Post by Kiwi Frontline on Dec 10, 2017 5:06:01 GMT 12
Dear Editor (Sent to the Waikato Times 3/12/17)
THE SANDY MORRISON TALE.
With leadership comes responsibility, Professor Morrison. The tale of the Treaty you trot out, while it mirrors the official line, is almost entirely false. If it is what you tell your students, you are brainwashing them.
There is no such thing as any “Treaty in English”. The piece of paper with a stroke-afflicted signature by Hobson and that of a few dozen chiefs was the second, repeat second, page of the document signed at Waikato Heads; a false treaty concocted by Hobson’s secretary, Freeman, and used solely there for an overflow of signatures. Orange was ignorant of this and much else besides. Its real significance in law must be zero.
The real treaty (in Maori) speaks of all the people of New Zealand (tangata katoa o Nu Tireni) being granted property rights (tino rangatiratanga) over their possessions (taonga). It is inexcusable for you to claim that the modern meaning of “taonga” (“all that they hold precious including the Māori language”) applied in 1840, albeit it was Hugh Kawharu’s manipulation of words.
The chiefs ceded sovereignty (kawanatanga) completely and for ever to the Queen as their recorded words at Waitangi and at Kohimarama in 1860 make absolutely clear. In return all Maoris, including slaves, were granted the rights of British subjects: no more, no less, no special rights over forests and fisheries, while, implicitly, they got what they wanted most: protection from the French.
Your claim that a collection of petty chiefs “allowed” the Queen of the most powerful empire on earth to have “nominal and delegated authority so that she can control her people” is ludicrous nonsense. The so-called “Declaration of Independence” was a failed attempt by Busby to bring some order into chaos, civil war and slavery.
It is through tales such as yours that the treaty has become a holy cow of brown racists and their white fellow-travellers. (My apologies to Hindu readers!) That is why they squealed when Sir William called it a farce.
When Hobson, entirely legitimately, declared sovereignty over New Zealand in May 1840, the Treaty had done its job and should have become a footnote to history where it belongs.
The hard, real evidence of the day is the basis of what I tell you. Read “One Treaty, One Nation”, Chapter Two, for more details.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
Dear Sir, (Sent to the Otago Daily Times 1/12/17)
It is quite certain that in writing to congratulate Dave Witherow on his article - and the O.D.T for publishing it, that I'll be speaking on behalf of that majority of New Zealanders who for fear of their jobs, professional standing, "friendships" and general well-being do not similarly speak out.
This is the situation that the hard Left, in combination with the usual public apathy, has created - and, failing a general and immediate moral renaissance, it can only get worse.
George Orwell and others like him could see it building back in 1948, and anyone else with similarly unclouded vision can see that it is now coming apace.
COLIN RAWLE, Dunedin
Dear Editor (Sent to the Waikato Times and Herald 30/11/17)
RadioNZ has got its knickers in a twist in saying that Sir William Gallagher called the Treaty of Waitangi a “fraud”. He didn’t. He called it a “farce” It is not that either but the way it is so widely treated as a holy cow in New Zealand today would be a farce if it were not a tragedy.
He is wrong though, in saying that our Polynesians were not called “Maoris” before 1850. While the term Maori did not occur in Hobson’s final draft of the Treaty of 4th February, it was inserted once in Article third by the Williams during their translation on the night of 4/5th February. This article, conferring equal rights on them with the people of England, did not apply to existing British subjects whereas Article second, guaranteeing property rights applied to all the people of New Zealand.
What the treaty really said does not stop racists today claiming special rights. The latest to be careless with the truth is Tauranga activist Graham Cameron with saying: “the special relationship between the Crown and New Zealand's indigenous people set out in the Treaty of Waitangi was the foundation for Maori wards.” (NZ Herald, BOP Times, 26/11/17).
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers/unpublished-letters
THE SANDY MORRISON TALE.
With leadership comes responsibility, Professor Morrison. The tale of the Treaty you trot out, while it mirrors the official line, is almost entirely false. If it is what you tell your students, you are brainwashing them.
There is no such thing as any “Treaty in English”. The piece of paper with a stroke-afflicted signature by Hobson and that of a few dozen chiefs was the second, repeat second, page of the document signed at Waikato Heads; a false treaty concocted by Hobson’s secretary, Freeman, and used solely there for an overflow of signatures. Orange was ignorant of this and much else besides. Its real significance in law must be zero.
The real treaty (in Maori) speaks of all the people of New Zealand (tangata katoa o Nu Tireni) being granted property rights (tino rangatiratanga) over their possessions (taonga). It is inexcusable for you to claim that the modern meaning of “taonga” (“all that they hold precious including the Māori language”) applied in 1840, albeit it was Hugh Kawharu’s manipulation of words.
The chiefs ceded sovereignty (kawanatanga) completely and for ever to the Queen as their recorded words at Waitangi and at Kohimarama in 1860 make absolutely clear. In return all Maoris, including slaves, were granted the rights of British subjects: no more, no less, no special rights over forests and fisheries, while, implicitly, they got what they wanted most: protection from the French.
Your claim that a collection of petty chiefs “allowed” the Queen of the most powerful empire on earth to have “nominal and delegated authority so that she can control her people” is ludicrous nonsense. The so-called “Declaration of Independence” was a failed attempt by Busby to bring some order into chaos, civil war and slavery.
It is through tales such as yours that the treaty has become a holy cow of brown racists and their white fellow-travellers. (My apologies to Hindu readers!) That is why they squealed when Sir William called it a farce.
When Hobson, entirely legitimately, declared sovereignty over New Zealand in May 1840, the Treaty had done its job and should have become a footnote to history where it belongs.
The hard, real evidence of the day is the basis of what I tell you. Read “One Treaty, One Nation”, Chapter Two, for more details.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
Dear Sir, (Sent to the Otago Daily Times 1/12/17)
It is quite certain that in writing to congratulate Dave Witherow on his article - and the O.D.T for publishing it, that I'll be speaking on behalf of that majority of New Zealanders who for fear of their jobs, professional standing, "friendships" and general well-being do not similarly speak out.
This is the situation that the hard Left, in combination with the usual public apathy, has created - and, failing a general and immediate moral renaissance, it can only get worse.
George Orwell and others like him could see it building back in 1948, and anyone else with similarly unclouded vision can see that it is now coming apace.
COLIN RAWLE, Dunedin
Dear Editor (Sent to the Waikato Times and Herald 30/11/17)
RadioNZ has got its knickers in a twist in saying that Sir William Gallagher called the Treaty of Waitangi a “fraud”. He didn’t. He called it a “farce” It is not that either but the way it is so widely treated as a holy cow in New Zealand today would be a farce if it were not a tragedy.
He is wrong though, in saying that our Polynesians were not called “Maoris” before 1850. While the term Maori did not occur in Hobson’s final draft of the Treaty of 4th February, it was inserted once in Article third by the Williams during their translation on the night of 4/5th February. This article, conferring equal rights on them with the people of England, did not apply to existing British subjects whereas Article second, guaranteeing property rights applied to all the people of New Zealand.
What the treaty really said does not stop racists today claiming special rights. The latest to be careless with the truth is Tauranga activist Graham Cameron with saying: “the special relationship between the Crown and New Zealand's indigenous people set out in the Treaty of Waitangi was the foundation for Maori wards.” (NZ Herald, BOP Times, 26/11/17).
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers/unpublished-letters