Post by Kiwi Frontline on Oct 31, 2016 6:11:59 GMT 12
Bay of Plenty Times 31/10/16
EXERCISE BIASED
I agree fully with Brian Johnson’s letter (October 29). The whole constitutional exercise was heavily biased in the favour of Maori.
Selected democratically based on Statistics NZ figures, the panel should have been: two Maori (14.9 per cent), one Asian (10 per cent), one Pacific Islander (10 per cent) and eight representing all other ethnic groups (65.1 per cent).
If you dare query the panel selection, and are lucky enough to get a reply from the authorities, it will commence (Under the terms of the Treaty).
If the version of the Treaty used by the Waitangi Tribunal were to be used as a basis of a new constitution, it would be a disaster. (Abridged)
R B
Papamoa
Taranaki Daily News 31/10/16
BOGUS TACTICS
Dennis Ngawhare (TDN, October 24) bemoans 800 words to get his pro-Maori propaganda out, unfortunately this privilege is not available to those that wish to counter.
That Taranaki was almost deserted is verified online "Further Papers Relative to the Native Insurrection, Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1861 Session, " by Charles Heaphy. "Taranaki that before the regular settlement of the country by the British, it had for several years been almost deserted by the Natives.... "The Waikato conquered it in 1830 " A miserable remnant of about 30 or 40 Natives of the Ngatiawa lived at Ngamotu point in 1839.
Furthermore Hobson's emissaries were unable to find a chief of sufficient rank to sign the Treaty in Taranaki.
Ngawhare resorts to a moral equivalence argument by comparing outside conflicts with tribal Maori wars. This bogus tactic is often used by marxists to suggest that two unrelated wrongs make a "right," or at least cancel one another out. Pukerangiora was just one example of Maori savagery, the Taranaki tribes slaughter in the Chatham Islands was even worse, as was the massacre and cannibalism at Auckland and Waikato by Ngapuhi.
That Taranaki tribal peace has stood unbroken since 1834 is credit to the British law system not tribal goodwill.
If Ngawhare's flippant quote "At the end of the day history is only a viewpoint" is accepted then history becomes rumour, gossip and hearsay and ceases to be a worthwhile subject of study. NZ taxpayers will be chuffed to know that they have handed elite Maori millions in settlements based on someone's viewpoint.
GEOFFREY PARKER
Whangarei
Southland Times 31/10/16
COLONISATION SAVED CULTURE
I have read with interest both the letter from Geoffrey T. Parker and the reply from Nichola Voice. Ms Voice comments that "England colonised, forcing their language and culture on Maori".
Is she not aware that colonisation brought an end to cannibalism, slavery and savage inter-tribal warfare. Pre-colonisation life for Maori was short, harsh and brutal with Chief Taipari of Tauranga noting -"Maori are well on the way to exterminating themselves". The arrival of the missionaries and subsequent colonisation saved them from that fate.
Colonisation brought them better food, medical care, hygiene, clothing, housing, and transport. In a nutshell - colonisation was the best thing that ever happened to Maori.
R B
Tauranga
CULTURE PERSONAL CHOICE
Permit an erstwhile Waipahi farm boy to respond to Nichola Voice's excessive reprimand of Geoffrey Parker for his remarks on culture and her unfounded accusation that he is racist.
Our culture is about how we live and is largely a matter of personal choice as is our view of other people's.
Any suggestion today that Maori culture is supposedly "indigenous" and therefore superior is absurd. Equally absurd is Voice's statement that the English forced their language and culture on Maoris. On several occasions wise parents petitioned for children in Maori schools to be taught only in English, even for their teachers to know no Maori. Those parents knew how valuable a sound knowledge of English would be for their children in the world. It is even more true today.
It is a different matter of fact today that there are groups of people with a modest quota of Maori blood claiming unfounded privileges and material rewards on that basis. That, in a word, is racism. The current bid for a powerful tribal voice in the control of water is an example. Parker does us a favour in alerting us to it.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
Northern Advocate 31/10/16 (Also in Southland Times 25/10/16, Waikato Times 25/10/16, Northland Age 20/10/16)
CULTURAL CLAIMS
Nobody is attempting to deny the right of a part-Maori New Zealanders to affiliate to a Maori kin group and embrace what they regard as Maori culture, provided they do it in their own time and on their own dime.
That means a shared common New Zealand culture occupies the public square, and any subcultural affiliations are a private matter for those concerned.
Funded and engaged in by those who value them, with no financial or other claim of any kind on those who don't.
For those who pretend to be indigenous because they are part-Maori and prefer to elevate that above their other ancestors, that's entirely their business.
However it is a different matter when these opportunists start trying to put their hand in fellow New Zealanders pocket and colonise the public square in order to force the language and culture of their adoption on others.
It then becomes the business of other New Zealanders, who are being compelled to pay or adopt something they don’t want or value.
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo
EXERCISE BIASED
I agree fully with Brian Johnson’s letter (October 29). The whole constitutional exercise was heavily biased in the favour of Maori.
Selected democratically based on Statistics NZ figures, the panel should have been: two Maori (14.9 per cent), one Asian (10 per cent), one Pacific Islander (10 per cent) and eight representing all other ethnic groups (65.1 per cent).
If you dare query the panel selection, and are lucky enough to get a reply from the authorities, it will commence (Under the terms of the Treaty).
If the version of the Treaty used by the Waitangi Tribunal were to be used as a basis of a new constitution, it would be a disaster. (Abridged)
R B
Papamoa
Taranaki Daily News 31/10/16
BOGUS TACTICS
Dennis Ngawhare (TDN, October 24) bemoans 800 words to get his pro-Maori propaganda out, unfortunately this privilege is not available to those that wish to counter.
That Taranaki was almost deserted is verified online "Further Papers Relative to the Native Insurrection, Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1861 Session, " by Charles Heaphy. "Taranaki that before the regular settlement of the country by the British, it had for several years been almost deserted by the Natives.... "The Waikato conquered it in 1830 " A miserable remnant of about 30 or 40 Natives of the Ngatiawa lived at Ngamotu point in 1839.
Furthermore Hobson's emissaries were unable to find a chief of sufficient rank to sign the Treaty in Taranaki.
Ngawhare resorts to a moral equivalence argument by comparing outside conflicts with tribal Maori wars. This bogus tactic is often used by marxists to suggest that two unrelated wrongs make a "right," or at least cancel one another out. Pukerangiora was just one example of Maori savagery, the Taranaki tribes slaughter in the Chatham Islands was even worse, as was the massacre and cannibalism at Auckland and Waikato by Ngapuhi.
That Taranaki tribal peace has stood unbroken since 1834 is credit to the British law system not tribal goodwill.
If Ngawhare's flippant quote "At the end of the day history is only a viewpoint" is accepted then history becomes rumour, gossip and hearsay and ceases to be a worthwhile subject of study. NZ taxpayers will be chuffed to know that they have handed elite Maori millions in settlements based on someone's viewpoint.
GEOFFREY PARKER
Whangarei
Southland Times 31/10/16
COLONISATION SAVED CULTURE
I have read with interest both the letter from Geoffrey T. Parker and the reply from Nichola Voice. Ms Voice comments that "England colonised, forcing their language and culture on Maori".
Is she not aware that colonisation brought an end to cannibalism, slavery and savage inter-tribal warfare. Pre-colonisation life for Maori was short, harsh and brutal with Chief Taipari of Tauranga noting -"Maori are well on the way to exterminating themselves". The arrival of the missionaries and subsequent colonisation saved them from that fate.
Colonisation brought them better food, medical care, hygiene, clothing, housing, and transport. In a nutshell - colonisation was the best thing that ever happened to Maori.
R B
Tauranga
CULTURE PERSONAL CHOICE
Permit an erstwhile Waipahi farm boy to respond to Nichola Voice's excessive reprimand of Geoffrey Parker for his remarks on culture and her unfounded accusation that he is racist.
Our culture is about how we live and is largely a matter of personal choice as is our view of other people's.
Any suggestion today that Maori culture is supposedly "indigenous" and therefore superior is absurd. Equally absurd is Voice's statement that the English forced their language and culture on Maoris. On several occasions wise parents petitioned for children in Maori schools to be taught only in English, even for their teachers to know no Maori. Those parents knew how valuable a sound knowledge of English would be for their children in the world. It is even more true today.
It is a different matter of fact today that there are groups of people with a modest quota of Maori blood claiming unfounded privileges and material rewards on that basis. That, in a word, is racism. The current bid for a powerful tribal voice in the control of water is an example. Parker does us a favour in alerting us to it.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
Northern Advocate 31/10/16 (Also in Southland Times 25/10/16, Waikato Times 25/10/16, Northland Age 20/10/16)
CULTURAL CLAIMS
Nobody is attempting to deny the right of a part-Maori New Zealanders to affiliate to a Maori kin group and embrace what they regard as Maori culture, provided they do it in their own time and on their own dime.
That means a shared common New Zealand culture occupies the public square, and any subcultural affiliations are a private matter for those concerned.
Funded and engaged in by those who value them, with no financial or other claim of any kind on those who don't.
For those who pretend to be indigenous because they are part-Maori and prefer to elevate that above their other ancestors, that's entirely their business.
However it is a different matter when these opportunists start trying to put their hand in fellow New Zealanders pocket and colonise the public square in order to force the language and culture of their adoption on others.
It then becomes the business of other New Zealanders, who are being compelled to pay or adopt something they don’t want or value.
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo