David Bain: A Judiciary and Politick That Have Lost Their Way, Entirely. We All Lose, Judith.

I didn’t follow the David Bain case that closely, so I have no opinion on whether he is guilty, or not, of the murder of his family; nor on whether he should receive compensation (other than logically, if he has been acquitted, thus imprisoned falsely, then there should of course be some sort of restitution made, whether - and here’s the point - the Minister believes he’s guilty or not). The point of this post is to say that in every tax post I’ve made this month (and on this blug) I have been demonstrating how, through our taxing legislation, and in other important areas of law, such as the case of Mark Hotchin’s treatment, (like him or hate him, his life has been frozen for two years this month without charge, and the clock is still ticking), government has overthrown the rule of law in New Zealand, meaning we are no longer a free, Western nation: our politicians and government departments regularly operate above the rule of law, IRD relies on it as its raison d'etre, in a dreadful pragmatism that disrespects every soldier who died fighting rampant statism in WW II and then the Cold War, and in a manner every free man in New Zealand should be appalled at, and out on the streets marching against. We have been so badly let down: there is nothing more important, nothing, than a country losing its way to this extent.

For the problem is it’s not just the politicians. This is so serious because our historical protection from the abuse of the power of Parliament, the judiciary, is as bereft of philosophy as the hive mind in the Fortress of Legislation. As I say in my by-line above, Antonio Gramsci, founder of the Italian Communist Party, said the free West wouldn’t be beaten with the gun, but by converting the minds of the young to the slavery of statism, and if you look at his army in our teaching stock, he was right. Members of the New Zealand judiciary have come through a state school system that implicitly, thus comprehensively, preaches the state in everything and never mentions the proud traditions of individualism and self-rule the free West was built on, other than to despise such principles (because in the mind of generation air-head, individualism is now equated with ‘selfishness’). It is for this reason the vital classical liberal ethic in the tax jurisdiction that was once the 1935 Westminster Principle protecting the taxpayer from the abuse of an arbitrary state, has been completely destroyed in our courts over the last decade, and Mr Dunne has not only been happy to let that happen, he’s been complicit in it: chances are if you structured yourself in any way that meant you weren’t paying the maximum tax to the state, then that will now be considered tax avoidance under an expanded (to mean whatever the IRD says) Section BG 1 of the Income Tax Act, despite the wording of the taxing legislation might have made your structuring entirely legitimate, indeed, to have been considered by the law as made by the politicians of the time – and in this instance I’m not even, other than indirectly, referring to Penny and Hooper arrangements. The judiciary believes your wallet and your effort belongs to Wellingrad, for the great pogram of redistribution, and an IRD with the powers of God over us, is using retrospective enforcement to chain the individual to the prison of state in a manner unparalleled in our history. I will further explicate this in my next tax post, however, I see it again this morning via the media in Judith Collins treatment of David Bain’s compensation case.

Lindy Chamberlain’s lawyer, an ex-pat Kiwi, Stuart Tipple, says he’s ‘ashamed’ with our Minister of Justice’s behaviour over the independent Binnie report on David Bain. I’ve not read that report, nor do I intend to, but his words below regarding process and principle don’t surprise me in the least:

Mr Tipple said he had followed the Bain case closely. He was aghast at Ms Collins' criticism of the independent report written by retired Canadian judge Ian Binnie, while keeping its contents confidential.

 "I'm really disturbed there's not more legal people in New Zealand that are standing up and saying this is just not good enough. You're just making our whole judicial system a laughing stock.

"During that time representing Lindy Chamberlain, I used to think 'this wouldn't happen if I was in New Zealand' but ... in the Bain case I think he has been subjected to actually worse injustices than the Chamberlains."

He claimed that Collins' actions were "basically painting a picture that she believes he's guilty". "That's how she's viewing the Binnie report. She's actually not accepting the jury verdict - which is: You are not guilty David Bain, you are innocent.

"It's so inappropriate for a Minister of Justice. She should be accepting that the jury's verdict as binding.

"I just find her conduct on the whole matter appalling and I'm ashamed. Deeply ashamed."

The ‘legal people’ are not protesting, Mr Tipple, because they’ve not got a classical liberal clue about their profession anymore. Meaning Judith doesn’t realise that in a free country if she doesn’t like a judicial decision she can’t just overrule it like this without due process, and the judiciary having succumbed to statism see no need for the process of the rule of law anyway, so there is no longer a check on her power to do whatever she feels ‘to her mind’ is right. Which it might be, but that is no longer the point. Once the politick and the judiciary convert to the Theocracy of State as we have done, and the essential separation of these two powers are sewn together again after all the blood spilt to keep them apart from the historical fight against monarchy, there can be no free society, only some shade of state tyranny. But you think Bain guilty, thus couldn’t care? Well tomorrow it might be you, for unprotected by a brainwashed judiciary, and uneducated politicians going about the pragmatic business of extorting the productive to fund a massive state they’ve grown into the enemy of all of us, with these two groups whom have no historical understanding of the classical liberal tradition they should be working in anymore, there was always going to be only the one result: call it what you will, socialism, collectivism, or, more accurately, statism; regardless, the individual is turned into the tax and debt slave and plaything of irresponsible, profligate politicians, repeating the mistakes of history, having learned nothing from the twentieth century. This is way more than the laughing stock matter Mr Tipple suggests, and there will be no Western Spring in my lifetime. In fact from 2014, in New Zealand, it all starts going beyond desperate.


Update 1:

Here's an interesting piece from Reed, one of the three wise (? :) ) men of Eternal Vigilance: Just what are the flaws in Binnie's report? Is it Fisher's report that is flawed?

"From what I’ve read so far Fisher doesn’t demonstrate any flaws other than his own."

Related Posts From This Month:

The Mockery of Law: Tax Avoidance – The Immorality of Uncertainty.

Tax Avoidance and the Morality of Certainty: New Zealand and the UK.

Retrospective Enforcement & the Brutal March ofthe IR’s World-Wide.

Labour's David Clark Declares War on the Consumer.

Retrospective Tax Enforcement Again: IRD &Accommodation Allowances.

It’s Over: Mr Dunne Has Done Away with the Rule of Law.