Post by Kiwi Frontline on Feb 19, 2020 13:01:37 GMT 12
Gisborne Herald 18/2/20
‘ALL’ MEANS ‘ALL’ IN TREATY
Re: Treaty supports freshwater right, February 15 column.
John Porter's lengthy piece is nothing but propaganda based on the fake “Treaty in English” of Hobson's snobbish secretary, JS Freeman, whose “Article Two” is very different from the genuine one.
Article second of the real Treaty, in the Ngapuhi dialect, says in essence that all the people of New Zealand — “tangata katoa o Nu Tirani” — are guaranteed the possession of their lands, homes and ordinary possessions (taonga). There is not a word about “forests and fisheries”, and “all” means “all”.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
‘ALL’ MEANS ‘ALL’ IN TREATY #2
In 1840 under English Common Law things like freshwater were managed/regulated by the Crown or democratically-elected officers.
The wise chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi to cede sovereignty to the Queen of England and, in return, became British subjects in accordance with the law of the time, including Common Law. Therefore it follows that freshwater was vested in the Crown. Yes, the chiefs themselves vested “various resources” in the Crown by signing the Treaty.
What Article 2 in the valid Maori language Treaty says, is that “all” the people of New Zealand (not just Maori, but Maori included) are guaranteed legal ownership of their land (occupied or in usage at the time), houses and ordinary property (taonga). As a consequence, any Maori customary rights to “other” resources like freshwater were extinguished by the Treaty.
Further, water cannot be owned until it is captured in a vessel of some kind; it is uncaptured water that is the focus of Maori opportunists who, if successful in their bid for it, may clip the ticket each time a tap is turned on — NZers really need to think about this!
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
Northland Age 18/2/20
EASILY CONNED
Most people don’t realise Queen Victoria did not have the right or power to grant Maori exclusive rights over her British subjects. This is elementary knowledge, as Britain never had racial laws.
All Treaty documents that have been used to install exclusive Maori rights have been false or unauthorised translations, such as, Hobson never authorised an English Treaty, and unauthorised translations of Hugh Kawharu. Kawharu was actually a sitting judge on the Waitangi Tribunal when he wrote what he called his “attempt at a reconstruction (note reconstruction) of the literal translation of the Maori text,” and this “reconstruction” is what was accepted by the 1987 Court of Appeal to establish there was a “Partnership between Maori and the Crown,” as well as the “5 Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.”
The Crown likewise accepted it for the purpose of this case. Amazing how easy it is to con the people.
IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui
‘ALL’ MEANS ‘ALL’ IN TREATY
Re: Treaty supports freshwater right, February 15 column.
John Porter's lengthy piece is nothing but propaganda based on the fake “Treaty in English” of Hobson's snobbish secretary, JS Freeman, whose “Article Two” is very different from the genuine one.
Article second of the real Treaty, in the Ngapuhi dialect, says in essence that all the people of New Zealand — “tangata katoa o Nu Tirani” — are guaranteed the possession of their lands, homes and ordinary possessions (taonga). There is not a word about “forests and fisheries”, and “all” means “all”.
BRUCE MOON, Nelson
‘ALL’ MEANS ‘ALL’ IN TREATY #2
In 1840 under English Common Law things like freshwater were managed/regulated by the Crown or democratically-elected officers.
The wise chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi to cede sovereignty to the Queen of England and, in return, became British subjects in accordance with the law of the time, including Common Law. Therefore it follows that freshwater was vested in the Crown. Yes, the chiefs themselves vested “various resources” in the Crown by signing the Treaty.
What Article 2 in the valid Maori language Treaty says, is that “all” the people of New Zealand (not just Maori, but Maori included) are guaranteed legal ownership of their land (occupied or in usage at the time), houses and ordinary property (taonga). As a consequence, any Maori customary rights to “other” resources like freshwater were extinguished by the Treaty.
Further, water cannot be owned until it is captured in a vessel of some kind; it is uncaptured water that is the focus of Maori opportunists who, if successful in their bid for it, may clip the ticket each time a tap is turned on — NZers really need to think about this!
GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei
Northland Age 18/2/20
EASILY CONNED
Most people don’t realise Queen Victoria did not have the right or power to grant Maori exclusive rights over her British subjects. This is elementary knowledge, as Britain never had racial laws.
All Treaty documents that have been used to install exclusive Maori rights have been false or unauthorised translations, such as, Hobson never authorised an English Treaty, and unauthorised translations of Hugh Kawharu. Kawharu was actually a sitting judge on the Waitangi Tribunal when he wrote what he called his “attempt at a reconstruction (note reconstruction) of the literal translation of the Maori text,” and this “reconstruction” is what was accepted by the 1987 Court of Appeal to establish there was a “Partnership between Maori and the Crown,” as well as the “5 Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.”
The Crown likewise accepted it for the purpose of this case. Amazing how easy it is to con the people.
IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui