The difference between Maori and Mana parties

July 11th, 2011 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Yvette pointed this out:

Sharples or Brash “You once again bring the Maori people’s aspirations into contempt and ridicule. Your views are not only inaccurate and ill-founded, but are totally out of tune with middle New Zealand’s ideals and aspirations for our country.”

Harawira on Brash “Your attempts to boost Act in the polls by riding on the xenophobic fears of Joe Bloggs in the street will not work this time round.”

I thought that was a great contrast. The believe the “average” New Zealander shares their aspirations for Maori, while the believes the average New Zealander is racist.

I think that difference in world view goes to the heart of why Hone left the Maori Party.

Tags: ,

77 Responses to “The difference between Maori and Mana parties”

  1. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,887 comments) says:

    No, no, no David. Get it right.

    The Maori Party left Hone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. MajorBloodnok (361 comments) says:

    Who knows what the average bloke and bloke-ess think of the ACT party point-of-view?

    Has any scientific survey been conducted?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Viking2 (11,412 comments) says:

    Well these maori Leaders are all Cl(arse) by the look of this news item.

    http://www.sunlive.co.nz/news/14119-ref-down-trou-earns-two-year-ban.html

    Bay of Plenty District Health Board member and former Bay of Plenty rugby player is banned from playing rugby until 2013.

    He has received the ban after he heckled and ‘down-trou’d’ the referee during a club rugby match in June between Te Puke and Rangataua.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Whaleoil (767 comments) says:

    I love how Hone now thinks Maori are foreigners.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. eszett (2,401 comments) says:

    while the Mana Party believes the average New Zealander is racist.

    Well, so does Don Brash, otherwise he wouldn’t think that such an ad campaign would be successful. Insofar both Don and Hone are very much the mirror image of each other. Particle and anti-particle. I wonder if they would disintegrate if they collided?

    @Whale: that is very funny indeed! Maybe he should consult Pauline Hanson on what xenophobe means.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ross (1,437 comments) says:

    It’s not often I agree with Hone but this time he’s right. Look at the furore over the possible sale of the Crafar farms to Chinese interests. There is indeed xenophobia among some of the populace. Without such xenophobia, Winston Peters wouldn’t have lasted so long as an MP.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Steve Wrathall (283 comments) says:

    Difference?
    Mana: “White M*********s”
    Maori: “Why are we fighting whakapapa against whakapapa? There’s so much enemy that is not brown.”
    Dr Pita Sharples, March 2009, in meeting with Mongrel Mob and Black Power members flown to Auckland at taxpayers’ expense for a secret hui.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2975445/Minister-flies-gang-bosses-to-secret-meeting

    None that I can see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    Good post Steve. Milkymilo oh guru-on-everything..care to comment on Steves post??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    You know, you have to wonder what you ACTards would see as the place of Maori in this country.

    But hey, you guys have blown it for another cycle, so who gives a sh!t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    The reality is very simple, the Maori party have been one of the most stable MMP coalition partners in NZ’s political history.
    The only reason they don’t get credit for as much is because they are brown.

    The more these ACT twits talk, the more their true agenda becomes apparent.

    Foot in mouth disease is strong with the ideologically extreme in NZ it would seem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    easy chunder..on an EQUAL footing with the rest of us…no special treatment..eg no as of right placements in university because you have brown skin. If you cant see the wrongness in that one example then you are a fool.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    “The only reason they don’t get credit for as much is because they are brown”

    what a crock of shit that statement is. “Woe is me Im brown so Im getting a bum deal.” And therein lies the problem with you lot..utter failures the fucking lot of you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Pete George (23,476 comments) says:

    on an EQUAL footing

    There’s no such thing as an equal footing. Every individual and every group have their own advantages, their own impediments, and their own challenges.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    what a crock of shit that statement is. “Woe is me Im brown so Im getting a bum deal.” And therein lies the problem with you lot..utter failures the fucking lot of you.

    You deliberately miss the point, (how unusual) again.

    So tell me, does the Maori party deserve any credit for being the most stable coalition partner in NZ political history or not?.
    Simple effing question.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    mate they are in the public trough. They arent gona rock the boat now are they.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    easy chunder..on an EQUAL footing with the rest of us…no special treatment..eg no as of right placements in university because you have brown skin. If you cant see the wrongness in that one example then you are a fool.

    Yeah, because we all know that educated people are the worst leaders, we all know that helping someone rise above their circumstances is just the worst thing we could do to help their culture.

    Nice example.

    Keep talking………

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Paulus (2,607 comments) says:

    Is it true that Pita Sharple’s father was from Bradford ?
    Is he then a relative of the late Ena of Coronation Street ?
    Or is he really different ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    mate they are in the public trough. They arent gona rock the boat now are they.

    Gee Starboard, isn’t that what some of the Greens and Hone are saying about them?

    Two drips out of the same tap?.

    Maori are are damned if they do and damned if they don’t: if they don’t agree with Pakeha, they are radical extremists, when they do get along they are troughers and traitors.

    If there was an election today, this pakeha would be voting Maori out of respect for their integrity and stability.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. ciaron (1,422 comments) says:

    Helping someone because of their circumstance (lets just ignore attitudes for a minute): good thing.

    Helping someone because of their circumstance and skin colour: not such a good thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. lofty (1,310 comments) says:

    I agree Shunda, I posted in another thread, that if we have to have race based politics, lets have it with honour & principle.

    I personally don’t like having race based parties in parliament, but we have em so we have to get on with it, until such time as NZ matures enough to see the way clear to rid ourselves of them.

    The Maori party, while having an obvious agenda, that I have difficulty with, have at the very least provided a stable coalition partnership that allows them a good platform from which to negotiate their stands.

    Then again the Maori party do not look for my vote, so could care less about my difficulty with their agenda, but it is obvious, from their point of view, that it is far better to piss from within the tent than without.

    Hone and his new found friends will always spend their lives pissing from without. It just makes them noisy and a little irritating thats all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Pete George (23,476 comments) says:

    I’m with Sunda in giving the Maori Party credit for being a player in government and actually doing what they can rather than whistling from the sideline.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Aredhel777 (290 comments) says:

    “Yeah, because we all know that educated people are the worst leaders, we all know that helping someone rise above their circumstances is just the worst thing we could do to help their culture.

    Nice example.

    Keep talking………”

    At the cost of equality under the law. I think it’s obscene that non-Maori students need an A- average to get into Auckland law school while Maori and Pacific Islanders get away with a B- average. What is going to happen is that when these people qualify and get their degrees, people will simply stay the hell away from Maori lawyers because they get qualifications without the required grades. It’s doing them a disservice. It’s also racist towards white and non-Maori people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Shunda barunda (2,977 comments) says:

    What is going to happen is that when these people qualify and get their degrees, people will simply stay the hell away from Maori lawyers

    So Maori are going to ruin the credibility and integrity of the legal profession?

    Bwaaa!! haa! ha! ha! HAAAAAAA!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Shunda

    Hilarious!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    ” I think it’s obscene that non-Maori students need an A- average to get into Auckland law school while Maori and Pacific Islanders get away with a B- average.”

    Thats because maori are thick..eh chunder, t-h-i-c-k dumb arse mo/fos.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Ryan Sproull (7,101 comments) says:

    At the cost of equality under the law. I think it’s obscene that non-Maori students need an A- average to get into Auckland law school while Maori and Pacific Islanders get away with a B- average. What is going to happen is that when these people qualify and get their degrees, people will simply stay the hell away from Maori lawyers because they get qualifications without the required grades. It’s doing them a disservice. It’s also racist towards white and non-Maori people.

    Aredhel,

    Hopefully people will be intelligent enough to know the difference between entry requirements and completion requirements, and will realise that all Maori lawyers have the same grade requirements for completing their qualification that everyone else does.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. big bruv (13,718 comments) says:

    Does anybody really think there is any difference between the Mana and Maori parties?

    One is racist with an angry face, the other is racist but says it with a nice smile.

    They are both separatists and both believe that Maori have special privileges because of their race.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Hey look both Pita and Hone are wrong and Hone was abusive. Must be a day ending in a y.

    got anything new for us DPF?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Don the Kiwi (1,705 comments) says:

    And all this is happening while there is a growing store of evidence to demonstrate that New Zealand was inhabitted by at least one other distinct race many centuries prior to Maori arriving here.

    Won’t the shit hit the fan if there is undeniable proof that Maori were not the indigenous people….what is it? Tongue at the fanny ?…..oh no that’s right – Tangata Whenua.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Aredhel777 (290 comments) says:

    “So Maori are going to ruin the credibility and integrity of the legal profession?

    Bwaaa!! haa! ha! ha! HAAAAAAA!!!!”

    Not at all. The law school policy is going to ruin the reputation of *Maori* lawyers. People will just go to non-Maori lawyers who are held to high standards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Dave Mann (1,217 comments) says:

    The MAORI PARTY are a cabal of racist separatists pursuing an apartheid agenda with the ultimate aim of complete indigenous control of the country formerly known as New Zealand; whereas the MANA PARTY is a one-man-band racist separatist pursuing an apartheid agenda with the ultimate aim of complete indigenous control of the country formerly known as New Zealand.

    There’s a big difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Don the Kiwi

    Big fan of pseudohistory?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Dave Mann (1,217 comments) says:

    I love how Hone now thinks Maori are foreigners.

    Yes, Whale, but this prick isn’t the only one who thinks this. Many a time over the last couple of years I have noted NZ Herald and also Radio NZ reporting that “Maori blah blah while New Zealanders blah blah”. I can’t furnish you with actual links, sorry, but I am sure that alert readers of this blog will have noted similar instances for themselves. The last one I remember was, I think, some report or other on smoking from Radio NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. ciaron (1,422 comments) says:

    mikenmild (1,071) Says:

    July 11th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
    Don the Kiwi

    Big fan of pseudohistory?

    Mike; after being thoroughly spanked over making out like Whale was making it all up, it probably be best all round for you to STFUP on calling people out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Doesn’t worry me, ciaron. It’s all good fun.

    I’d be fascinated to see someone ‘demonstrate that New Zealand was inhabitted by at least one other distinct race many centuries prior to Maori arriving here.’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. ciaron (1,422 comments) says:

    Fine, carry on looking like a tool then.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Banana Llama (1,043 comments) says:

    No difference David they are both Racist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    A few have tried milky. But the archeological sites that would help with this science have been put off limits. I wonder why that is?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    krazykiwi

    I think that’s part of the myth-making, that the ‘truth is out there’ but is being concealed by vested interests.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. ciaron (1,422 comments) says:

    the ‘truth is out there’ but is being concealed by vested interests

    Yeah, thats only true when its a “right leaning” interest… /sarc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Manolo (13,572 comments) says:

    How can you distinguish between two turds?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Milky, The best way to dispel myths is with evidence, while the best way to suppress the truth is to claim pursuit of it is myth-making. Just let the research be done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. GJ (329 comments) says:

    And in the end it will all play out and Winston will be back! I can hear him laughing now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Viking2 (11,412 comments) says:

    lofty (1,005) Says:
    July 11th, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    The Maori party, while having an obvious agenda, that I have difficulty with, have at the very least provided a stable coalition partnership that allows them a good platform from which to negotiate their stands.

    We ofcourse have no way of testing the veracity of that argument. Because ACT have the same number of MP’s and have an agreement to support the Govt. the Govt. can remain stable. Weather the Maori Party support them is of no consequence until dealing was necessary and Key being the deal maker was happy to trade so Maori Party with pressure from the Nat MP’s gets its way. If that didn’t work them there was always the Greens.
    I always though Bolger was the worst of compromisers but Key is way worse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Steve Wrathall (283 comments) says:

    When the Maori grievance industry really cranked up in the 70s and 80s, it was implied that we could do away with special treatment, once all historical “injustices” were resolved.
    Now it is admitted that such racial privilege is supposed to last “forever”.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJpRwCi9Cs8
    That’s the sea change that’s happening: Non-Maori NZers are realising it will only end when they say “enough”.

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

    Don the Kiwi: And all this is happening while there is a growing store of evidence to demonstrate that New Zealand was inhabitted by at least one other distinct race many centuries prior to Maori arriving here.

    Mikenblinkers: I’d be fascinated to see someone ‘demonstrate that New Zealand was inhabited by at least one other distinct race many centuries prior to Maori arriving here.’

    I was about to write that Don is correct, tho sadly a lot of the evidence is being suppressed, locked away in Wellington. Eg. evidence taken from the Waipoua Forest – read http://www.celticnz.co.nz/embargo_saga.html But then you, Miken… went and wrote: I think that’s part of the myth-making, that the ‘truth is out there’ but is being concealed by vested interests. You may not have meant to say what you said there, but you’re spot on. The truth IS being concealed by vested interests.

    Those who were living in New Zealand before Maori arrived were part assimilated and part slaughtered/eaten. Now when the latter happens, there is obviously little or no evidence left, which makes it very easy for je*ks like James Belich and other twats to come along and say “there’s no evidence”. Such is what happened with the Waitaha, who some Maori claim are just another tribe. Wrong! They were in NZ before Maori. Information about them is coming out. They are very real and remnants of their groups live today.

    Ever heard of karma? It’s real. The Maori have had a very good deal out of that, as the treatment which some Maori are constantly complaining about and which the claims industry is founded upon was as nothing compared to what happened before, compared to what they meted out to those they found here and themselves.

    It’s my belief that there were parts of the land which is NZ which were uninhabited before Maori arrived, due to volcanic and seismic activity, which made them very hard to live on. Rather like Chch today only worse, perhaps. This can be applied to a large part of central and eastern North Island. So the claim that it was an empty land is true – in part. But then there were other areas which were inhabited, and the peoples were, as I said, either assimilated or enslaved/slaughtered/eaten.

    Why is it so hard for Maori to accept that they did these things back then and that they did those things to each other only 200 years ago? And then to say, well OK, we have indeed benefitted from the colonisation of our country. Yes, really. We have left behind that time of terror. And I mean terror. Not knowing whether the next day we would face possible enslavement and/or death is not a good way to be (unless you are a patched gang member, of course.) And then to move on, knowing that we still have the good parts of our culture and we can do very well in this society without all this claims shite. We really can stand on our own two feet. ……………..why is it so hard for that to happen?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Don the Kiwi (1,705 comments) says:

    mikenmild.

    I wrote that “there is a growing store of evidence……”

    I did not say that I, at this time, subscribed to that evidence; however, that fact that there is mounting evidence cannot be ignored, that maori were not the first inhabitants of this land.

    Krazikiwi and spiritfree are correct, in that we should not ignore evidence that is being documented. I first heard of this about 6 or 7 years ago, and now there are people who are actively persuing discovering and investigating the evidence.

    I suggest you keep an open mind, as I do. But if you are interested in looking at some of the evidence for yourself, I suggest you visit http://www.kaimaiview.co.nz or google Martin Doutre.

    Then you are welcome to make any judgement you care to make.
    Have a pleasant evening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Celtic NZ, heh. What about the Egyptians and the Phoenicians, surely they were able to get here as well? Not to mention the Chinese, as so vividly described in those wonderful ‘histories’ by Gavin Menzies, 1421: When China Discovered the World and 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance. So many theories, so much evidence to conceal.

    Earlier today Scott Hamilton posted a link to a good discussion of this. I’ll track it down and repeat it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Don the Kiwi (1,705 comments) says:

    mikenmild.

    Don’t mock until you are sure. Gavin Menzies, as I understand it at this time has been debunked.

    However, I can tell you that there is evidence of arabic habitation here prior to maori. My brother was living in Taupo several years ago, and was taken by a friend to an old site – possibly an ancient quarry, but certainly some excavations, and rock carvings. My brother had lived in Saudi Arabia, and travelled extensively through Egypt and the Midle East. He was absolutely certain that some of the carvings and emblems were arabian in origin. He is not a geologist or archeologist, but is definite in what he saw, and if memory serves me well, took photos of them to have them verified.

    I don’t know if anything further has eventuated, but time will tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Scott noted earlier today:

    The man behind these theories is Martin Doutre, who has some pretty unsavoury connections, as you can see:
    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
  51. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Don

    I don’t want to mock really. I can accept that some people hold to alternative beliefs about our history from sincere reasons. There will always be debate over history based on evidence, eg different readings about the course of the New Zealand Wars, or Eldred-Grigg’s recent revisionist approach to WW1. But we move beyond that when we go to speculation that is not really grounded in evidence at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Sharples also congratulated the gangsters on decreasing gang violence. “I need to thank you for that. I want to acknowledge that. Parliament sure hasn’t. They say `I’m not talking to a gang member’,” he told the hui.

    “Why are we fighting whakapapa against whakapapa? There’s so much enemy that is not brown.

    So let’s get this straight, a Minister flies Mongrel Mob and Black Power members to Auckland which we pay for and he tells them – a Minister of the Crown, no less – “There is so much enemy that is not brown.”

    And there is no outrage, no MSM storm, nothing at all, just a para in a page three story.

    I see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    reid

    I’m prepared to give Sharples a pass on this one. I think it was in the context of violence between Maori, when there are other causes to ‘fight’. I really don’t see this as advocating violence against pakeha.

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

    Mikenblinkers: I’m prepared to give Sharples a pass on this one. I think it was in the context of violence between Maori, when there are other causes to ‘fight’. I really don’t see this as advocating violence against pakeha.

    And of course gang members are certain to see it this way, too. Oh look, there goes another one!

    Mike, for God’s sake (as well as your own) – take the blinkers off?!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. starboard (2,523 comments) says:

    “Why are we fighting whakapapa against whakapapa? There’s so much enemy that is not brown.“
    So let’s get this straight, a Minister flies Mongrel Mob and Black Power members to Auckland which we pay for and he tells them – a Minister of the Crown, no less – “There is so much enemy that is not brown.”

    comments pleeeeease Milkenmike..c’mon what you got to say bout this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. adze (2,105 comments) says:

    Not that I think Sharples was suggesting non-Maori should be targeted for violence; but that’s a very generous interpretation, Mike.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. hj (6,915 comments) says:

    Shunda barunda (1,897) Says:
    July 11th, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    You know, you have to wonder what you ACTards would see as the place of Maori in this country.

    But hey, you guys have blown it for another cycle, so who gives a sh!t.
    ………………………
    Acts position is a reaction to a prominent Maori position, as demonstrated by the Maori Party and Maori in institutions such as Auckland University. That “place of Maori” would suggest that they have a common law right to among other things the foreshore and seabed of the whole of New Zealand. There is also the protection of the culture which sees themselves as having primary links to the land based on birth which gives them a higher status (mana whenua) plus a “sacred guardianship role” which includes managing the countries natural resources (eg development rights). The “tards” are the apologists for the Maori position (where Maori refers to the cultural fundamentalists who are prominent in Government, Government institutions and pressure groups).

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

    Apparently, the Americans discovered something in Osama Bin Laden’s place which indicated that he thought that Al Qaeda needed a makeover, coz they were getting a bad press. I’m reminded of this recent discovery by the last few words of the report about Pita Sharples palling up with the Mongrel Mob and Black Power. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2975445/Minister-flies-gang-bosses-to-secret-meeting for anyone just tuning in. “Issues raised by the gang leaders at the hui included…negative public perceptions towards gangs.” I wonder whether Pita was able to assure them that he’d do his best as a Minister to improve public perceptions towards gangs?

    Ridiculous tho that idea may seem, it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility. Because, tho never reported in print, I distinctly heard Tariana Turia say in an RNZ interview 18 months or so ago, in which the number of Maori being charged with robbery and all the rest was brought up: “well you have to understand that they’ve had everything stolen from them.”

    Sadly for New Zealand, anyone wishing to major on these outrages and the urgent need to root out these justifications of the unjustifiable is labelled racist. The mouldy blanket which sits over the country is a very heavy one. Why anyone should seek to hang on to it is beyond my comprehension.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. hj (6,915 comments) says:

    On evidence Maori were first here, albeit no earlier than 1290*. When they arrived they were responsible for the fastest mass extinctions of a mega fauna in human history. They also burned much of the forests as demonstrated by analysis of core samples of 12 South Island lakes. European visitors report that their society was brutal and cruel. Post modernists try to discredit the accounts of the first European visitors.

    *the japanese are not Japans tangata whenua yet they have been there for 5000 years.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. GK (97 comments) says:

    Sharples’ comments to a convention of criminals and thugs that they should fight a common foe — white people?? –reveals Sharples for what he and his party really are. Devious, two faced, rascist and sly. You can trust them as far as you can throw them

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Thought Sharples and Brash were both good tonight, after that they had Pem Bird and Hone.

    I didn’t bother watching Hone after Pem finished.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    reveals Sharples for what he and his party really are. Devious, two faced, rascist and sly.

    That comment was made two years ago, I may be wrong but I don’t recall an outcry at the time.

    I think Pita was addressing warriors in language they could understand. I think it was an unwise unhelpful message amongst the available alternatives he might have used to that particular audience. But I don’t think he was intending those words to be taken literally. My point in raising that quote was the double-standard inherent in the media for imagine if someone else said the same thing to white gang members and they themselves were also white and they said it about brown people. Imagine what Campbell Live and Mihi Forbes would say then. She’d probably scratch whoever it was’s eyes out.

    John would be white as a sheet and probably vomit, like a little girl.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. wat dabney (3,724 comments) says:

    The difference between Maori and Mana parties

    It’s like arguing the difference between The National Front and The British National Party isn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. niggly (819 comments) says:

    I’m suprised the reporter didn’t pull Sharples up to better explain the comment (being discussed here) …. but my reading of the article doesn’t indicate Sharples advocating fighting “enemy that is not brown.” More like he was telling the gangs there are more important issues rather fighting each other (eg tobacco companies perhaps) and it might have been a way to get into the thick gang members skulls and get their attention etc.

    Or more likely IMO to ensure Sharples got some respect/attention because the article also says Hone da Muss was also present there (I’d say the gang members would have some admiration of tough guy Hone and somewhat initially bemused by Sharples, so it may have been an ice-breaker of sorts).

    However I’m happy to concede it was not a wise choice of words to begin with and it does allow one to form the impression that Sharples had a hidden meaning which could be sinister, which all the more so in the company of gangs. Perhaps the obvious thing would be for the media to revist this claim and clarify etc, then one could better judge.

    Edit: saw your post above Reid (after I posted) and I agree – there was no outcry at the time and indeed you’re right about the double-standard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Shazzadude (526 comments) says:

    After hearing Brash debate on Native Affairs tonight, it appears that Brash has an even lower opinion of Pakeha racial tolerance than Hone does.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Scott Hamilton (298 comments) says:

    It’s sad to see people still bandying Martin Doutre and his theory of an ancient race of Kiwi Celts around. Doutre is a crank and a conspiracy theorist who thinks 9/11 was an inside job, that the Holocaust never happened, that David Irving is a great historian, and that Stonehenge was built by refugees from ancient Egypt. If anyone believes his stuff, which has been debunked numerous times by trained scholars, then they ought to believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. I wrote about Doutre’s fantasies a couple of years ago and along with others had a debate with him underneath my article:
    http://books.scoop.co.nz/2008/11/18/no-to-nazi-pseudo-history-an-open-letter/
    Doutre convicts himself with his own words in the debate, owning up to his 9/11 conspiracy theory as well as his Holocaust denial and making a series of ludicrous comments about NZ prehistory.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Scott Hamilton (298 comments) says:

    ‘Waitaha, who some Maori claim are just another tribe. Wrong! They were in NZ before Maori. Information about them is coming out. They are very real and remnants of their groups live today.’

    Nope. There’s an extremely weird New Age cult called the Universal Peace Nation of Waitaha which is doing very nicely, thanyou, flogging lavishly produced picture books to Californian hippies through the internet. These folks claim to be the descendants of aliens who first settled in ancient Egypt then came here via South America. They make Martin Doutre and Gavin Menzies look credible, and the notion that they are taken seriously by any archaeologist, historian, anthropologist, or linguist is absurd. Here’s a 1997 interview with the leader of the ‘Waitaha Nation’, who of course has supernatural powers:
    http://www.crystalinks.com/macki.html

    The Universal Peace Nation of Waitaha has been championed by Noel Hilliam, a very strange man from Dargaville who has a history of finding and then losing U boats and faking prestigious awards:
    http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2010/03/heads-in-sand-in-dargaville-as-claims.html

    And you really think that trained experts ignore these guys because of a conspiracy? Rationality isn’t a conspiracy.

    In the real world, Waitaha is the name of the Maori iwi which first moved into the South Island, and was followed and assimilated by Ngati Mamoe and then by Kai Tahu.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Scott – there is evidence of aboriginal inhabitation across the ditch stretching back 50,000 years. Are you convinced that all scientific evidence puts the first humans here in NZ just 1000 years ago? Are there any NZ archeological sites that have had a less than thorough investigation? Is all the evidence in and the case closed in your view?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Scott Hamilton (298 comments) says:

    kk, the case is never closed, and there are many fascinating mysteries surrounding our history (here’s one, for example: http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2008/08/rongotute-more-than-story.html) but I believe that Doutre’s claims about a vast and technologically sophisticated white civilisation existing on these islands thousands of years ago are about as likely to be true as his claims that 9/11 was an inside job and that the Holocaust never happened. Here’s how I put it in the piece I wrote about Doutre:

    It is highly unlikely that a very large population using advanced technology could have existed on these islands thousands of years ago, as the Celtic New Zealand circle claims, because such a population would have left a record of its presence which we do not find. Any large-scale settlement of these islands would likely be accompanied by the destruction of a considerable amount of forest by fires, and scientists can discover the date at which this sort of destruction began by testing pollen spores preserved in the sediment of lakes. Tests do not indicate any man-made destruction of the forests began until less than one thousand years ago, so the claims in your article about mass settlement occurring five thousand years ago look rather unlikely. (11)

    If huge numbers of European people lived here thousands of years ago, then we ought to be finding their skeletons, as well as burial items which reflect a distinct, non-Polynesian material culture. But the oldest skeletons and burial items we’ve found so far are distinctively Polynesian, and are less than a thousand years old. Why have we never found any human skeletons or human artefacts under the layers of ash left by the massive Taupo eruption a couple of thousand years ago?

    Of course, the Celtic New Zealand circle claims that a massive conspiracy is busy hiding the bones and artefacts of ancient Celtic New Zealanders. In his article ‘Forbidden History – Covered Up!’ Martin Doutre even claims that special teams of armed men controlled by sinister international forces are going around the country deliberately blowing up caves where Celtic bones are found.

    The truth is that prehistoric bones unearthed in New Zealand are routinely scrutinised by archaeologists, biologists, craniologists, museum curators, representatives of iwi and hapu, and even coroners. Are all of these people really involved in an enormous conspiracy? Auckland War Memorial Museum holds a large collection of human remains, which it is slowly and carefully identifying and returning to groups both inside and outside New Zealand, in a process involving dozens of experts from this country and overseas. Is this process really being controlled by some unseen sinister conspiracy?

    The most devastating evidence against the claim of ancient non-Polynesian settlement comes from DNA testing. The article you have published claims that the ancestors of the Maori slaughtered the male Celts who had settled this country and then raped their women, and that present-day Maori therefore have some of the blood of the ancient Celts.

    In recent years a series of scholars have run DNA tests on Maori, in an effort to trace their ancestry. These tests confirm that Maori are a Polynesian people, and that Polynesians have their origins in coastal Asia thousands of years ago. In 2005 a team from Victoria University was able to establish an ancient connection between Maori and one of the indigenous peoples of Taiwan: both groups have the same rare gene marker for coping with alcohol. (12) If Maori really were part-Celtic, then the connection would show up in DNA tests. It doesn’t.’
    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
  70. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Pakeha and hori bloody lawyers, old Bill had the right idea for both groups along with an axe.
    The reason so many bloody layers are in parliament, easy, to make sure a lot of laws are written so only a bloody lawyer could come close to understanding them.

    Pakeha need As and horis Bs, if I was making the bloody rules only about five would be mouth pieces would make it to law school a year, and that is being generous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Sharples was telling both groups we have a common enemy, extreme ACT right wing red necks who need a bloody good kicking.
    So, who among you extreme right wing red necks is going to volunteer to be first to face up to Black power or the Mongrel Mob ?
    No weapons is the rule, which of you crackers is feeling lucky ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    grumpy, after making a bunch of sense yesterday looks like you took the wrong pills this morning. the common enemy is an attitude like your 11:58, promoting as you so often do, violent actions to ‘solve’ what you consider to be problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Manolo (13,572 comments) says:

    …promoting as you so often do, violent actions to ‘solve’ what you consider to be problems.

    Do I need to remind you what his nickmane is?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. KevinH (1,217 comments) says:

    The main difference between Mana and Maori Party’s is that the Maori Party are at the cabinet table, and Mana aren’t and won’t be in the next government.
    It is one thing promising ( Mana) and an entirely different thing delivering (Maori Party).
    Whatever, there will be more choice for Maori voters at the next election, the down side being that the vote will be split, particularly in the North.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    krazykiwi come on, nothing wrong with baiting the extremists from both sides, too many extreme right wing types mouth off that they need to do something about Maori.
    Why not give them the opportunity ?
    If they want to play big boys games, well,they will find that big boy rules apply.

    And yes there are extreme dickheads who are Maori and who rant that Pakeha should leave NZ.
    Sending both groups to the Auckland Islands would work well.
    .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. eaglewatch (62 comments) says:

    grumpyoldhori…

    Oh dear, whilst the final line(s) of your post 1:22 does offer some form of redemption, the rest is mindnumbingly pathetic garbage.
    If i thought for one second that fighting would achieve anything I’d gladly stand up to these small minded fuckwits you mentioned (mongrel mob and black power) it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve stood up to some uneducated wanker who finds solace or some misguided form of identity in wearing a stupid picture on a leather jacket and fighting/killing his own people.
    I am NOT intimidated by these sorry excuses for human beings and your comments of “no weapons” is hypocrytical and ironic in the extreme as I’m sure these cowards have rather large arsenals stashed away somewhere BUT guess what… my trigger finger works just as well, if not better than theirs… but that just proves who gets beaten or dies first and nothing else !!!
    This belief that you have that these are “big boy games” is disturbing to say the least, they are pathetic, moronic, childish games and dont be fukin stupid enough to think that Maori are the only people in this country that know how to and are prepared to fight if and when the need arrives, some of us have just climbed the evolutionary ladder and entered into civilisation far enough to know its all just macho bullshit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. eaglewatch (62 comments) says:

    mikenmild…

    Just because somebody who presents evidence or theories has links to an unsavory connection does not automatically lump them in the full of shit basket.
    You seem to be the ultimate authority on New Zealands history, got it all sorted and figured out aye ? what a load of bollicks !!! Don is politley trying to point out that there are archeoligical findings that would at the very least warrent some form of investigation, he is not purpetuating it as undeniable fact, he is actually speaking for a very large percentage of the population that do not have any personal agendas or partisan arguements to present, they are simply interested in uncovering what has yet to be (officially) uncovered.
    It may well turn out to be a hoax and/or uncover findings that do nothing but support the current accepted history of New Zealand BUT who the fuck do you think that you are to dismiss them without intimate knowledge of them or the reasons why they were covered up and the findings suppressed.
    Embagoes are generally put into place on these things by governments as they would be detrimental to the founding constitutions of the country… do you think that if the findings supported current accepted history that they would have gone to that trouble ???
    Its hard to say which outweighs the other – your arrogance or your ignorance, very tough call indeed !!! and just incase you haven’t figured it out yet… it is through archeological digs etc. that we discover the past and prove (or disprove as the case may be) theoretical history.
    Good on ya Don, whether its bullshit or not… its an embarressment to this countries government and an insult to the educated and free-willed people who live in it that this has been allowed to happen (or mores the point NOT happen).

    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.