Ngapuhi’s treaty claim

May 10th, 2010 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

New Zealand could be “rocked constitutionally” in a Waitangi Tribunal hearing starting today with the country’s largest tribe, Ngapuhi, arguing they never ceded sovereignty to the Crown.

The Northland iwi of 122,000 people will argue it was and still is a self-governing state within New Zealand.

They can argue what they like, and the Tribunal can agree or disagree, but it won’t affect the legal and political reality that they are part of New Zealand, and not a self-governing state.

If they want to start refusing health, education and welfare payments from the Government, then I’d take the claims more seriously.

Mr Piripi said Maori had occupied the area for up to 2000 years and had governed themselves for much of the time. The tribunal would allow them to reassert this.

2,000 years? Doesn’t sound like history is their strong point. Almost all scientific evidence points to around 1280 as the time of migration here. So that is 560 years of self-rule, not 2,000 years.

Tags:

170 Responses to “Ngapuhi’s treaty claim”

  1. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    One could argue that the entire Treaty was a relationship between the British crown, and Maori – not with the current NZ Government. Therefore, all disputes should be taken to England (lets see them get a penny from the POM’s).

    Another could argue that not all Maori signed the treaty, and few women did. How is this proportionately representative of all Maori (despite the fact that no full-Maori exists today).

    Either way, I knew that National’s willingness to give Maori their right to fly the Sovereignty flag and other concessions would lead to seperatism – this is exactly what I was waiting for.

    Shame on you National, you could have learned a thing or two from the leadership of Helen Clark towards Maoridom.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Jd (23 comments) says:

    There are three ways to attain sovereignty over another country; through cession via a treaty, terra nullius or conquest.

    Which would Ngaipuhi prefer?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. dimmocrazy (286 comments) says:

    560 years of self rule? Nonsense, there has never in the history of Maori been anything close to it, unless one looks at the level of individual tribes, and even then there could be serious debate of what “self rule” actually means.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. JamesP (76 comments) says:

    Well that’s one way to open the bidding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. virtualmark (1,421 comments) says:

    DPF, I’ve long thought in a similar vein to what you set out … if Maori want self-rule then they can have it provided, first, it’s on their own Maori land and second, they reject all claim on “New Zealand” for health, education, welfare, infrastructure, justice, defence etc.

    I can see their argument in view of the Maori text of the Treaty conferring “kawanatanga”, or loosely governorship, but that Maori felt they still enjoyed their own undisturbed right of possession of their lands and independent control (via chiefs) of their affairs.

    But if that’s what they’re arguing then they need to really front up and own it. They would owe no taxes to the New Zealand government, but they would have no rights to New Zealand’s services either. And we would be free to setup border controls, deny them access without a passport & visa, deny them the right to work in “New Zealand”, charge duties and taxes on goods crossing the “border” etc etc.

    Heck given the net positive outflow of Government funds to Northland I’d happily cut them loose.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. virtualmark (1,421 comments) says:

    Likewise … just to lob a grenade into the conversation … I’d happily give Maori unfettered customary rights to fish and so on, provided they used customary methods to collect them.

    Take as many fish as you like, just like your ancestors did/could. But paddle your canoe out there like they did, use a woven line and a bone hook, like they did.

    If you want to use white mans magic like tin boats and outboard engines then play by white mans rules.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Yvette (2,589 comments) says:

    “The Northland iwi of 122,000 people will argue it was and still is a self-governing state within New Zealand.”

    Where is the evidence of this current self government?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. freethinker (648 comments) says:

    Here we go again – more Maori claims that lead to dissent amongst themselves and the rest of the country. Perhaps we should present Maori with an ultimatum – go independent in Northland and pay the crown for the assets and services provided or accept the status quo and tribunal settlements as absolutely final in any circumstances and accept we are all NZ citizen’s with identical rights and for those who wont irrevocably accept either a free one way ticket to the Pacific island of their origin with all NZ rights cancelled. These pricks piss me off, quit moaning and living in the past Maori are no more entitled to compensation for injustices committed by our white forefathers than we are to pay – history is history and we can’t change it even the Jews who possibly have a bigger and more recent grievance with Germans have accepted that Germany isn’t their permanent meal ticket.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. krazykiwi (9,188 comments) says:

    I can see more of this sort of thing hitting our radar… as Maori radicals become emboldened by Key’s desire to play apartheid-like games in pursuit of continued power.

    The tragedy for me is that the majority of Maori I know are as sick of the abuse of their heritage as we are sick of having our future hijacked by greedy politicians.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. EverlastingFire (290 comments) says:

    “There are three ways to attain sovereignty over another country; through cession via a treaty, terra nullius or conquest.

    Which would Ngaipuhi prefer?”

    Given Key’s recent and ongoing relations with the Maori Party and Iwi I’d say he’d be more likely to just say “here ya go! whatever you need cuzzie!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Mr Nobody NZ (396 comments) says:

    The whole treaty claim process is nothing but a game.

    Perhaps we could take it seriously if those involved first provided a clear definition of who are maori and what percentage of maori ancestry does one have to posses to still be maori.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    One could argue that the entire Treaty was a relationship between the British crown, and Maori – not with the current NZ Government or us. Therefore, all disputes should be taken to England.

    Totally agree.. and the NZ Government should put their case forward on their behalf.

    But I think you will find the Poms saw it comming and handed all their maori responsibilities to our govt.. who didn’t see it comming.. in the change over to independence.

    But I still believe we have a case having the Governor General.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    They either signed or they didn’t, if they signed they ceeded. If they want to change their minds now then they lose all their rights under that document.

    Unless we’re a bleeding heart midle white guilt ridden softcocks who will let people make up any old shit in order to hold their hands out for another round of play the victim.

    If we are to accept that they didn’t understand then I require a detailed explaination of why over 30 chiefs signed the English versio being fluent in English after having spent the entire night on dicussions. during which apparently the idea of what that one word meant was not even mentioned by those who had a full understanding of it.

    Stinks to high heaven.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    BKBee you’re grasp of our consitituional monarchy is nonexistant at best. By your reckoning the current NZ Goverment has no legal standing in New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Yvette lets see how self governing they are when we turn off the social wealfare.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    RKBEE,

    You will find that the treaty is rather specific – it gives all Maori British citizenship, not New Zealand citizenship. One could therefore argue that Maori and all their sufferage is a matter between the British crown and Maori.

    hehehe in reality this would never happen, imagine the UN’s cries of unjustice and discrimination – ‘they’re Britain’s problem now’ will certainly result in an international outcry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Good point Mr Nobody.

    I’d like to see one class of Kiwi, Passport holders/citizens, one law for all.
    It’s getting that I’m now thinking we must burn the treaty in a public ceremony, as we rescind the Maori seats and all other laws that benefit them above any other groups in NZ.
    Then move on from there, you’re either a New Zealand citizen – Permament Resident – Working/Tourist Visa.

    Only NZ citizens can be
    MP’s or Ministers
    Judges
    Security Forces (above Sgt rank)
    Snr Civil Servants (above a certain grade)
    vote in National elections
    get a Passport
    Pension
    Benefit
    Free Schooling
    Free Health Care.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    read the other thread ya limpdick cracka asses.

    NZ never formalised independence from the British. So in effect our govt still is the crown and we are all british subjects more so Maori because it was guaranteed in the treaty.

    But the major sticking point is, under international law, the Maori treaty version can be the only legitimate one to whch there is a major difference in what they signed over and interpeted as governance and what the colonial gov’t took as sovereignty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    It’s a pity they can’t self rule as the old saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. The idea of self governing may well have seemed like a tremendous idea at the time but the realisation that things are not as peachy as they should be will soon be apparent when the KFC outlets move south.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    The international outcry will be when we ask for our money back…

    Remind me why we have a Governor General … Murray… He or she represents who.. on behalf of who..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Bobs Your Uncle (5 comments) says:

    If Northland Maori didn’t sign the treaty, then all land occupied by non Maori was taken by conquest? Conquest by either battle or occupation.

    If by conquest then the NZ government does not owe a thing.

    What gets me is, if land was lost by inter tribal fighting then that was it. Land was occupied not owned. But when another tribe came from overseas that’s different?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Robert Black (423 comments) says:

    Here we go!

    The floodgates have been opened.

    Wait until they start on the foreshore and seabed!

    That big Maori hand is out and open.

    The legal/court fees alone will be in the billions.

    And by the way, don’t give them Northland it is too pretty.

    Herd them all into East Cape then close the gates.

    District Ten.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Yvette (2,589 comments) says:

    “Ngapuhi kaumatua Titewhai Harawera questioned the Waitangi Tribunal’s right to assess her iwi’s claims when the tribunal opened its hearing at Te Tii Marae this morning.

    Mrs Harawira, who also spoke on behalf of Sir Graham Latimer, criticised the tribunal as a “creature” of the Government.”
    – stuff.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Mr Nobody NZ (396 comments) says:

    MikeNZ, personally I have another approach.

    All New Zealanders become Maori.

    All current citizens are enrolled swapped onto the Maori roll and they can opt onto the Non Maori roll once every 5 years.
    In the meantime all seats in Parliment are changed into Maori seats.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    then all land occupied by non Maori was taken by conquest? If by conquest then the NZ government does not owe a thing.

    it was land taken by theft/confiscation which restorative justice penalises the criminal to make reparations to the victims. The gov’t needs to buy back some freehold titles they stole and sold and give them back to Maori.

    What happens if someone stole your car and sold it to someone else ? Is it still your car or is it, tough titty get over it ? Or your phone gets confiscated at the theatre. tough shit possession is 9/10 of the law, what phone i don’t know nothing about no phone ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Rex Widerstrom (5,125 comments) says:

    I love the “secession” defence. A guy tried it in court here a while back, fighting a speeding ticket (he admitted doing 89 in an 80 zone).

    However he asserted that he’s seceded from the Commonwealth of Australia. Not an entire principality, like Hutt River. Not even his house. Just him personally. I expect by now he has a queue of asylum seekers waiting to move into his pants.

    The judge in the Supreme Court commented “Even if some part of the state to which Mr Williamson occupies had seceded, Glen Forest where Mr Williamson’s driving occurred, remained part of Western Australia.”

    I think the Magistrate in the original case made the best comment though. When Williamson demanded to be “tried by my peers” he asked “where would you find them?”.

    A pity that NZ’s legal system seems prepared to entertain such claims wthout giving them the derisive response they deserve.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    Given there are no full-blooded Maori, it’s hard to argue that they didn’t breed their way to being under crown sovereignty if not through the treaty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    I’m expecting Neville Key’s government to cave in any minute :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    @pollywog: A more appropiate analogy would be if somebody stole your great great grandad’s car 90 years ago and sold it to somebody else and then eventually over time, the three families bred together, but one strand of the family you deny the joint heritage with: now, 90 years on would you be claiming reparations from that strand of the family for the car?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    fuck it! carve off northland. i want a big ass border though. fence, guards etc. We give NO HELP at all. no aid. NOTHING.

    They can become the dope growing capital. huge export dollars for them.

    Enjoy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. jcuknz (648 comments) says:

    You can be sure of entertaining comments on this blog when the Maori ask for something or make a comment :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    To be fair, what I heard was that they thought the treaty didn’t nullify their earlier declaration of independence – it just complimented it so to speak.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. kowtow (6,701 comments) says:

    Labour let the genie out of the bottle back in the ’70′s.

    Like so many other things from the “progressive” camp like human rights, sexual orientation rights,animal rights, minority rights,criminal rights,we have indigenous rights…..suck it up honky bro,as long as you got the cheque book and don’t have the balls to say no ,then all and sundry are going to come at you with their hands out and why not if the state and electorate is so stupid.

    Look at the apologies to any and all, the open borders to convicted terrorists,the “principles of the Treaty, ” the anti smacking nonsense,negligible sentencing of criminals etc

    A senior female English judge was in Dunedin recently saying “dignity” should be a human right for goodness sake!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Yvette (2,589 comments) says:

    I think it could be helpful to discussion here if someone could ask Titewhai Harawera what her iwi actually want.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    Yvette, I think the shortest answer to that question is usually “a blank cheque”, or something effectively close to that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Jd (23 comments) says:

    Bobs Your Uncle makes an interesting point.

    If Maori adhere to customary law and acknowledge that land taken by one tribe in war then belonged to than tribe by virtue of conquest would not the Crown be entitled, by virtue of the same customary traditional laws, to retain lands it has seized.

    I would actually be interested in hearing from somebody verse in customary law on the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    Maybe John Key’s racist, undemocratic and totalitarian arrogance is now beginning to be recognised for what it is. This lying bastard has had the affrontry to issue a press release following the Nats’ weekend conference denying that they are separatist WHILE they plan to barefacedly STEAL our country’s whole fucking COASTLINE and give it to the Maoris! Ceding Northland to them is the logical progression now. This country is actually probably finished. I am not being dramatic either… we are talking Gaza Strip/Northern Ireland/The Balkans here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Dave Mann @ 4:17 pm

    Dave it’s that sort of apathetic thinking by the masses.. is why it happens.. grow some balls and say no.. I’m generally speaking… but you know what I mean.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. RRM (8,988 comments) says:

    [DPF]: “They can argue what they like, and the Tribunal can agree or disagree, but it won’t affect the legal and political reality that they are part of New Zealand, and not a self-governing state.”

    Isn’t this a way of saying that although their tribe as a (self-governing entity / nation if you will) didn’t sign the Treaty, nevertheless they are bound by it anyway, and they should just STFU and deal with it? An interesting legal concept!

    I am not saying I want to see a separate Ngapuhi state. But I find the (libertarian/freedom/property rights) right contorts itself into some very interesting attitudes whenever Maori sovereignty and/or Treaty of Waitangi issues come up!

    [DPF: They are not bound by the Treaty. No one is bound by the Treaty. The Government has passed some laws that give the Treaty some legal impact, but the Treaty by itself is not a form of law. So the fact they did not sign it has nothing to do with the fact they are not sovereign]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    DPF I don’t know what libertarianism has to do with this discussion… nothing as far as I am concerned… You are introducing a red herring. The ‘legality’ is also totally irrelevant… Who would have thought 10 years ago that a goverment would be treasonous enough to give away our country’s fucking COASTLINE for Christ’s sakes? Wake up New Zealand; these assholes can do anything they like and we will wake up one day to find the whole concept of ‘New Zealand’ has been consigned to the dustbin.

    [DPF: If you didn't tell blatant lies, people might actually respond to the points you are making. But if you like screaming lies, carry on]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Cactus Kate (538 comments) says:

    Now now everyone, surely this is what Smile and Wave means when he wants National Party supporters to challenge themselves to bend their minds to support the Harawira’s of this world.

    After all Hone can do what he likes in a white mofo’s government. Hang on, by being an MP isn’t Hone on behalf of his whanau accepting being part of a wider New Zealand?

    Yes Simle and Wave, “challenging” is the best word.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Dave Mann 4:17 pm

    Go back to England and the join the BNP. Given their election result, they need you.

    BTW, I haven’t seen evidence supporting the Nga Puhi claim, so I won’t make any substantive comment – for or against – on the grounds for it until I get round to looking at it. But the inflammatory comments of Dave Mann and several others here don’t help in reaching mutually acceptable solutions to valid historical grievances.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    It started with a ‘h’, then moved to a flag…………………….

    Key just feeds their greedy sense of entitlement

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Cactus Kate 4:59 pm

    Hang on, by being an MP isn’t Hone on behalf of his whanau accepting being part of a wider New Zealand?

    Means to an end, C.K.

    And I presume (hope) you agree that it is a better one than either taking up arms against the State or meekly conceding Maori lost and should assimilate themselves into Whitey’s world. They are the alternatives to participating in the political system as it exists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    and taken by one tribe in war then belonged to than tribe by virtue of conquest would not the Crown be entitled, by virtue of the same customary traditional laws, to retain lands it has seized.

    Clutching at straws eh ? The crown arent subject to customary traditional law because they arent Maori and the land wasnt taken in conquest.

    It was taken in peacetime and legislatively stolen. Heres just one example. BTW Tuhoe also never signed the treaty.

    authorities falsely accused Tūhoe of involvement in the killing of missionary Karl Volkner in the Volkner Incident and confiscated the iwi’s fertile lands. Tūhoe lost 5700ha of land on its northern border from a total of 181,000ha of land confiscated by the Grey government from Tūhoe, Te Whakatōhea and Ngāti Awa. The Crown took Tūhoe’s only substantial flat, fertile land and their only access to the coast. The Tūhoe people retained only harsh, more difficult land, setting the scene for later famines

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C4%81i_T%C5%ABhoe

    If you asked most Maori they’d rather have the land than the money but theres little chance of getting all the confiscated land back so what else you got that’s worth shit ?…$$$

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    If you think I am bigoted and inflamatory for not wanting my country given away to the Maori separatists and the negation of everything New Zealanders of every colour have worked for for 150 years toad, then you are very well named. Another slimy pond dweller.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Owen McShane (1,226 comments) says:

    If you have a look at the Treaties the Normans signed with the Saxon and other Warrior Tribes there is a strong similarity to the Treaty signed here.
    The Normans said “we now run the show” but you warlords can Lord it over you customary turf. Which of course was closely confined.

    And after about a generation or two everyone forgot about it and go on with customary murder and pillage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    My advise to the property-less go breed with a Maori and own something..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    RKBee, my advice to anybody owning property would be to consider their options very carefully as it looks like being worth almost nothing very soon. Go ahead and laugh at this. Have a good old guffaw. Then consider if you would like to be a property owner anywhere in Northland right now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Dave Mann 5:12 pm

    As I expected. No argument, just abuse. Don’t you get it – it’s not “your” country. It is the country you and I have the right to live in as a direct consequence of the signing of Te Tiriti.

    Te Tiriti guaranteed “te tino Rangatiratanga” to the iwi and hapu who signed it. I’m no expert in translation between historical Maori and English, but from what I do understand, that is essentially a guarantee of sovereignty. To what extent that flows on to “self-governance”, given Article 1 of Te Tiriti:

    Ko nga Rangatira o te wakaminenga me nga Rangatira katoa hoki ki hai i uru ki taua wakaminenga ka tuku rawa atu ki te Kuini o Ingarani ake tonu atu – te Kawanatanga katoa o o ratou wenua.

    is a matter of debate.

    That debate needs to be had, not shut down by Whitey First.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Caleb (465 comments) says:

    the men of this country went to war and died for this country, remember… anzac day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Caleb 5:35 pm

    remember… Parihaka Day:

    On the morning of November 5 1881 the invasion force led by two Members of Parliament, both Cabinet Ministers entered Parihaka. More than 2000 Parihaka people sat quietly on the marae while children greeted the army.

    The Riot Act was read and an hour later Te Whiti and Tohu were led away to a mock trial and incarceration in the South Island. The destruction of Parihaka began immediately. It took the army two weeks to pull down the houses and two months to destroy the crops.

    Women and girls were raped leading to an outbreak of syphilis in the community. People suspected of being from other areas of the country were thrown out. Thousands of cattle, pigs and horses were slaughtered and confiscated.

    No, not Nga Puhi. But I hope you get the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    But the inflammatory comments of Dave Mann and several others here don’t help in reaching mutually acceptable solutions to valid historical grievances.

    …but its ok for john harawira to make inflammatory comments a la white mother fuckers and nothins said…smile and wave…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Caleb (465 comments) says:

    probibly standard practice 120 years ago. of course we would hope to never let that happen today, but can we look back into the past and make those same judgements. Of course the moari themselves were even more brutal.

    So we conceed and apologise, does that me we should compensate.

    A binding referendum on the issue?

    Certainley if we every decide to be a republic, a binding referendum on the details of the constitution!

    Yea right…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    and Im with you Dave Mann…while the rest stand around naval gazing ..” theres nothing to worry about “…” its all ok ” Key is sellin us down the river….bastard…smile and wave.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    As I expected. No argument, just abuse. Don’t you get it – it’s not “your” country. It is the country you and I have the right to live in as a direct consequence of the signing of Te Tiriti.

    Got news for you Toad, the majority don’t hold your opinion and would fight tooth and nail to stop your way of thinking. Any political party who proposed the “it’s not “your” country” line would be fucked in the polls from now to eternity.

    It is our fucken country, and it belongs to all of us: Maori and Pakeha.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Rufus (606 comments) says:

    Jivekitty 3:41 – totally agree

    Someone recently said how funny it was that all the rebel Maori are conveniently ignoring their white ancestry.

    Pollywog – you’re want the best of both worlds: a return to maori tradition/rule/customs/justice by gained by using white man’s rules and justice against him.

    Which will it be? If you remain true to your traditional Maori sense of right/wrong, ROE, justice etc, you got owned, and just be glad you didn’t get eaten and wiped out. Move on.

    Instead, you ought to thank the British for protecting you from the French or Dutch who would have surely killed off the lot of you.

    Thank the British for bringing you into the modern age – granting you instant access to all the benefits other cultures have gained/developed over thousands of years of hard struggle.

    That’s the problem – there’s no honesty or gratitude with you lot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Brian Marshall (181 comments) says:

    Hey Toad. Some history for you.
    They were squatting on confiscated land. Amoung the followers was Titokowaru. He lead the actions that lead to massive number of killing of innocents of all. The leaders of Parihaka may have preached peace, but the actions of the followers in the preceding years surely put doubt into the minds of the government, and that is why the actions were so very heavy handed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    John kEY must be listening Dave… he has just said no to the Tūhoe… claim… and its this sort of Govt political interference in the middle of their treaty negotiations… that will course a back lash from Maori…

    It will be not giving Maori their dew settlements that will course a national Maori revolt.

    Maori are sick of being used as a politcal football… They just want what they were promised.. fair and final settlement.

    John Key is now in damage control.

    As I have said before when public opinion starts running against him on Maori issues he will start supporting ACTs issues.

    Its the National voter thats being played… and well played at that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    Toad

    Am I right in thinking that ” Te Tiriti.” is the Maori version of the Treaty of Waitangi as apposed to the English version or is that just what the politically correct Greens insist on calling it?

    And while I am at it, it is false of you to suggest that we need to have a discussion, that is NOT the Green party policy, the Greens want to hand the lot over, authority, power and title to the Maori on the basis that they were here first.

    At least be honest about this Toad.

    By the way, I do not appreciate you using the term “whitey” to describe me and my ancestors, I find it offensive, please use a more respectful term.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    Parihaka day ?-ahem Toadey – when will Ngapuhi compensate the Ngatiporou for the 1818 rape, pillage and plunder of the bay of plenty – or is tribal fighting oK?……. just no fighting with whitey?

    - get the point?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Bevan 6:26 pm

    Got news for you Toad, the majority don’t hold your opinion

    FFS Bevan, the “majority” don’t hold my opinion on many/most things. I’ve known that since I was a teenager. That’s why I have spent most of my life trying to convince the “majority” to look more deeply into issues, because what the “majority” normally delivers is aggrandisement to themselves but injustice to minorities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Good point our “majority” is the minority when comes to the bigger world picture.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. minto57 (197 comments) says:

    polywog it would appear you have overstayed long enough and it is time for your return to the Cook islands or maybe Zimbawe as a possible alternative universe

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    Well, I don’t appreciate toad’s automatic assumption that I (or anybody who doesn’t want to be dominated by Maori separatists) am white. I might be part white, polynesian, indian, chinese or … Shock Horror … Maori! The majority of the population of this country are some combination of these. How come only a small minority of them seem to think they matter?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. minto57 (197 comments) says:

    toad you really need to remove that straw from your arse you are starting to sound like a facist

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Steve (4,319 comments) says:

    OK. Where do I pay?
    I want a final and full payment request and then never come back and ask for more. You get your land and money and fuck off. No more Welfare, no more nothing. Get it? Maori get nothing after a fair settlement is made.

    Why the fuck should I pay this MAORI TAX just because I was born here, and my Father and Grandfather born here. I am just as indigenous as you so called MAORI. Show me your bloodline, I can show you mine.

    This shit has to stop! you lazy lazy non working shitbags need to earn a living. I DO NOT OWE YOU A LIVING. I am sick of paying TAX to support you.
    How much do you want?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Robert Black (423 comments) says:

    Oh fuck it, let’s have a civil war, there are only 15% of them.

    Send in the 16% of Asians in the first wave of attack.

    After all, what would China do in such a situation?

    Hehe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Steve (4,319 comments) says:

    “Indigenous” = people of the land. How many generations before you become the people of the land?
    Or we just pay the lazy slackarses forever?
    You wonder why the Asians come here? they fucking work and pay tax. No lazy Ngapuhi Maori is going to pay tax for my retirement, why should I pay for theirs?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Oh fuck it, let’s have a civil war, there are only 15% of them.

    You forget what the majority of our armed forces are made up of Blackie.. and its not 15% Maori.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Remember for backbone.

    Vote your party vote to ACT next time.
    and give Mr Key and The National Party a smack at the next election.
    :-)
    You’ll be giving a swift kick in the cobblers to the Greens, Maori and Labour at the same time…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    Out of curiosity, what are the majority of our armed forces made up of?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Scott Hamilton (235 comments) says:

    David, where do you get the idea that ‘almost all scientific evidence’ points to the ancestors of Maori arriving here ‘around 1280′? I’ve never heard a single expert trying to be that specific. It’s tricky, because you’re dealing with all sorts of different types of evidence processed by scholars in different fields – archaeology, botany, oral history, zoology, and so on. The consensus at the moment seems to be sometime between 1000 and 1300 AD, but there are a few – Doug Sutton, one of NZ’s leading archaeologists, for example – who have suggested a considerably earlier date. I’d agree that two thousand years is quite unlikely, but you do seem to be suggesting a degree of consensus that doesn’t exist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    @Scott: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14046-rat-stowaways-date-human-arrival-in-new-zealand.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @minto57 7:48 pm

    toad you really need to remove that straw from your arse you are starting to sound like a facist

    FFS, you can’t even spell it. And you obviously have no understanding of what the term means. I am socialist libertarian, not a capitalist authoritarian (supporter of the corporate state), which is what fascism is associated with.

    @Robert Black 7:51 pm

    Oh fuck it, let’s have a civil war, there are only 15% of them.

    Think Fiji, Robert! What is the proportion of Maori to non-Maori in the armed forces? You know, the people who have training in fighting wars!

    Not that I support Bainimarama, I might add. But get the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    Ah, JiveKitty @ 8:29 pm:

    Yes, you are thinking as I am thinking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    OK. Where do I pay?
    I want a final and full payment request and then never come back and ask for more.

    But it’ll never stop. They’ll just keep wanting, more and more and more and more. And every piece of land grabbed leaves an open surface for another handful of dirt. And every handful taken encourages others to get their share. Every dollar handed over gives more resources to get more, like some sort of heavily-geared property developer – except it’s us with the debt.

    And the thing is that the land taken (and the money taken) isn’t spent on anything good. It replaces historic grounds with townhouses, it sells native forest to loggers, the mountains to miners, the foreshore to hotel builders.

    This land was your land, and it was mine, but now it’s all theirs. Sickening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    Out of curiosity, what are the majority of our armed forces made up of?

    they would be too lazy to do anything..if thats what you are getting at…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Jd (23 comments) says:

    “Clutching at straws eh ? The crown arent subject to customary traditional law because they arent Maori and the land wasnt taken in conquest.
    It was taken in peacetime and legislatively stolen. Heres just one example. BTW Tuhoe also never signed the treaty.”

    Interesting opinion Pollywog which is contra to reality.

    I think you’ll find a lot of land was taken by conquest such as through the Taranaki land wars.

    It is irrelevent whether Tuhoe signed the treaty when determining the legality of its current status because the events of late 2007 proved that their land was annexed by conquest. Facts on the ground are everything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    It seems that Toad is quite keen on a civil war…

    They are nothing if not extreme these Greens.

    At what point do we stop giving Toad?, at what point do the rest of the county (non Maori) stop having to pay?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    tristanb – it won’t stop.

    Get used to it.

    Once it was all theirs.

    Much of it was ripped off.

    Claims will continue.

    For at least the rest of your and my life.

    Get used to it.

    Be prepared for “our” Government to pay.

    For the injustices of the past.

    Get used to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Mike keep trying… but also see that the Act party and the Maori party are being played of against each other by Keys to help his party hold the middle ground… The only one doing the kicking is Keys… Act are serving their purpose as are the Maori party for Keys… the loyal National supporters have know where to turn… They want go with Act and they want go with the Maori party and Labour and the Greens are not even in the picture… Act and Maori are just weights on the balancing scales for Key… he’s the smartest PM New Zealand has ever had… his weakness is he likes to gamble on the unpredictable… and Maori are very unpredictable.. which will in the end be his down fall.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Steve (4,319 comments) says:

    tristanb,

    So when does my 1/64 part Maori Grandson get his share?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    Get used to it.

    get fucked..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @big bruv 8:49 pm

    It seems that Toad is quite keen on a civil war.

    It is actually my worst nightmare, bruv. That is why I support addressing the grievances of the past – to avoid civil war, not to encourage it.

    And if it were to ever come to it, given current demographic trends and the ethnic composition of the armed forces, I don’t think Whitey would do very well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Scott Hamilton (235 comments) says:

    Jive Kitty: the research project led by Janet Wilmshurst whose conclusions are reported in the link you gave was a response to some controversial datings of kiore bones which a biologist name David Holdaway made back in the ’90s. Holdaway seemed to show that the bones, which were dug from under the tephra of the Taupo eruption in Hawkes Bay, were close to two thousand years old. But the repeated failure to find the same date from other bones found at the site, or to find other bones under the tephra, makes many scholars believe Holdaway’s results were the product of contamination. I blogged about the Holdaway controversy a couple of years ago:
    http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2008/01/dem-bones.html

    In some ways Wilmshurst’s conclusions are a little tangential to Holdaway’s own reading of his findings. He felt that his dating showed that a group of humans arrived here, ‘dropped off their rats’, and then either died or left. He never claimed to have discovered a date for a settlement, which is a different thing from a visit.

    It’s not the case that the discrediting of Holdaway’s tests in the eyes of many scholars equals solid support for the view that settlement definitely took place in the thirteenth century – and the idea that a settlement date can be pinpointed to a decade is silly. There are a number of scholars who propose an earlier date than the thirteenth century for various reasons – Doug Sutton, for instance, argues that we can’t rely simply on material evidence like old carvings and other cultural artefacts as an indicator of first settlement, because there are often situations where people are resident in a place for hundreds of years before they leave material evidence that survives the test of time. This is especially true when we’re dealing with coastal settlement, because of the impact of erosion, sea rises, and so on. It’s proved quite difficult to find ancient archaeological sites in large parts of coastal New Guinea, for instance, even though we know people have been in the highlands of that place for tens of thousands of years.

    Since we know that the ancestors of Maori almost certainly came from East Polynesia, and we know roughly when East Polynesia was settled, we can put a pretty good absolute limit on the first date of settlement here. But there’s still latitude for argument.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @ starboard 8:52 pm

    get fucked..

    Thanks for such an intellectually informed comment on a thread where we were having an interesting discussion about the future of our nation.

    You really have no idea. You can head off to the UK and support the BNP too, you racist bigot, starboard.

    If you were a genuine right winger, you would support property rights, regardless of ethnicity. But you want property rights only for Whitey, and those who held them long before Whitey arrived can (how did you put it so delicately?) “get fucked”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    Toad

    You really are in a trolling mood tonight, or is it that you are going through a period of self loathing because you happen to be born white?

    I have asked you once and I will ask you again, please do not use the term “Whitey”, it is racist and it is derogatory, you would jump up and down if anybody used a derogatory term to describe Maori so I cannot see why it should not cut both ways.

    It is interesting that you are so sure that the Maori who are in our armed forces would immediately swap sides and fight against the government, I am not sure why you think like that, these Maori are not your ordinary everyday activist losers Toad, these are proud men and women who have done well in their lives, you would be surprised at how many of them have no time at all for the John Harawira’s of this world.

    The trouble with your idea of addressing the grievances of the past Toad is that they will never end, people like you will continue to ignore the endless line of Maori failure and continue to blame non Maori for their ills.

    You might have a misplaced guilt complex Toad but most of us do not, Kiwis are an apathetic bunch but eventually they will say enough is enough, soon we will find a government who is strong enough to say “No More”.

    It will be the best thing that has happened to NZ and the best thing that has happened to Maori.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Scott Hamilton (235 comments) says:

    PS In saying all that, I don’t mean to write off the research Wilmshurst and co did and the evidence they cite. I’m just suggesting that there’s latitude for argument. Even if I find its conclusions over-confident, Wilmshurst’s report is a valuable tool for countering fringe nutters like the Celtic NZ crowd and the Nation of Waitaha scamsters:
    http://books.scoop.co.nz/2008/11/18/no-to-nazi-pseudo-history-an-open-letter/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    And if it were to ever come to it, given current demographic trends and the ethnic composition of the armed forces, I don’t think Whitey would do very well.

    You forget Australia with the US will step in to secure the region.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    Toad

    The BNP support ingenious rights, the Greens are all for that are they not?

    Or do you see all white people as evil?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    you’re fighting this argument on your own toad…and ya sadly losing..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    bruv, as a New Zealander of Northern European ancestry, I fee very comfortable about describing myself and others of similar ethnic origin as “whitey”.

    Much like “Nigger” is one of the most offensive words in any language – unless it is reclaimed by the people it was used against to oppress.

    So the band NWA (Niggers With Attitude) don’t denigrate their own people by the use of that term.

    Nor do I mine by referring to Whitey (although I have to admit to being a bit provocative tonight, but responsively, rather than proactively).

    Anyway, enjoy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Whafe (652 comments) says:

    It gets painful getting fucked up the ass by all this BS from the Moree’s wanting more and more and more and more and more….

    Give me strength….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @starboard 9:15 pm

    you’re fighting this argument on your own toad…and ya sadly losing..

    Don’t see you putting up any argument at all starboard. You really are a dumbfuck. You ain’t got an argument.

    You are leaving it all to big bruv, who at least tries. He is someone worth debating with on blogs, starboard, because he has some intellectual analysis.

    You don’t. Dork!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    You are not being provocative Toad, you are being a dick.

    You are also being very immature, and like all pinko’s you like to see how far you can push the envelope before somebody responds with a term that you find offensive so you can run off to DPF asking for some demerits.

    We have seen how you would police this blog, much like Frogblog, where any dissenting opinions are not tolerated.

    Some might have reacted to your juvenile posts Toad but I am not one of them, there will come a time soon when the gravy train stops, there will not be a civil war, there will not be rioting in the streets (save the odd protest from your left wing low life pals) and the world will keep turning.

    I often wonder how people like you deal with the massive guilt complex you suffer from, at what stage do you stop Toad?, at what stage do you say “they have to take some personal responsibility”,? at what stage do you look at an 18 year old offender who claims that it was colonisation that made him break the law and laugh?

    Seriously mate, don’t you ever get sick of being played for a fool?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    toad…see 8.52…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Jd (23 comments) says:

    “So the band NWA (Niggers With Attitude) don’t denigrate their own people by the use of that term.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9KJOtQclOA

    I’d say Public Enemy are much more reflect of black nationalism that a group which writes songs about group sex with 14 year old girls.

    Try again wigga.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    I don’t see there being a civil war. Too much to lose and not enough to fight for. As for the military, I’m not sure the ethnic composition would be relevant in such an event anyway. It doesn’t actually imply who they’ll support unless you want to generalise that skin colour trumps all other loyalties, and that’s doubtful. I don’t see my stepmother’s relatives in the army siding with a group of activists or tribe leaders (although it would be doubtful they’d ever want to get their hands dirty enough to start a civil war) who’ve done little for them, their family or their family’s community. Admittedly this is anecdotal but I don’t believe it’s dissimilar from the norm. Furthermore, as I said earler, all Maoris have other heritage as well, culturally and ethnically. They are not an “other” in the context of the larger New Zealand society. They are part of it. This would again muddy the waters even if one wanted to posit a simple case of ethnic/cultural loyalty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @big bruv 9:34 pm

    Hugs and kisses bruv!

    Let’s make up.

    After all, I did defend your integrity against that “starboard” character who was attempting to undermine the integrity of good honest right wing New Zealanders earlier tonight .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @JiveKitty 9:44 pm

    I don’t see there being a civil war.

    No, I don’t either. JK. But it is sure as hell fun winding up the wingnuts and seeing how far they can go.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    bruv – ya nailed it. its self loathing white toad.

    im pretty sure one of my great grandfathers got ripped off at some stage. hell i think one or two were sent from england to aussie. cant say i give a shit.

    injustices of the past = an excuse not to man up and make your own way in this world.

    but hey, we all know the left dont want to see maori progress. its better to keep them angry and with their hand out. give them some $$ every now and then. keep them poor and dependant! it means votes for the other victims of the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    I think it would be a more useful exercise to look at what % of the infantry have loyalty to thier Maori heretage. Most others in the army may wear the uniform, may get a smattering of infantry training at basic, may know how to clean a rifle and fire a rifle, but they are not fighting soldiers per se, they are trades people. An officer told me a long time ago that they purposely keep the % of Maori in the infantry at 10%. I don’t know if it is true but from my personal observations it could be. During my time in the TF I had many good Maori mates, I would have been more than happy for them to watch my back as I would have watched thiers. But I would be more than happy to shoot the Jacksons, Sharples, Turias, and Tamiheres of this world. And no I was not infantry but a pretty damn good shot for a truckie.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    Um, no, dime. Give the resources back that us whiteyboys ripped off from them, or if that is too difficult, negotiate compensation.

    No handouts – just give back the land that was ripped off, or compensate accordingly. Isn’t that how a justice system is meant to work?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Toad posted:

    … feel very comfortable about describing myself and others of similar ethnic origin as “whitey”…

    The KKK and the apartheidists of South Africa probably felt similarly about their own use of use of the N word and of “kaffir”.

    Toad’s post:

    … given current demographic trends and the ethnic composition of the armed forces, I don’t think Whitey would do very well…

    Toad denies he wants civil war, but repeatedly brings up the possibility.

    High and continuing intermarriage in NZ is creating a large and increasing population with both European and Polynesian ancestry. The new Kiwis tend to be a little more white than brown, but skin colour is irrelevant except for getting Vitamin D from the sun without contracting skin cancer. The influx of Asian blood will make the new blend even more interesting.

    As for the relatively high proportion of Maori in the Armed Forces, brown and white NZers have fought side by side for a long time now, and both have tasted victory together — and failure (against the Turks at Gallipoli, and against the German airborne troops in Crete and at Cassino).

    Why would Toad want to scare white NZ’ers with talk of the high Maori numbers in the Army? Is it this….?

    Toad: I will get my Big Brown Brothers to helt you all if you don’t shut up.

    A leftist wimp.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. kiki (425 comments) says:

    BNP

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Bhutan Nepalese

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Kiki posted at 10.34 this enigmatic message:

    BNP

    What has the BNP got to do with this?

    Are you bringing them in because they are pushing their “rights” as the allegedly indigenous people of Britain?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Asia Minor Catastrophe

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Whatever you’re smokin, kiki, pass it around so we can work outwhat you are saying.

    Bhutan Nepalese????

    Butan Nepalese what?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    Toad, how about we start with giving them back land you and your greenie mates own. No compensation. You and your mates up for it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Asia Minor Catastrophe????

    Did Turkey not make the cut for the World Cup???

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Jasenovac

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @Jack5 10:31 pm

    Just digging yourself a bigger hole, Jack.

    Don’t you see it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Kiki: Jasenovac – the Croatians’ extermination camp?

    Quick pass the roach around before I get a headache.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Spanish Expulsion, 1492

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Toad at 10:31

    …Just digging yourself a bigger hole, Jack.

    Nah, it’s Toad in the Hole at this hour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Kiki at 10:44: “Spanish Expulsion, 1492″

    ??????

    For fuck’s sake spit out your message, kiki.

    Life’s too short for New Age riddles.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Toad your comment

    Don’t you get it – it’s not “your” country.

    can leave many dead. I know a survivor of a recent genocide and revolution is not cool. It leave misery.

    I do find it ironic that the party that made milage out of closing the gaps is now accentuating the gaps, both from what they encouraged and their hypocritical actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    Jack5 please ask Toad to answer my question, I’m not speaking to the dipshit at the moment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    what country are you commenting from kiki

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Toad:

    Please answer Muzza M’s question of 10.41pm:

    …Toad, how about we start with giving them back land you and your greenie mates own. No compensation. You and your mates up for it.

    Will you give your home to your local iwi?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    toad – theres limitations man.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    Thanks Jack5

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Okay Kiki, I get it. Your:

    … do find it ironic that the party that made milage out of closing the gaps is now accentuating the gaps…

    Yep, secretly signing the UN indigenous rights deal, encouraging separate, race-based social services, then spouting about there will be no racial separation in NZ. Bro. Key does appear to be all over the place on this issue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. reid (15,531 comments) says:

    Unfortunately I think in this debate toad is the advanced party.

    No matter what we think we’ve done in the past to redress the grievances whether or not anyone thinks such redress is just, it’s not been enough.

    I think however that rather than rail on our Maori brethren we need to look at ourselves, for a just but not full solution since that can never be, for that would involve the entire country. How many of us don’t know the history, even. I’m guilty of that.

    Let alone the intricacies of the culture we destroyed in our thoughtless conquest in the name of Empire.

    Yet even though many of us know only the general picture even then in our profound ignorance we’re still willing to abrogate our heritage of Westminster justice, just cause it’s difficult to decide who did what and when.

    That sucks.

    Nga Puhi deserve their day in court, free, incidentally, of limitations arbitrarily imposed by the PM in a last-minute press briefing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    Jack5 hate to have to correct you but closing the gaps was a Labour initiative, abandoned pretty bloody quickly when it turned out to be FUBAR. Whanau Ora is the new initiative which JK has let the racist party ream him and the NZ taxpayer up the arse with. It will last longer than closing the gaps but will also turn out to be FUBAR.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Reid at 11.03:

    …Let alone the intricacies of the culture we destroyed in our thoughtless conquest in the name of Empire…

    Bullshit. Britain was reluctant to colonise NZ. It finally did so because of pressure from church groups sponsoring missionaries, who were reporting back about the mayhem as whalers and gun runners traded muskets and rum for flax, timber, and tattooed heads etc.

    The British didn’t destroy Maori culture. As a stone age culture, with still cannibalism and slavery, Maoridom collided with modernity. In fact, the British gave the Maori a written language and introduced modern education to them. (Land rorts began with the white settlers, the pioneers.)

    Turn your head from the past to the future, Reid. The talk of redress for past actions is fraught with hypocrisy. Next you and the other bleeding hearts will be asking for compensation for families and descendants of criminals hanged in the past, as the majority in society now accept capital punishment is wrong. This was an excellent example given by Stephen Franks on Jim Mora’s radio show on RNZ today. The panel was talking about whether the Rugby Union should apologise for all-white rugby teams to South Africa.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Muzza M (286 comments) says:

    Looks like Toad has wimped out. Good night all, good conversing with you. Again thanks Jack5. Better get some sleep, have to work tomorrow, and pay 38% of what I earn to people I wouldn’t give a penny to if they were begging in the street.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. reid (15,531 comments) says:

    “Turn your head from the past to the future, Reid.”

    I have, Jack.

    Where have Maori done anything except demanded recognition as the tanagata whenua?

    And usually when they’ve demanded that, it’s been because some idiot’s ignored them and made a decision that affects them the outcome of which might or might not, have been different, had they been meaningfully consulted. Emphasis on (a) meaningful and (b) consulted prior to the decision.

    Not sure what your experience is Jack, but in my observation that usually has a positive outcome, provided both (a) and (b) occur in the correct sequence. It’s not rocket science but somehow we pakeha idiotically and continually ignore the need for it, resulting in various news headlines.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Rex Widerstrom (5,125 comments) says:

    Only just found time to come back to this thread, probably too late for anyone to read, but still…

    kowtow says:

    Like so many other things from the “progressive” camp like human rights, sexual orientation rights,animal rights, minority rights,criminal rights,we have indigenous rights…..suck it up honky bro,as long as you got the cheque book

    Sorry, but WTF? How do human rights (or animal rights, or rights relating to sexual orientation for that matter) cost you anything kowtow?

    You can grant people rigjts without agreeing with any expectation they may have of your paying for any aspect of their lifestyle.

    I want my human rights, I want the right to practive any sexual orientation I choose, and I want those rights for others. But I don’t expect you to fun my rights, kowtow, just stand aside and grant me them. Do you have a problem with that?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    I’m looking fowards to the return of Constantinople to be honest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    Oh and LMAO about a civil war, do we have even have enough stores to supply a months worth of fighting over a Pa? let alone a country, how could either side afford to fund such a war when we are having to sell our farms to the chinese.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. william blake (90 comments) says:

    “Perhaps we could take it seriously if those involved first provided a clear definition of who are maori and what percentage of maori ancestry does one have to posses to still be maori.”

    and

    “Given there are no full-blooded Maori…”

    It isn’t funny how you lot can say Maori can’t be who they are when it is about Maori issues; but day to day you lot can sniff out Maori blood like Gestapo tracker dogs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Owen McShane (1,226 comments) says:

    We know that around 1250 the Maori STOPPED coming to NZ because the Little Ice Age brought an end to the extended canoe migrations across the Pacific. The Mediaval Warm period enabled such migrations although ocean going was still cold work which is why Polynesians developed a high ratio of body mass to lung capacity.

    However it is more difficult to say how far into the Medieval Warm Period their migrations to NZ began. It does seem that the door was open for only a few hundred years at most.

    Anyhow, Maori should be aware that their history suggests a Warm World is good while cold worlds are “cold”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. grumpyoldhori (2,410 comments) says:

    Muzza M a weekend terror were you.
    Make up of the infantry, one of my lads is a platoon Sergeant and he was saying it is close to 50% hori.
    That will make some worry about a hori takeover :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    Toad Says:

    “Women and girls were raped leading to an outbreak of syphilis in the community.”

    Can you provide a reference Toad?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    Wait for the back down from Neville Key.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3679521/Tuhoe-decision-infuriates

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    Those who expected a better management of race relations must be sorely disappointed. Key has proven to be an appeaser, who has sold out to the racist Maori Party at the expense of the rest of New Zealanders.

    Considering his political aspirations I would expect no better from this spineless Prime Minister and the National Party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    Toad Says:

    Te Tiriti guaranteed “te tino Rangatiratanga” to the iwi and hapu who signed it…. To what extent that flows on to “self-governance”, given Article 1 of Te Tiriti:

    …..

    is a matter of debate.

    That debate needs to be had, not shut down by Whitey First.
    ……………………………………
    So the Green party shouldn’t poke it’s nose in Maori affairs Toad?:

    “GREENS’ FORESHORE COMPROMISE THREAT TO TINO RANGATIRATANGA

    A spokesman for the New Zealand Maori Council says a proposal by the Green’s to prevent the sale of customary foreshore and seabed land over-rides Maori tinorangitiratanga rights.

    The Greens have suggested an amendment to the Maori Land Act to the panel looking into the Foreshore and Seabed laws but council spokesman Maanu Paul says it is not a good idea.

    “It says that tino rangatiratanga for Mori ought to be conditional. That you ough not to have the power to determine the destiny of your takutai moana, of your foreshore and seabed. That it ought to be tied so that you can’t sell it. Tino rangatioratanga over any treaty asset under article two has to be unfettered,” Mr Paul says.”

    http://waatea.blogspot.com/2009_05_17_archive.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    Maori Party furious over Govt’s Tuhoe decision

    Is that Tariana Turia or Meteria Turie (it’s hard to tell the Green party and Maori Party apart)?
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3679521/Tuhoe-decision-infuriates

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. mikeysmokes (269 comments) says:

    Well I’ll be fucked. Fuck the police by NWA on Kiwiblog. Wonders never cease

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Jadis (147 comments) says:

    mikey – is it sad that I can still recite the lyrics to that ‘song’?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. LiberalismIsASin (288 comments) says:

    All this arguing about maori land, colonialism, etc is IRRELEVANT. This country will be asian in 100 years time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. Jadis (147 comments) says:

    I wonder if the Treaty negot Minister or PM might change their view re: including Ureweras in the settlement if there was an understanding that Tuhoe would then gift the park back to NZ as a whole (at this stage Tuhoe have only said they’d guarantee access). I also wonder if there are ‘concerns’ that Tuhoe might not follow through in the same way that Ngai Tahu did with Aoraki/Mt Cook.

    From what I have seen Tuhoe want to be able to operate the Ureweras as their land, care for it, employ Tuhoe to care for it, run more of their own Tuhoe-based companies on it (like the adventure tours, hunting tours and the like). While still in DOC management and Crown ownership that would be more difficult.

    The Ureweras are a special place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. Jadis (147 comments) says:

    I should add that I doubt the Urewera ownersip issue will change in near future… just a few balls in their air to manage at the moment for this Government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    “The Ureweras are a special place.”

    Bollocks!

    It is nothing but bush and scrub, nothing special about it at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    LiberalismIsASin 11:17 am,

    All this arguing about maori land, colonialism, etc is IRRELEVANT. This country will be asian in 100 years time.

    I agree – asian OR Muslim, although I’m not sure which one will win out first. But certainly New Zealand of even 20 years hence will be vastly different to the NZ of today. We’ll either be ‘owned’ by China, or Islamified like much of Europe and the UK are today. Either way, it doesn’t look good for the future of our nation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. Jadis (147 comments) says:

    Really Big Bruv? The parts that I spend time in are lovely… lots of native bush, beautiful streams, kids on horseback, caves, the stories that can be told about the area… but then again I have family there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Jadis 11:32 am,

    Really Big Bruv? The parts that I spend time in are lovely… lots of native bush, beautiful streams, kids on horseback, caves, the stories that can be told about the area… but then again I have family there.

    I agree, Jadis.
    And let’s not forget really great tramping, and lake Waikaremoana; the second largest lake in the north island (to Taupo) – excellent for kayaking, sailing, trout fishing. Truly one of New Zealand’s best kept secrets.

    Have you actually been there, Big Bruv?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    @hj 9:25 am

    I did provide a link – this one: http://www.parihaka.com/About.aspx

    9:53 am

    I could counter Maanu Paul’s view by asserting that the whole concept of freehold title and selling land is an imported British one that is foreign to tino rangatiratanga.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    Maori separatism is a con, a game to exact money from the rest of New Zealand with the feeble excuse of “reparations” (whatever that means 160 years later).

    If so, let the separatists go but we should not pay them a dollar in welfare benefits. They should also take back their own people that populate NZ prisons.

    These tribes cannot have their cake and eat it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. adrianb (30 comments) says:

    Not even close, Kris K., time to brush up on basic geography, I’m afraid. Rotorua is the second largest lake in the North Island, followed in third by the mighty Lake Wairarapa. Waikaremoana is a tiddler…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. virtualmark (1,421 comments) says:

    So toad …

    I could counter Maanu Paul’s view by asserting that the whole concept of freehold title and selling land is an imported British one that is foreign to tino rangatiratanga

    So perhaps when the Maori signed a treaty granting them British citizenship then perhaps they should have been a little more careful about what British societal values were?

    And let’s not forget that several Maori chiefs had travelled as far as Britain, and clearly seen the way society worked there, and many were very familiar with the colonies in Australia where, no doubt, the concept of freehold title and selling of land was well established.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    Toad I do laugh at the description of yourself as a “socialist libertairan”… oh god that makes my head spin

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    run more of their own Tuhoe-based companies on it (like the adventure tours, hunting tours

    …do they/would they employ ” white ” people in their businesses…if not , they are/would be clearly breaking the law.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. adrianb (30 comments) says:

    I can just picture how Tuhoe’s “custodianship” of the Park would develop. First there would be numerous hui and speeches about how it was to remain “for all New Zealanders”. Then there would be an increasing number of charges for use of the park, guides, etc etc. Then there’d be some flare up somewhere about visitors “not showing respect” and Tuhoe would ban people going to X area because of a tapu/rahui/issue of “cultural sensitivity”. Then this would happen again. And then again. Non-paying visitors would be harrassed, charges would increase, and when the government of the day finally decided enough was enough there would be a big protest/sit in at the former park headquarters at Waikaremoana and Tuhoe would attempt to bar access to the park. After that, members of Tuhoe would start talking about “tauiwi” needing passports approved by “Tuhoe Nation” to enter the area, and down the slow spiral of Balkinisation and ethnic strife we would go.

    Watching the capitulation to the campaign for ethnic separatism in New Zealand is like watching a car crash in slow-mo. Really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. grumpyoldhori (2,410 comments) says:

    Starboard nope, since the Tuhoe follow the mighty god Tu they can do as the Brethren do and argue that only followers of the faith should be employed by the Tuhoe.
    The words hoist and petard come to mind :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. EverlastingFire (290 comments) says:

    Britain has a document the supersedes the treaty of waitangi. It’s non-issue for them and always will be. Given the welfare mentality that corrupts some Maori minds, don’t you think they’ve tried to gain British passports and welfare using the treaty as their driving force? Well they have, and failed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    Toad Says:

    @hj 9:25 am

    I did provide a link – this one: http://www.parihaka.com/About.aspx
    ………
    you provided a propaganda link Toad. Can you provide written reports from the time in question regarding
    “Women and girls were raped leading to an outbreak of syphilis in the community.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Toad states the obvious in his 11.47 post:

    …the whole concept of freehold title and selling land is an imported British one that is foreign to tino rangatiratanga..

    Of course you can’t have a land title system unless you have a written language, and it is hard to have a concept of selling anything when your culture is still at the barter stage.

    What does your leftist intellect suggest: reverting all NZ land to non-title and occupiers or conquering group have prime use rights?

    Would your new Aotearoa also abolish money, because it didn’t exist in Maoridom? Would it abandon written language, too? And rugby? And education (essentially Western style that goes back to Ancient Greece) modern pop culture and clothing and fashion and plumbing and travel and foods and warm clothing and medicine and X rays and hospitals?

    There is no going back! If by some miracle NZ were to revert to a pre-1940s Maori land (not even a true nation state), it would be gobbled up within a couple of decades by Australia, China, or even Fiji.

    It’s all a bit like your fossilised socialism, Toad.

    The dogs barked, the caravan moved on — a century and a half ago in the case of pre-modern NZ, and two or three decades ago in the case of Marxist Stalinism, Maoism, and even stultifying Christian socialism of the British and NZ and Toad type.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    Interesting opinion Pollywog which is contra to reality.

    I think you’ll find a lot of land was taken by conquest such as through the Taranaki land wars.

    It is irrelevent whether Tuhoe signed the treaty when determining the legality of its current status because the events of late 2007 proved that their land was annexed by conquest. Facts on the ground are everything.

    oh stop talking shit ! its if you’r not gonna get challenged with the truth. did you not read that link i posted regarding Tuhoe confiscations and what events of 2007 are you talking about ?

    The ‘taranaki land wars’ were escalations of conflicts white settlers started by stealing Maori land and provoking them to resist and fight back so as to escalate a “war” and justify the illegal confiscation of more land as punishment. “Taranaki land wars” pfffft…one mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter. So what do you call the war against colonialism in the US circe the 1700′s, ‘the american revolution’ or the ‘war of independence’ ?

    if there is to be ethnic conflict in the present or future. The same thing will happen. It wil be provoked by crackkka ass rednecks like most of ya’ll dumb ignorant white asses braying like Don Key or Brash John.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. big bruv (12,351 comments) says:

    “that is foreign to tino rangatiratanga.”

    Tinoroundabout is bloody foreign to the vast majority of Kiwis Toad.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. starboard (2,447 comments) says:

    ….gollywog…breath thru ya nose…b-r-e-a-t-h thru ya nose…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    …crackkka ass rednecks like most of ya’ll dumb ignorant white asses braying like Don Key or Brash John.

    Let me guess, Pollywog. You are a student at Canterbury?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    …starboard…pull yo head outta ya ass… p-u-l-l yo head outta ya ass

    so now that ‘smile and wave’ has pulled Te Urewera of the negotiating table, theres not a fuck of a lot left to give Tuhoe back for the theft of their lands. Money is piss poor compensation, but what else is there ?

    sad fucken state of affairs !!!

    authorities falsely accused Tūhoe of involvement in the killing of missionary Karl Volkner in the Volkner Incident and confiscated the iwi’s fertile lands. Tūhoe lost 5700ha of land on its northern border from a total of 181,000ha of land confiscated by the Grey government from Tūhoe, Te Whakatōhea and Ngāti Awa. The Crown took Tūhoe’s only substantial flat, fertile land and their only access to the coast. The Tūhoe people retained only harsh, more difficult land, setting the scene for later famines

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C4%81i_T%C5%ABhoe

    …and nope Jack 5

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    authorities falsely accused Tūhoe of involvement in the killing of missionary Karl Volkner (150 years ago).

    “sad fucken state of affairs !!!”
    .
    It’s what you make of it really; Tuhoe have the same opportunities as everyone else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. pollywog (1,153 comments) says:

    oh don’t talk such shit hj !!!…since when have Tuhoe had the same opportunities ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. hj (5,692 comments) says:

    I meant as individuals but not as a tribe as New Zealand’s population is now about 4.1 million and National Parks are everyones backyard.
    God Save the Queen!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. Simone (3 comments) says:

    It is great to see such lively debate but the level of ignorance shown by some is appalling and an embarrassment to the New Zealand education system.

    How can we all be so ignorant of the history of our own country and the people in it.

    The insistence of stating your opinion as a fact is ridiculous. Pray tell me what base in fact is there for the claim that “there are no full bloodied maori in New Zealand”.

    And since when does a Waitangi Tribunal claimant speak for all of Ngapuhi? Since claimants make up less than 1 percent of Ngapuhi and in most cases do not have a mandate from the people whatsoever, how does this make a claimant a “spokesperson for Ngapuhi”.

    You, that are making sweeping statements regarding Ngapuhi as a whole, are just showing your redneck racist colours. Its like saying Tim Burton speaks for all of White New Zealanders.

    All this nonsense about being F.. up the arse and ripped off by Maori. How exactly does this impact on your life? Any settlement made with Maori, how exactly does this affect you in real terms? Please give me evidence of where so called “white people” have been kicked off their land in order for it to be given back to Maori????

    Sounds like shit stirring of the highest order to me. Visit http://www.tuhoronuku.com/ and educate yourself a little.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.