search, are made to have consumed fluoridated water, right? Now, if you've got the court saying, no, well, you can't do that, because you know that prisoners didn't, nobody in prison could be required to take the vaccine, right? Not happening. And in fact, anybody who wasn't in the workplace wasn't required to take the vaccine, they just got, you know, basically shut out of society otherwise. But yeah, so you've got two cases there that were mentioned in the Yardley one. You could start a new case on getting fluoride out of the water by running it on the fact that there is no right in the group to have you medicated individually, right? So, and I think that the best case, the strongest case would be for a prisoner to take a case and say, I'm in the prison, I can't, I have no choice, right? That is, that's your strongest case. So that's just a, that's just a by the by. But yeah, I just want to talk to you about that, because I think that that's kind of the basis of all what's been going on. And, and, you know, we've got lots of legal weapons that we can use, etc. But the reason why we would use the legal weapons and the effectiveness of them relies on the fact of our strength of individual rights within our common law system. So that's pretty much all I was going to talk to you about tonight. But I'm sure you guys got lots of questions and things to tell me. So I'll leave it, leave it there. Okay, Erica, she just, she just popped off. Jeff's got his hand up. Okay, I can't see anything tonight. I'm on my phone. I was going to screen share before and I thought, nah, I'll probably make it, yeah, even more difficult. No, that's cool. Where am I now? I've lost you again. Oh, I think you've just flicked off the camera part on. Oh, there we are. There we are. There we are. Yeah, I'm here. Did you have a question? Yeah, no. Well, hi, Erica. Yep. No, I just thought that you, I just saw something on your messenger before it wasn't the question on here, I guess. Oh, yeah, I was talking about group rights versus individual rights. Yep. From our wonderful friends from 1920, who said the common interest is before self-interest. Oh, tell us that story, Erica. This is what our wonderful Austrian friend, well, sorry, I shouldn't say friend, enemy, he started a world war. The Nationalist Socialist Deutscher, well, that's German, Nationalist Socialist German Party in 1920 said that the common interest is before self-interest, which means all their policies were to supersede any kind of individual rights, you know. Of course. Of course, and that's where it started, 1920, because he was a private in the First World War, right? Yes, I mean, you know, there was Mr Karl Marx who talked about his economic theory, and then there was Mr Adolf Hitler, the Austrian man who talked about the common interest before self-interest, so he extended the whole communist idea of the worker versus a large corporation and turned it into, I guess, yeah, common interest before self-interest. What's good for the group is better than what's good for the individual. Well, if you've got control of the group. If you've got control. Yeah, otherwise, no. That's where their aggressive propaganda machine came into play. I mean, they were even called the Ministry of Propaganda, because back then it didn't have the negative connotations that it does now. Ah, so it was called that in German, was it, Erica? I believe so. I mean, I think it's a Latin word. Oh, okay. I haven't researched it, but it sounds to me like a Latin word. It only got the negative connotations after World War II, but when there's discussions about public health and what's good for the group and what's good for everyone in the community center or everyone in a school or everyone in a hospital, it's exactly that, just the common interest before self-interest. These people in charge need to be reminded that in 1920, a certain Austrian man put this in his program for the National Socialist Party of Germany, and that's what started a world war. A world war. It took a world war to take it down. Exactly. You had Al Duce in Italy as well. Yes, and there's a German history museum in Berlin which has a very large section dedicated to World War II and the National Socialist propaganda. I recall a doll's house in this area of the museum, a doll's house with wallpaper that had swastikas on it, little teacups with swastikas on them, tablecloths and tea towels with swastikas on them, and then as you went around, there was a chart called the race chart, and it had the Aryan race, and then it had the Western race. So this was to add the Mussolini, to add the Italians into their so-called Aryan race chart. Oh, because they weren't Aryan and all that? Of course they weren't. The Italians had been invaded by the Africans for centuries, the Moors, the Moor invasion. I don't think there's anything Aryan about Italy. However, Mr. Hitler, well, his team of propaganda took the Aryan race chart and then did a few deviations with, you know, the Jewish race chart, the certain no's, the certain earlobes, blah, blah, blah, and then they had the Western race chart, and then they had the Western Aryans, which were the ones with the dark hair and a mustache, just like Mr. Mussolini, of course. Women as well? No, it didn't actually have women on it, it was just men. Well, they didn't know what women were, probably. It's a problem now. Well, they, you know, they build houses made out from rubble from being bombed. So it was a very interesting, what's the word? It was a complete destruction of the original idea and morphing it into something else. And I can relate that to how they got told that there was going to be a disease of the unvaccinated, the unvaccinated were going to fill up the hospitals, but then it's like, well, so my vaccine doesn't work unless everyone else has had it. It's just, yeah, completely twisting the original intent. So, yeah, back to the common interest before self-interest. If anyone ever tells you not to do something for the group, you say, well, no, sorry, I'm entitled to my individual rights. That's what the whole Nuremberg Code says. I'm allowed to be selfish and the Nuremberg Code says that I'm allowed to be. So, yeah. Yeah, yeah, selfish. Yeah, but I mean, that's the way they want to say, you know, it's a selfish idea, but it's an actual fact. It's the only way that you can avoid tyranny, because it might be a group that you particularly agree with, but if something comes into the law that says that's going to infringe or an action of the state, that you might have voted for them all and think they're, you know, edited sliced bread. But the fact is that if they infringe somebody else's, an individual's right, then they've got to be stopped, yeah. But it was all us individuals who had their rights infringed. I say I'm selfish because that was the term that the government used to label people. I know I'm not selfish for choosing my own medical treatment. Yeah, and the other comparison that the government used, and I don't even know if it's the government or some journalist whom they paid, was that they compared an unvaccinated person to a terrorist going around murdering people. Yes, yes. And, of course, the group was glorified, you know, 10 of 5 million, and the unions got really excited. And, you know, going back to the 1920s, you will find out too about the history of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, that the first, I think he had about, I think Mr H had about 20 people in his group. But then he looked around and saw, oh, there's a group of dissatisfied people, or there's a group that, you know, are well organised. And the first group to join him was a union, the German Workers' Union. Interesting, because he's a socialist. Everyone loves socialism. Oh, yeah. Looking at history, you know, the Wahi strike was not very long after the Bolshevik revolution. The whole workers' euphoria spread very, very quickly. It was like, oh, we can now stand up as workers. You know, it started in Russia, or Mr Marshall, where it started. But it was very quick to spread the whole globe. There must have just been a few newspapers going around spreading the whole thing. And now, I would say the whole fear of getting sick and making other people sick, that spread very, very quickly. And it was all about the group rights, so the individual rights. I think I was even on Star Trek once. There was a group. Really? Yeah, Star Trek, Next Generation in the 90s. There was an episode about the Borg. So this group, the Borg, they were incapable of using a personal pronoun, I. They could only say we. Oh. It was impossible for these Borg people to say we. Now, I can't remember the whole episode, but I do remember just that aspect of it. There's no capability to think of the self, it's only the we. We do this and we do that. Yeah. Which is exactly what all the propaganda advice has been. It's all been we. We this and we that and God. Yeah. And then I read, I think I read one meme that said, we were all in school and we learned about propaganda from World War II and we thought, wow, how did you not see it? And here we are today and people just don't see it. Hmm. Yeah, a lot of not seeing it. And I mean, I suppose people must think, gee, well, why does the number, you know, why does the number eight workers union call themselves a union? Because we want to show what a real union of the individuals is like, right? Yeah. Yeah, a real union with no political interference. And I have to almost apologize for a certain political party emailing us and saying that they agree with us. But it's like, sorry, we can't get involved in political parties. Oh, have we had an email from a political party? Yeah, I mentioned it last week. It was from the group. What was her name? Dr. Merida. Anyway, I don't want to discredit anyone. I think it's great that political parties are branching out. And I think it's great that we have more political parties and they're not just the, you know, the two evil kings to choose from, which is what it is now. We have more. But there's been an email from a political party and all the power to them. And we can't get involved. Sorry, because then we're just as bad as all the other unions. It's like, we agree with you, but we're not advertising. Sorry. And there's a lot of good things out there. It's all just a matter of researching. We don't want 27 minority political parties like Mr. H had to deal with either. So the more these political parties get together and do something, the better. But, you know, the thing is that if they each put up a candidate for an electorate and work together to cover all the electorates and said, OK, nobody is to give any party. Well, I suppose you could give your party vote to your individual one, but it would be washed out in the end. So it wouldn't become any point in having a political party. That's one thing they could do. They could get together and they could put up a candidate, check out, I mean, how many electorates are there? There must be 120 electorates in this country. No, I don't think there's that many. There's that many seats. Yeah, we've got to have one electorate MP for each seat. And you could break the party stronghold then on the system. Karl Bromley mentioned the parties getting together and doing a coalition. We have a hundred. Then you've got some clown at the top who wants to be the king again, or the queen. We're not getting involved. Definitely not. But if I was giving advice to political parties who want to be political parties, I would say, you know, get together with all the other little ones and work out, because I did something like this for, well, I advised the NZPP back in 2017. Billy Tika Hika's party, right? So the Billy Tika Hika party, we should call it. But they didn't even, I said, you know, your party vote, don't bother with that. Go after individual electorates, because you want to get five percent. It's a hell of a lot of vote to get, right? Five percent. To get any, to get anything. But go after electorates. So I worked out, you know, because I wasn't voting for that party at that stage. I told them that. And I said, go after the, these are the electorates you might be able to take off national, or you might be able to take off Labour. OK? And I did them a list, and they took no notice of it whatsoever. And nobody got elected from that party, not even TK himself, right? I think it was all a sham to take party, to take votes of other small parties. But if party, you know, if parties thought smart, they've got resources, they've got people, they've probably even got very capable people who could become electorate MPs. And apparently you don't even have to live in the electorate to be an electorate MP. Although, 72, thank you, Amanda, 72 electorates, 65, well, you know, as far as Māori, I'd say get rid of those ones for a start. OK? We're all of the same, one man, one vote. Hang with that. But, OK, just get your, you know, work out a scheme whereby you've got enough people for every electorate that was, you know, and make sure you win those electorates, and then you'll control the Parliament. You won't get it, you won't be able to probably elect a Prime Minister and Cabinet, which is a damn good idea. Yeah, I mean, the ACT Party managed to do it with Epsom. What did they do? I've lived in the Epsom electorate, and election time they pay people to ring up everyone on their landline and go, I mean, how many people are in Epsom? I'm going to guess 16,000, 20,000 maybe. Yeah, they pay the people to ring them up and get them hooked up. Yeah, but they also get 16,000, you know, if they've got, you know, say they've got 10,000 votes or something, and they get the party vote, then they can get extra MPs. And that, you know, I think that the party list should be destroyed, and the parties should be destroyed and just have electorate MPs, because that's the only way that the individual voter can get a fair deal. Otherwise, you know, you don't get any, you know, all of those people who supported NZPP got nothing out of it, except the, you know. What year was it? 1984, Muldoon got 40-something percent of the votes and then managed to be Prime Minister. 1984. And that seems to be one of the arguments for getting list MPs. Anyway, yeah, we shouldn't talk political science. We should talk laws around group rights, and there are none. There's no laws. There's no legislation. There's baloney orders that seem to have been. Well, that's because it's regulatory, you know, it's the executive has basically captured the rest of the system. They've captured the ministries, they've captured the public service, they bear hand in hand with the corporates. They really need to go. The Crown needs to be dismissed completely. We could run the country with a parliament of electorate, individually electorate MPs and the courts. That's and, you know, if we're going to have a public service, slash that to the bone because they're a load of khaki. I think the only way that people are going to snap out of the propaganda is when the press is dismantled or has big changes, you know, say Hillary. What's her name? Hillary and that other twat, Oliver. They're all going to be Hillary. Well, there should be never any money given, like there should be no state broadcaster. There should be no tax money given to companies, media companies. But when there's a new government and later this year, and there will be, that's when all that funding. Oh, the funding will probably keep going until January, February the following year. Yeah, I mean, once you've committed to it, that's it. I haven't seen what this year's NZIA funding is, but it's pretty clear that 1945 those German newspapers who lost their funding from the Ministry of Propaganda, which is what it was called, they all disappeared. They all folded straight away, instantly. Maybe they didn't have annual budget funding, you know, like it would last for the whole year from start of financial year to end of financial year. But as soon as that funding ends, it's going to be probably similar to what the German people experienced. You were brainwashed. We didn't know we were brainwashed. That's their excuse. Well, I suppose if you've been brainwashed, you don't know you are. You're brain's quite washed of sensible thought. Yeah, and apparently there was a high suicide rate at the end of, you know, 1945 as well. And obviously the Americans and the British rolling in probably made it pretty apparent when you got foreign troops rolling into your town. The Americans had a radio station in West Berlin that didn't stop until 1994, I think. They had military men in uniform on TV every night on the American military radio station in West Berlin. Unless there's some kind of announcement here. Or Hillary Barry and that other guy, you know, they just all quit. Who's the other one? Simon Dallow. These news presenters, they all just need to quit, I think, when they wake up and see what they've done. Well, you know, I think they might be in for something a less peaceful end than that, actually. I think they'd better start lawyering up. Yeah, I like it how Liz talks about how she's just sitting next to Simon in the news and how can he possibly be doing this? A few days later, I saw the back of the bus and they said Simon Dallow, investigative news journalist. It's like, oh, God. Yeah, well, we've got a lot of work ahead of us and there's going to be a lot of exposure. There's a new media group that wants to get in touch and wants to cooperate, if you like, with us called Voice Media. So we'll see how that all goes, too. They're really, really good. The guy that owns the e-local is part of that. Yeah, very, very, very, very cool guy. Yeah, so I saw the Hamilton Common Law Group was one of the people who were in that. That's the group that you go down to, isn't it? Yeah, yeah, no, that's a good group too. They're doing good stuff. So I think it'll all come together. I like the idea of it's all coming together in media because it's non-political in that sense, you know, we're not coming together in media to win a political contest, right? Well, the union certainly won't be, or anybody from the union, because it's not allowed. But, you know, I like the idea that people could, I think they're talking about a six o'clock news, they're talking about a magazine, all sorts of, you know, a whole, what do they call it, a one-stop media package that you can find out about all the different things that are going on that the groups are doing. Because there's people, you know, we're the only union group, but, you know, there's quite a few common law groups, garden groups, all sorts of groups, you know, alternative currencies, all sorts of stuff going on. So I think it sounds like it's going to be a really good initiative. Very, very good. Oh, and of course, when I was talking before about the idea of putting together a case to go after the fluoride in the water, because, of course, if people want to have fluoride toothpaste and take fluoride tablets, even if they want to, that's up to them. But for people who don't want it, and, you know, I think there's some darn good evidence that it's not good stuff, they shouldn't, they shouldn't be in the water, OK, because why should people have to go and buy bottled water, for goodness sake, when they're paying, you know, to have, they've paid for all the infrastructure and for clean water. And it's back to the common interest and the greater good. Yeah, common interest and self-interest is like, well, some people don't have toothbrushes. I mean, I've had this argument with a family member and I said, well, in the 50s, how much was a toothbrush? Was it 99 cents? Did you change it every three months or did they cost a lot more? How much was a tube of toothpaste? You know, back then, maybe it made sense to put fluoride in the water because toothbrushes and toothpaste were not accessible and super duper cheap. I mean, oh, they're not cheap with the recent inflation. But anyway, back then you weren't told in the 50s, change your toothbrush every three months, that's for sure. And I'd see a lawyer from the toothbrush company to get you to buy more of their product because every company wants you to buy more of their product, right? Buy more, buy it more frequently, help us with our dividends. So the whole fluoride for everyone. And maybe they're arguing in Northland, you know, everyone doesn't go buy $3 toothbrushes all the time, who knows? But it's, yeah, it's back to the common good. Over self-interest, what's better for 5 million people? I think our criminal law covers all of that though, Erica. I mean, the common good consists for me of a decent police force catching criminals and prosecuting them and getting them out of the public, right? That's fine. Absolutely fine, as far as I'm concerned. And those criminals will have defence lawyers and if they're innocent, they'll get off, right? But that's as far as the common good should go. Yeah, I agree. You know, this is what is it that the American Constitution says, you know, to guarantee the right to, you know, everybody's individual idea of happiness, right? The pursuit of happiness. The pursuit of happiness, that's right. And the right to property. The right to property. But they're saying things like, oh, well, let's have the SNAs, let's have significant natural areas because that's in the public good. Let's have all of these bikeways. Oh, that's in the public good. Let's have electric cars. Oh, that's in the public good. No, it's not. Well, even if it was, it's not the role of government to be pushing that on the public. It's like Amazon building that great big bloody data centre and they're just going to carve up a whole entire wetland. Oh, so where are they? Where are they building that, Emma? They put it in. Oh, it's some, yeah, in Auckland, eh? Auckland? Oh, Whanau a Pai. Oh, yes, yes. Over by the Air Force Base. Yeah. Oh, there's someone in there. He lives there. I wonder if it's their property. They're thinking they're going to have a lot more data on us, you see. But I'm saying that because under section 1684 of the Health and Safety at Work Act, they were, it's unlawful to gather data, persons, individuals' data, named data, that that all needs to be destroyed now. Okay, all of the workforce, so all of the data that came out of the workforce needs to be destroyed. And we need to... A couple of years ago, the government decided that instead of having their own data centres to run their systems, you know, their databases for MSD and land revenue and all that kind of stuff, instead of having their own data centres, there was a directive that they could start putting it in the cloud. So they've been doing that for a while. And now they're taking it one step further, and they're obviously funding Amazon Cloud to now go into Auckland. And Maori Health objected to it, like, three or four years ago. I don't know what their view is now, but their view was, our data is private, and it's not to go into any cloud. So maybe they've turned the tables on that one with the giant checks with lots of zeros, who knows? Yeah, so it's... And suddenly, it's, oh, well, remember, we're the tribal elders, and you do as you're told, guys. So, you know, it's just, you know, this whole idea of the team, the tribe, the group, the team of, it's all the same thing. It's all people wanting to be at the top of it. It's not the people who, you know, who've been forced into it, etc. It's the ones who are doing the forcing. It's the iwi. It's the Crown. It's the, you know, the head of the, whatever, secret service, or, you know. That all didn't, by the way, didn't have any right to be telling workers what to do, or businesses what to do. So I hope businesses listen to a few of these Zooms that we have and wake up, because it's time that WorkSafe for a start was sued. Oh, I'm just waiting for someone to say WorkSafe told us to do this, and then we'll add them as a controlling third party on their personal grievance. I just thought, someone, I saw a post before about WorkSafe finding, I'll have to go back and find where it was, sending someone to jail, a lady, to do with food safety. Oh, yes, yes. Oh, yes, yes. Yeah, yeah. I think I might have even advised her, but I don't think she took my notice. I don't think she took any notice. I told her daughter or something what to do. Yeah. Oh, I don't know where it was. It wasn't to do with, but was it to do with the jab? I think it was to do with the jab, somehow. That's right. It was to, aye. Yeah. Yeah, but, you know, she had her own ideas about what was going to be done. Does anyone have any updates from? Christchurch, wasn't it? Was it Christchurch? I think so, yeah. Steve Alder's case, does anyone know where that's at? I don't know. I often invite Steve to come to the Zooms, but yeah. Yeah, I don't know either. I mean, all he needs to do is section 191. I mean, he's already sent a letter to WorkSafe, so the cases that he's facing are the ones, are the charges before the WorkSafe letter. They back off as soon as they got that WorkSafe letter. Oh, then they should just drop it. They're just wasting Crown money. Yes, that's right. I said to him, give me the case number and I'll do an OIA on how much money has been spent. All right, yeah, yeah. Someone pass that on to Steve. I did an OIA. Actually, it's probably in the system. I did an OIA on the Yardley appeal and said, how much are you spending on this? And two weeks later, it was dropped. And they'd spent, was it $26,000? And that was just following the appeal. Yeah, that's just to be the filing fee. Didn't get $26,000. God. Oh, they'll be saying that that's all they know of. The lawyers will have got a hell of a lot more than $26,000. I mean, they're in-house. The Crown lawyers are probably in-house. But, you know, I mean, in terms of what they get paid, yeah, it'd be a lot more than $26,000. I mean, that's the sort of chump change. Yeah, I just mean how much. I mean, that would have been how much they had billed in their system. I've done another OIA. I still haven't got an answer. How much has the Department of Justice spent prosecuting 253 arrests in Wellington a year ago? It's been transferred about. Still no answer. Because now it's like, oh dear, we're going to have to say how much money we're spending prosecuting 253 people. You should have found out what the price of that do down in A&E Square was in September of 2022. Oh, all those prosecutions. Well, it's just like, it's like you've got gangrene on your hand. So you just keep chopping off your fingers, your hand, your whole arm, your whole elbow, up to your shoulder. It's just ridiculous. It's like how many roadworks trucks there are driving around now. You know, the ones that carry the road cones? Yes, the road cones and the giant arrows on the back of the truck to show that these road cones are coming out. Yeah, yeah. And they put them down one side and then they drive, turn around, then they pick them all up and then they put them on the other side and then they go put them somewhere else. Is that a new growth of cone industry or something? Oh, terrible. Honestly, in the last 12 months, the number of those trucks around has just gone nuts. Oh, selling food while not registered. Oh, yeah. No, that isn't, that wasn't a, that wasn't a, what do you call it? COVID thing. COVID one. No, no, I thought it was something else. Yeah, I thought it was something else. Yeah, I thought it was something to do with, I think that she might have drawn attention to herself over being a cafe that, you know, was open, which was fair enough, yeah. And I think, and I'm not, I'm not begging or anything like that, but. Yeah, I think she was supposed to have told her staff she wasn't vaccinated or some bullshit like that. I think that was the, there was a complaint from WorkSafe or something about that. Yeah, tell your staff you're not vaccinated. I know a business owner whose staff forced her out of her own business and made her stay at home and then she started operating out of her home and then when she had to go back to her business to get supplies, she would text them and say, I'm coming to pick up supplies and they would all vacate because they were so scared. It's like these people, half her age, had her afraid of the state. It's just ridiculous. I was thinking about it the other day. Half their age and on immigrant sponsorship visas, work visas. Kind of like the children narking on their parents. Mummy and daddy, if you do this, I'm going to tell the state, you know, was these immigrant workers saying. If the boss comes in, I know she's not vaccinated. She'll be breaking all these rules. And so, yeah, how ridiculous the situation is that, unfortunately, I guess when you're in charge of a business, you're at the mercy of your workers. You need your workers, you know, you need to keep your clientele up. But, of course, you know, we know with the CVCs, they were unlawful. If you were forced to have them, to get into your job or wherever, OK, because you were basically being forced to give your private information to the state and that's unlawful. Yes, it's 168. These workers, there are only two of them, I believe, maybe three, that were just brainwashed. Oh, we've done the right thing and our boss hasn't. Gosh, what's to become of her? We're not going to be anywhere near her. I mean, just, you know, I'm back on the brainwashing thing. I always talk about brainwashing. Yeah, well, you've been in a country that was sort of the centre of a day. So you kind of understand. It was the centre of the aftermath of it. And I still remember meeting an elderly man who was about, I don't know, 60. And I said, I was actually at his holiday house. And I said I had been living in Canada because at the time I was a student there. And he said, I've been to Canada. I said, oh, well, that's amazing. Where? And he said, I was in Calgary as a prisoner of war. This is a German man. I'm looking at him in the eye. I'm staying at his holiday house for a family birthday party. And I just felt like I was looking the enemy in the eye. And I thought, wow, did you vote from the stage? Like, were you? Yeah, I didn't ask him these questions, but this is what was flashing through my brain. But in a way, the soldiers who had uniforms on, you knew where you were with them. Right. They might have been brutes or whatever. But it's the, you know, the innocent looking clerk in the court or, you know, the principal in the board of trustees or the DHB HR hags. And those were the real crims, right? In all of this. Yeah, the ones making the real baddies. You know, talking about, oh, you know, you've got your tenfold hat on or, you know, it's entirely up to you. And how do you feel about it? And we'll give you some employer assistance, put you on an employer assistance program, because you obviously need your head read. You know, those are the people I just find a lot of disdain for. Human remains people. There was a guy who, Liz Gunn, she films at his house. I've forgotten his name, but he said, oh, human remains, human resources, sorry. It's just like another level of management in a company. It's like you've got your manager and then there's HR, which is like another group of managers trying to put you around. And this particular ex-German soldier said that when he was in Calgary, he basically spent all his time in the prisoner of war camp shoveling snow. What, from one place to another? Snow goes about 10 feet up higher than your house, so you've got to shovel your way out. So he actually had it pretty easy in Calgary as a prisoner of war. You know, he wasn't in Auschwitz or anything. But it was a very odd feeling looking the enemy straight in the eye and thinking, wow. No, just look. He glistened to his pants one leg at a time. Yeah, I agree. He's not the same as someone destroying livelihoods or making decisions. It's those decision makers. Those are the ones. Those are the ones that will have to face justice. And having said that, I'm very happy that last week we filed another case in the Employment Relations Authority for a certain franchise and also its head office. So that's going to be good. Looking forward to the office and to see when the CEO is going to resign soon. So everyone watch all these. We're starting to pull those string pullers in. Yeah, awesome. Yes, watch out. Anytime there's a resignation, you need to really examine why they've resigned. Because what they say they're resigning for has nothing to do with why they're resigning. Does anyone believe that there will be trials? Yes, they're already beginning to be. We're starting trials, right? Now, these are kind of the small start of the avalanche, right? Because what is building up in these, you've got to remember when you're taking a personal grievance, you're basically prosecuting the other side. You are on the side of you suing them, right? And it's not called prosecution. But you've got the same role, really. You've got to prove their guilt. Because all of these, and it's great practice, right? Because we'll work our way up to the big fish. And we're, as Eric is just saying, now the CEOs are being drawn into the picture. Yeah, third party, because they did control it. I mean, there were tons of small businesses destroyed in this country, because people like the CEO of Fletcher's had decided that he was going to, you know, everybody had to be vaccinated. A lot of trucking companies, etc, were affected. Delivery companies, a lot of the logistical companies were affected because the big corporations, the heads of the big corporations decided, you know, everybody's going to get vaccinated in this corporation. And, you know, I'd say to those small companies, get together, or think about it, right? And get suing. Because they had no right to be breaking their contracts with you guys. It doesn't matter. We're not talking about killing them. We're talking about killing their pocketbooks. You know, somebody just said they've got bodyguards. No, we're not talking about physically killing them. But we are talking about destroying their power, which is the most important thing to do. The Australian FISA report from a Freedom of Information Act is the post, I think it's the clinical trial study. So this was pre-human trials. And it says that there's a rapid decline of T-cells in the chimpanzees. Oh, sorry, it wasn't chimpanzees. It was some kind of primate. I forget. Rapid decline in T-cells five weeks after two doses. And that's on about page two in the summary. And the Australian government knew about this in February 2021, I think, or January. And they still proceeded. It's quite scary to think about all the cancer cases that are popping up and other immune issues. What's the one when you've got, when your cells start rotting and you've got immune, sorry, antibiotic resistant infection, that kind of thing? Yeah, it's a real worry. So all those companies who've had their staff sick and they'll have that data, how many people have been off sick when they got jabbed and then how many have been off sick since they've been jabbed. I mean, there's going to be a huge increase. That's an interesting point, actually. I wonder if we could get that information. Well, it'll all be in the individual HR. I know at my previous employer, I asked the HR, I said, I've seen a lot of people getting their injections and then taking the week off or three days off. The whole point of this is not to be sick. And the legislation around, say, breastfeeding and work, that came in, what, a decade ago, I forget when. And that was based on studies showing that mothers that breastfeed their children took less sick days because they were obviously giving them an immunity boost from breast milk as opposed to formula, which doesn't have any natural immunity in it. The same thing will be evident in the HR data showing all the sick days. And probably only government departments will be able to collate that because they're the only ones that will actually talk. All the individual ones won't. But, yeah, it's a real concern how many people are. If we could get that information off them, I'm pretty sure, actually, we could probably do that. But it's going to be, yeah, sorry about that, Crystal. It's not your fault. None of this is the individual's fault. It's the crown, OK? In the end, it's the crown. OK, guys, I'm just about, oh, I was going to ask somebody about something. Christchurch, no, it's gone. Something's flicked up before, but I'm on my phone and I haven't, I'm not looking at the expanded screen. No, don't worry about it. Yeah, but if anyone had a question that I didn't answer, please watch a shared documentary by Peter Williams. What's that one about, Lou? Silenced, I think it's called, yeah. Silenced, I haven't seen it, yeah. And is he on, what platform is he on? Has he got that on? It's on his website by the looksilenced.co.nz. Yeah, it looks like his own domain, so good for him. Yeah, good, yeah. Oh, awesome. Yeah, everybody's got their part to play and, you know, unfortunately, even if you got injured, that you've still got your part to play, you know, because you've been the meat in the sandwich, unfortunately, guys. OK, better say goodnight. Yeah, very good. Thanks, Lou. Thank you very much, Emma, for abandoning your other task meeting. It's all right. It worked out better in the end. I got to, yeah, look after my little calf and, yeah. Oh, is your little calf OK now, getting there? Oh, not really, yeah, sort of. It's going to be a slow, slow recovery, yeah, so. What's wrong with it? It's got something called joint ale, which is like a bacterial infection that gets into the joints, yeah. Oh. It's quite hard to shift once it's in there. Oh. So, but hopefully she'll be all right. She's doing OK in many respects, but, yeah, it's just a slow, slow process. Poor thing. Yeah, OK, yeah, very good. Good night, Eden, everyone. Yep. Thanks, everyone, for coming along with Harmony. Nice to see some new names coming in. Yep, yep. Of course, yeah, feel free to, yeah, yeah, feel free to share the link when you. One more, one more, two more slips to chocolate. Is that how that works? Yeah, good, awesome. Yeah, I put them in the fridge and save them until I've eaten them. Yeah, yeah, chocolate makes my clothes shrink, yeah. OK, very good. See you later. Thank you. Thanks, everybody. Good night. See ya.