Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jan 22, 2019 3:36:03 GMT 12
Gisborne Herald 22/1/19
MISTAKE TO RELY ON TRIBUNAL
Your editorial of January 16 criticising the articles by Mike Butler and myself makes the grave mistake of relying on the opinions of the Waitangi Tribunal about Te Kooti’s rebellion in 1868.
There is little resemblance in the proceedings of that tribunal to anything “court-like” as you claim. As veteran newspaperman Brian Priestley, who attended the Ngai Tahu proceedings, said: “There was no cross examination. Witnesses were treated with sympathetic deference . . . . It would be hard to imagine any public body less well organised to get at the truth.”
A lengthy examination of its findings in the Ngai Tahu case by Alan Everton describes its findings as a “fraud” and a “swindle”.
Around 90 percent of land sales were by eager tribal sellers, some selling the same land more than once. Confiscations amounted to only a few percent. They were “tikanga” and the rebels were warned that they would occur to pay in part for the cost of suppressing their rebellions.
And I did not “suggest”, as you state, that “we should be thankful that they (i.e. colonial troops) provided a ‘solid foundation’ for our nation”. I said that “our settlers from Britain” did so and that is the truth.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
BEGS THE QUESTION
It seems the derogatory term “honky” is acceptable to our esteemed editor . . . which begs the question, is it’s counterpart also now available for use?
A. ABBOTT
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers
MISTAKE TO RELY ON TRIBUNAL
Your editorial of January 16 criticising the articles by Mike Butler and myself makes the grave mistake of relying on the opinions of the Waitangi Tribunal about Te Kooti’s rebellion in 1868.
There is little resemblance in the proceedings of that tribunal to anything “court-like” as you claim. As veteran newspaperman Brian Priestley, who attended the Ngai Tahu proceedings, said: “There was no cross examination. Witnesses were treated with sympathetic deference . . . . It would be hard to imagine any public body less well organised to get at the truth.”
A lengthy examination of its findings in the Ngai Tahu case by Alan Everton describes its findings as a “fraud” and a “swindle”.
Around 90 percent of land sales were by eager tribal sellers, some selling the same land more than once. Confiscations amounted to only a few percent. They were “tikanga” and the rebels were warned that they would occur to pay in part for the cost of suppressing their rebellions.
And I did not “suggest”, as you state, that “we should be thankful that they (i.e. colonial troops) provided a ‘solid foundation’ for our nation”. I said that “our settlers from Britain” did so and that is the truth.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
BEGS THE QUESTION
It seems the derogatory term “honky” is acceptable to our esteemed editor . . . which begs the question, is it’s counterpart also now available for use?
A. ABBOTT
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers