Early human settlement found

Archaeology students from the University of Auckland have uncovered early remains of human settlement on Ahuahu – Great Mercury Island.

The group of 25, including 12 students from the University's Field Methods in Archaeology paper, travelled to the island last month as part of their Stage Three course work.


The discovery of a human settlement in Coralie Bay on Ahuahu - Great Mercury Island by Auckland University archeology students recently is estimated to be over 600 years old. Photo: Ben Rogers

They spent three gruelling weeks on the eastern side of the island excavating a 15m x 10m area of an ancient sand dune area in Coralie Bay.

But Professor Simon Holdaway says the work was worth it as the group uncovered 13,000 objects, including stone artifacts and bones.

One of the most significant discoveries was the finding of moa remains in the remnants of an ancient oven.

'We excavated a big area and we uncovered some just amazing material,” says Simon. 'A site that's almost certainly very early because it's got moa bones in place in ovens.”

'The significance is that the moa must have been alive shortly before they ate it.”

It's not uncommon to find moa bones being used as tools and for industrial purposes, but signs of the bird being prepared and eaten, particularly in the North Island, are rare.

Based on this discovery Simon believes the site must be over 600 years old.

The discovery also indicates it must be a very early site in New Zealand's history, not just for the North Island but for the whole country.

Also found in significant quantities was obsidian which doesn't originate on the island and therefore must have been brought in by the people inhabiting Ahuahu - Great Mercury, likely from nearby Tuuhua - Mayor Island.

A blade made out of obsidian was even found still stuck inside the shoulder and flipper of a seal.

The fact the islands have not had a breeding population of seals for 600 years was also an indication of how old the site must be.

There were also signs that the site was not a brief stop-over as there were lines of stone with burnt-out wood suggest a dwelling was located there.

Simon says the next visit to the island will be in June where the team will evacuate another part of Coralie Bay that is also eroding.

The work is being supported by local iwi, Ngaati Hei, and the island owners Sir Michael Fay and David Richwhite.

Great Mercury is part of The Mercury Islands, a group of seven islands off the northeast coast of the North Island.

They are located eight kilometres off the coast of the Coromandel Peninsula, and 35km northeast of the town of Whitianga.


An earlier archaeological dig between Coralie Bay and Mercury Cove. Photo: Supplied

You may also like....

114 comments

Good evidence

Posted on 13-03-2015 11:45 | By YOGI BEAR

Of when the pacific Islanders arrived in New Zealand, I wonder when Maori actually arrived? Perhaps around that time and they found the Islanders here, or was it Moriori?


Concrete Proof ?

Posted on 13-03-2015 13:29 | By Mackka

They this site is over 600 years old. They say Maori arrived here around 500 years ago. What say you now Mr Bell ! ?


Mackka

Posted on 13-03-2015 15:23 | By YOGI BEAR

Easy, he will say whatever he is told ex the Wellington Trough brigade and there will be absolute faith in the shattered and severely tainted rubber stamped writings of Janet W. These should never have got to paper, but I guess what else could she do to get the cheque from her pay masters.


I await with......

Posted on 13-03-2015 15:53 | By Jimmy Ehu

for the Bell to toll!!!!, bring it on "tinker".


.

Posted on 13-03-2015 16:49 | By whatsinaname

why do they have to dig it all up. cant it just be left. what good is it going to do. apart from telling them that moa bones are in wooden ovens and used as tools.


Give it a little time

Posted on 13-03-2015 19:09 | By s83cruiser

and this 600 year old history will be sanitised to suite the requirements of the gravy train passengers. It will be twisted and distorted until the truth is lost and the history will be reborn and not even be remotely close to what was actually found. They may as well just chuck their findings back in the hole and cover it over because that's what going to happen to it above ground. Given what has happened to the history of New Zealand to date to suite the Gravy Train passengers this new revelation will only get buried in BS in the finish anyhow. Don't really know why these people bother digging up this stuff knowing its going to be rubbished anyhow. It will be locked away in some cupboard someplace and never see the light of day again because it doesn't fit with the current propaganda from the WT.


Geriatric keyboard warriors vs qualified archiologists

Posted on 13-03-2015 19:49 | By expatAucklander

Easy to snipe from the sideline when you don't have the qualification/experience/context to understand the issue. How about instead of seeing conspiracy theories in the shadows the collective bunch of you accept the report from the people who actually understand what they are talking about.


Sorry Mackka, Maori have been here about 760 years

Posted on 23-03-2015 11:02 | By Peter Dey

The radiocarbon dating carried out by Janet Wilmshurst's team at 1400 East Polynesion and New Zealand settlement sites showed in 2011 that Maori arrived here about 1250AD. So the settlements at Great Mercury Island are dated at about 160 years after the arrival of the first Maori settlers. There is no evidence of any other settlers in New Zealand before Maori arrived. YOGI BEAR wants proof that there were no pre-Maori settlers here. But that is irrational. If pre-Maori settlers were here they must have been supernatural not human because they have left no physical evidence of their existence.


S83cruiser, don't ignore the Pakeha gravy train

Posted on 23-03-2015 11:16 | By Peter Dey

S83cruiser seems to have been brainwashed about results of archaeology. What archaeologists have found is that there were no Moriori here before Maori arrived. So Maori were not the bad guys. They did not wipe out any pre-Maori settlers. So people cannot refuse Treaty settlement justice to Maori. Pakeha Governments have dealt with Maori unfairly for over 150 years. Pakeha Governments have wrongly taken about $20 billion of assets off Maori since 1840. Treaty settlements will return about $2 billion. So the real gravy train is Pakeha Governments and taxpayers who are still getting the benefit of $18 billion in the bank wrongfully taken from Maori.


YOGI BEAR, no false report was signed

Posted on 23-03-2015 11:41 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR now claims that somebody else prepared the 2011 scientific report by Janet Wilmshurst of her radiocarbon research that showed that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand and that there is no evidence of any other settlers here before Maori arrived. YOGI BEAR does not seem to realise that there were four joint authors, and that Janet was the team leader. The other authors were Terry Hunt from the University of Hawaii, Carl Lipo from the California State University, and Atholl Anderson from the Australian National University Canberra. YOGI BEAR is accusing these four highly qualified researchers of all signing a report that was not based on their research at all. That is obviously absolutely ridiculous. YOGI BEAR is desperately making up claims for which he has no supporting evidence at all. The evidence is all against him, but he is in denial.


YOGI BEAR, read Janet Wilmshurst's report

Posted on 23-03-2015 11:51 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR keeps writing nonsense about the 2011 radiocarbon dating research by a team lead by Janet Wilmshurst. YOGI BEAR should read the report. It is available on the internet. Just Google Janet Wilmshurst and pick out the relevant paper.


whatsinaname, they asre students learning

Posted on 25-03-2015 14:21 | By Peter Dey

Whatsinaname asks why the students are digging all the remains up. They are learning how to dig without damaging what they find, they are learning how to classify what they find, and they are learning how to collect suitable material for radiocarbon dating. Their evidence shows that there were no pre-Maori settlers on Great Mercury Island.


s83cruiser, this find supports the Waitangi Tribunal

Posted on 25-03-2015 14:27 | By Peter Dey

s83cruiser, the Waitangi Tribunal accepts that Maori were the indigenous people of New Zealand, so that when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed Maori were the rightful owners of New Zealand. The archaeological dig on Great Mercury Island supports the Maori claim to be indigenous.


YOGI BEAR is in denial over Morimori

Posted on 25-03-2015 14:34 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR suggests that there were Moriori in New Zealand before Maori arrived. Current radiocarbon research shows clearly that there was no Moriori race in New Zealand before Maori arrived. The story of a Moriori pre-Maori race in New Zealand was based on myths retold by Pakeha writers. These myths have now been shown to be fiction because the latest radiocarbon dating shows that there is no evidence of anybody living in New Zealand before Maori arrived about 1250AD.


YOGI BEAR is in denial over Moriori

Posted on 25-03-2015 23:52 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR has no evidence that a Moriori race existed in New Zealand before Maori arrived. There is no scientific evidence left behind by anybody in New Zealand before Maori arrived about 1250AD.


Different View

Posted on 26-03-2015 15:30 | By Jitter

Messrs Dey and Bell back the Wilmhurst findings to the hilt as her findings give them exactly what they want. However there are a number of experienced and qualified people who do not agree eg NZ Historian Prof of History at AUT Paul Moon who states "Studies using carbon dated materials carried a high level of error. Maori oral histories are open to interpretation and may not be entirely accurate. The idea of Maori being indigenous to NZ may need to be reconsidered".Mr Bell in one of his previous recent comments states that Moriori did not exist ! In the early 1960s I worked with a girl who was obviously of mixed blood and came from the Chathams. I asked her what Maori tribe she belonged to and she said "My ancestry is Moriori, don't ever class me with those savage Maoris". That's how strongly they feel.


Jitter, carbon dating error is small

Posted on 26-03-2015 20:37 | By Peter Dey

Jitter and Paul Moon write as though carbon dating provides precise dates for the materials tested. Carbon dating provides for New Zealand a possible date of first settlement between 1230AD and 1280AD. Qualified and experienced people do not say that carbon dating carries a high level of error. What carbon dating does do is show that there is no evidence of any other race of people in New Zealand before Maori arrived. The date of arrival is irrelevant to this. Most people know that the Maori of the Chatham Islands are Moriori. They never claim to be a pre-Maori race of people. They migrated from the South Island to the Chatham Islands about 1500AD.


Not only but also,jitter.

Posted on 27-03-2015 08:02 | By robin bell

Jitter continues his desperate attempt to discredit the obvious. It is dishonest to attribute statements never made.I have never,ever claimed Moriori don't exist, simply that they were Polynesian and an early wave of IMMIGRANTS.In the absence of anything but anecdotal,unproven desperate rhetoric from you and your support group,Janet Wilmshurst and her team of experts remain at the forefront of knowledge. Robin Bell.


Jitter, myths are not accurate. Science is accurate

Posted on 27-03-2015 10:58 | By Peter Dey

Science produces reliable, accurate information. That is why we have all of the modern technology that exists. Maori myths do not pretend to be factual. Pakeha writers who tried to produce factual stories out of Maori myths had no scientific knowledge at the time. The radiocarbon dating that we now have has only been highly accurate about Maori arrival in New Zealand since the research of Janet Wilmshurst, Terry Hunt, Carl Lipo, and Atholl Anderson in 2011. Accurate carbon dating does not provide a precise date. It provides a probable time period for New Zealand of about 1230AD to 1280AD for the first arrival of Maori. This is reliable because it can be scientifically checked and fits in with a great deal of other scientific knowledge. Quotations from Paul Moon are probably out of date half-truth.


Jitter is clinging to a false hope

Posted on 27-03-2015 14:34 | By Peter Dey

Jitter does not seem to realise how widespread the members of Janet Wilmshurst's research team were. Janet lead a team of researchers from the New Zealand Crown Research Institute, Landcare, from the Australian National University, from the University of Hawaii, and from the State University of California. These are all highly reputable universities. The four lead researchers: Janet Wilmshurst, Terry Hunt, Carl Lipo, and Athol Anderson have all signed their names and the names of their universities to the scientific paper they produced. Their paper presents clear radiocarbon evidence that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD, and that there is no evidence of anybody settled here before then. It was major research. They covered 1400 settlement sites throughout East Polynesia and New Zealand. Their evidence far outweighs any other evidence so far available, and their credibility is of the highest order.


Oh Dear

Posted on 27-03-2015 16:43 | By Jitter

Messrs Dey and Bell continue to put all their faith in the investigation results produced by one group. I will take this result and consider it with all the other expert individuals and groups who have carried out similar research. Somebody stated in a comment attached to the item re the creation of a Maori council ward that "Moriori did not exist" and "were a fictional race created by Europeans to support their own arguments" or words to that effect. The descendants of the Moriori's on the Chatham Islands would strongly dispute this.


Jitter is now on to it

Posted on 27-03-2015 21:30 | By Peter Dey

Jitter should definitely consider all the individuals and groups that have carried out radiocarbon dating research of first settlement in New Zealand. Reputable historians now say that all radiocarbon evidence points to the same conclusion, that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD.


Why are there two groups called Moriori?

Posted on 27-03-2015 21:50 | By Peter Dey

The Polynesians of the Chatham Islands have always called themselves Moriori. The fictional pre-Maori occupants of New Zealand were called Moriori by the Pakeha writers who wrote about them based on Maori myths.


The fiction?

Posted on 28-03-2015 11:53 | By YOGI BEAR

Well Peter that is interesting, so why then did part Maori wander out to the Chatham Islands then? What actually happened is that Moriori (people here in NZ before part Maori) were chased out there and hunted down. It certainly looks like part Maori got treated a lot better than that now doesn't it.


Surprise

Posted on 28-03-2015 13:05 | By Jitter

So Messrs Dey and Bell are now saying that Maori myths and legends have no element of truth. In addition Peter Dey is now saying that the pre Maori occupation of NZ told to Europeans who documented these accounts at the time are also fiction ? I guess the European writers had to give these pre Maori NZers a name as they (according to the Maori stories) were not Maori. Also I do fully understand how widespread Janet Wilmhurst's team were but this still does not prove that this one single team were correct. The latest dissitation by Bruce Moon on the Treaty and the way its meaning has been altered to suit one group makes very interesting reading. Of course Messrs Dey and Bell will immediately say it is inaccurate and biased.


Jitter, Read

Posted on 28-03-2015 13:18 | By Peter Dey

Jitter does not seem to realise that Bruce Moon in the book "Twisting the Treaty" writes a full paragraph about Janet Wilmshurst's 2011 radiocarbon dating results on page 296. Bruce Moon fully accepts her conclusion that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD. Modern science is how we now have all of modern technology. People like YOGI BEAR and Jitter who write letters using computers and email and do not accept the results of radiocarbon dating are irrational.


Jitter, Bruce Moon is fascinating

Posted on 28-03-2015 13:30 | By Peter Dey

Bruce Moon is fascinating because he accepts that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD based on the radiocarbon dating evidence. However he claims that Maori are not indigenous because they arrived only about 500 years before the first Pakeha settlers, and this is not long enough to be indigenous. Historians have always regarded the first settlers in any region as the indigenous race of the region. Bruce Moon has come up with a new rule of his own for being indigenous, and it is a rule that nobody else uses. That is fascinating.


Surprise #2

Posted on 28-03-2015 13:32 | By YOGI BEAR

The other part of the response by Messrs.' Dey and Bell will also include the usual claim to racism by everyone else for picking just on them.


Jitter, myths may contain truth

Posted on 28-03-2015 13:43 | By Peter Dey

Jitter, it is not correct to say that Maori myths and legends have no element of truth. We have no way of knowing. What we do know is that if there is a conflict between a myth and scientific radiocarbon dating evidence that the scientific evidence is correct and the myth is not. Myths may still contain truth. But they cannot over-rule scientific evidence.


YOGI BEAR pretending that facts can be ignored

Posted on 28-03-2015 17:14 | By Peter Dey

We do not know whether YOGI BEAR is racist but we do know that he regularly carries on writing wrong information as though facts that contradict him do not matter. The radiocarbon evidence that Maori arrived in New Zealand before any other settlers about 1250AD is at present irrefutable fact.


YOGI BEAR, Moriori and Maori are equally Polynesian

Posted on 28-03-2015 19:15 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR still seems to believe that the Moriori from the Chatham Islands are a different race from Maori. DNA identification shows that Moriori and Maori are equally Polynesian and migrated here originally from the Tahiti region.


YOGI BEAR, Moriori and Maori are equally Polynesian

Posted on 28-03-2015 19:15 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR still seems to believe that the Moriori from the Chatham Islands are a different race from Maori. DNA identification shows that Moriori and Maori are equally Polynesian and migrated here originally from the Tahiti region.


pretending that facts can be ignored?

Posted on 28-03-2015 23:02 | By YOGI BEAR

Well if you say so, perhaps you could let me know when you find your second one. You know the fiorst one was that momentous moment when you decided correctly so that all part Maori myths, legends and storytelling were all made up, changed ever day of the week and were completely and utterly unreliable. That you got right. perhaps you could consider taking one more little wee step, and taking a lot at all the mythological stories, created legends and storytelling tabled to the WTF Tribunal in Wellington all behind closed doors. Then maybe you would be starting to get to the 'missing link' as it was and is.


YOGI BEAR, more nonsense

Posted on 29-03-2015 11:26 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR, nobody has ever said that Maori myths were all made up, changed every day of the week, and were completely and utterly unreliable. Maori myths may contain a great deal of truth as far as the characters in them are concerned. We have no way of knowing. What we do know is that myths are not reliable fact for dating the first arrival of Maori in New Zealand and that radiocarbon dating is reliable. It can be checked and repeated to give the same result.


YOGI BEAR, more misinformation

Posted on 29-03-2015 11:35 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR suggests that Treaty settlements with the Waitangi Tribunal are based on Maori myths. Treaty settlements are based on hard facts. In Tauranga 20,000 hectares of Maori land was wrongfully taken by the Government. That is hard fact, not myth. All other Treaty settlements are the same. The evidence accepted by the Tribunal is always presented in a settlement report for every settlement. YOGI BEAR's suggestion that Treaty settlements are based on myths is more anti-Maori nonsense. YOGI BEAR is not being accused of being racist, but a great deal of his writing is wildly anti-Maori and not supported by any rational evidence.


Moriori and part Maori

Posted on 29-03-2015 11:55 | By YOGI BEAR

So Peter, you say they are the same as both are from Polynesia? I accept that Moriori migrated here, the means is unknown/not clear. However Maori were dropped off hear later by General Zheng He. Without this random event NZ would have been occupied by Moriori when NZ was colonized by the colonials. In end result they are different, the Chatham Island records of the time record this.


Part Maori and Moriori?

Posted on 29-03-2015 12:14 | By YOGI BEAR

So taking the essence of what you are saying here. Part Maori are an invasive species just like deer, pigs and rats? Hitched a ride from somewhere else then claim to be here all the time, please, give me a break here. What you have just confirmed is that part Maori are not indigenous to NZ, they are from the Islands. I now confirm that you have provided a second "Fact", well done Peter. Now would you like to go for "Three strikes and you are out?"


Unwelcome overstayers?

Posted on 29-03-2015 12:23 | By YOGI BEAR

Perhaps Peter you need to look for real evidence of Moriori, We all know Moriori were here before the Pacific Islanders (now name changed to part Maori) perhaps the mother load of data will come fom a good look at Pacific Islanders (now name changed to part Maori) DNA, as Pacific Islanders (now name changed to part Maori) eat more or less that last of the Moriori then that will be the place to confirm all needed. With your line of reasoning could I suggest that you write the UK archaeological Society and point out to them that the Normans were Indigenous to England, while you are at it I would also mention the French, Romans and Vikings. Love to see their response. PS Perhaps you could suggest a WTF Tribunal in England?


Moriori Chatham Islands?

Posted on 29-03-2015 12:46 | By YOGI BEAR

Perhaps Peter you could look at where Moriori came from prior to being in the Chathams. You will find that they fled there from NZ because of line of the psychopathic ex Pacific Islanders (renamed self as part Maori). The peace loving Moriori fled NZ and were hounded to virtual extinction (a bit like the Moa and anything else that moved). Moriori did not deserve this. So your denial about the existence of Moriori is futile, moriori were clearly here before the ex Pacific Islanders (renamed self as part Maori) and that clearly means that Moriori have a better claim to sovereignty of NZ than the ex Pacific Islanders (renamed self as part Maori) becasue the Treaty of Waitangi clearly provided agreement that part Maori ceded sovereignty. You can not claim back what was never yours to give in the first place.


YOGI BEAR, your belief in myths not science is irrational

Posted on 29-03-2015 14:38 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR continues to insist that the myths of pre-Maori Moriori settlers in New Zealand are true, and that modern radiocarbon evidence is not true. This is irrational drivel. Modern science has produced the computer and email that YOGI BEAR uses to write with. Modern radiocarbon evidence shows that there is no evidence of anybody living in New Zealand before Maori arrived about 1250AD. The same evidence shows that Moriori migrated from new Zealand to the Chatham Islands about 1500AD.


Why does YOGI BEAR believe myths over science?

Posted on 29-03-2015 14:51 | By Peter Dey

It is a mystery that YOGI BEAR keeps insisting that the mythical stories of pre-Maori Moriori are more believable than the results of radiocarbon dating. Especially since YOGI BEAR keeps repeating his belief that myths are made up and unreliable.


YOGI BEAR, first settlers are indigenous

Posted on 29-03-2015 15:00 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR shares a not uncommon misunderstanding about indigenous people. Dictionaries say that indigenous means originating in a certain place. Some people think that this means that a race of people arriving from overseas, like Maori, cannot be indigenous. However dictionaries also say that indigenous means being the original inhabitants of a place, and that applies to indigenous people. All of the indigenous peoples of the Pacific arrived in their countries from overseas. Maori are no different. Being the first settlers in new Zealand is what makes Maori indigenous.


YOGI BEAR, Zheng He did not come to New Zealand

Posted on 29-03-2015 15:18 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR repeats the misinformation about Chinese Admiral Zheng He. There is a Chinese Zheng He Society because he was an important person in Chinese history. The Zheng He Society has no knowledge of Zheng He coming to New Zealand. This can be checked on the internet.


Yogi bear

Posted on 29-03-2015 16:01 | By robin bell

has to tow the "party" line. He has no evidence of pre Maori occupation of N.Z. The party line dictates the need to discredit Maori as indigenous, this they hope will destroy Maori claims to "ownership" pre Treaty. The treaty trashing troglodytes of Tauranga, yogi bear etc. have failed to make any headway with this policy,for obvious reasons. They have no evidence of any of their claims. NONE. Robin Bell.


Peter Dey

Posted on 29-03-2015 16:20 | By Jitter

has gone overboard with his comments. Yes I have a copy of "Twisting the Treaty" and know full well what Bruce Moon says about the Wilmhurst excavations. I have not commented re Bruce Moon saying anything about the Wilmhurst report but was commenting on his latest paper on the Treaty document itself and the way it has been rewritten to fit in with Maori claims by claimants and the Treaty Tribunal.If the Tribunal were told black was white they would uphold this statement and approve it.


YOGI BEAR helps us with his misinformation

Posted on 29-03-2015 16:26 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR presents a great many common views on this topic. But readers can see that, in fact, YOGI BEAR is not able to justify his views with sound evidence or rational thinking. It helps us to move forward positively knowing the reasons why many commonly held opinions are wrong and contradicted by sound evidence.


first settlers are indigenous

Posted on 29-03-2015 17:35 | By YOGI BEAR

You are absolutely right there Peter, however your misnomer is that this was ex Pacific islander who now refer to themselves as part Maori. You of course are ignoring the realty that Moriori were here in NZ before that. So we are on "fact three" that the best case for being indigenous is being first here in NZ. When you have proved that let me know, that of course means "proving" that no one else was "EVER" here and that of course you will never be able to do as the more you look the more evidence you will find to prove yourself wrong. Hence the reliance on Janet W alone, in isolation.


Jitter now claims,

Posted on 30-03-2015 08:13 | By robin bell

along with Bruce Moon and his followers,that the treaty has been altered to suit Maori.RUBBISH. The treaty in itself has no bearing on the atrocious behaviour of the Crown POST treaty.The Crown acknowledge this behaviour and and are redressing it.Those Treaty trashers who oppose this action, should be very thankful FULL compensation is not being sought. Robin Bell.


YOGI BEAR, no physical evidence of humans before 1250AD

Posted on 30-03-2015 10:37 | By Peter Dey

If there were any inhabitants in New Zealand before 1250AD they would have left evidence of their existence. There is no evidence of anybody living in New Zealand before 1250AD. To rational people this means that there were no inhabitants in New Zealand before Maori arrived about 1250AD. YOGI BEAR says that the more you look the more evidence you will find of pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand. However YOGI BEAR still cannot provide any such evidence. He chooses to claim that Maori myths are more believable than the modern science that gives him his computer and email. That is irrational.


Jitter the Treaty has not been rewritten

Posted on 30-03-2015 11:10 | By Peter Dey

Jitter is being misled by Bruce Moon's claim that the Treaty of Waitangi has been rewritten. We have two official versions of the Treaty, in English and Maori. They were made official by Governor Hobson. They are not exact translations but that was the choice that Governor Hobson made and it was his decision to make. These two versions are in the Treaty of Waitangi Act that set up the Waitangi Tribunal. They have never been rewritten. Bruce Moon wants to ignore the fact that Governor Hobson's decision was official and cannot be undone. It is Bruce Moon who wants to rewrite the Treaty.


Jitter, Waitangi Tribunal decisions are not fabricated

Posted on 30-03-2015 11:20 | By Peter Dey

Jitter seems to think, along with YOGI BEAR, that the Waitangi Tribunal process is corrupt. Tauranga Maori had 20,000 hectares of land wrongfully taken by the Government. That is fact, supported by the Waitangi Tribunal in a full report. All Treaty settlements are finalised with a full public report. They are all approved in Parliament. There is very little discussion in Parliament because everybody there knows that the Tribunal process is above board. People, like Bruce Moon, who criticise the Tribunal, simply do not back up their criticism with any credible evidence.


first settlers are indigenous

Posted on 30-03-2015 12:03 | By YOGI BEAR

The definition of 'indiginous' according to the dictionary is "born here". But that is not what you are meaning, you say that the first in NZ is 'indiginous', I easily understand the difference in what you are trying to say here. Where your myths on this fall down is that you are ignoring all of NZ history pre ex Islanders. There were seven other cultures living in NZ at various times and even when the ex Islanders were dropped off here there were a least two other cultures present when they were kicked off General Zheng He's ships. Oh yes he did exist, he had a ships log and the writings are clear, I have seen them. Nice try Peter, go get back in you canoe and paddle off into the sunset on that one.


Jitter

Posted on 30-03-2015 12:09 | By YOGI BEAR

You are correct of course, one day Peter and Robin will catch up.


Peter, his misinformation

Posted on 30-03-2015 12:11 | By YOGI BEAR

Hey Peter, I am still waiting to see anything from you, example, how about you provide some written evidence of events, like the travels of ex Islanders to NZ? Perhaps the written record of settlement throughout NZ? Anything?


Yogi Bear claims

Posted on 30-03-2015 20:26 | By robin bell

to have seen,read and understood the writings of Zheng He. It is therefore very strange that his "interpretation" of the voyages of this great Admiral differ so radically to that of Chinese historians. Rather it is more in line with the witterings of Gavin Menzies, disgraced and ridiculed "author" of 1432 who among other outragious statements claims Zheng He sailed up the Thames to the court of Henry 5th and presented him with a silk shirt. No evidence whatsoever. Yogi bare plays the childlike game of "prove me wrong" How positively SAD. Robin Bell.


Yogi Bear, wants written proof

Posted on 30-03-2015 20:49 | By robin bell

of widespread Maori settlement of N.Z. I suggest he follows his penchant for ships logs, and checks out those of Abel Tasman, James Cook an du Fresne, just for starters. Robin Bell.


Why is YOGI BEAR ashamed of his beliefs?

Posted on 30-03-2015 21:23 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR keeps insisting that there were pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand when he is unable to provide any evidence to support his claim. What YOGI BEAR says does not make sense. It seems very clear that YOGI BEAR is motivated by beliefs that he is not telling us about. He refuses to accept clear evidence that he is wrong. If YOGI BEAR is ashamed to tell us of the real reasons for his point of view, maybe he needs to reconsider those beliefs.


YOGI BEAR, no evidence of humans means no humans here

Posted on 31-03-2015 11:41 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR we do not believe in fairies because there is no evidence that they exist. We do not believe in pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand because there is no evidence that they existed. YOGI BEAR can pretend that this is not the case but that just proves that he is writing nonsense.


Indigenous people

Posted on 31-03-2015 13:04 | By drgoon

indigenous: originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native. There are no indigenous people of Aotearoa. All people of Aotearoa are immigrants. The gene line of Maori has been traced back to Asia. Choke on that fact. For reference... this among many research studies prove beyond a doubt that Maori are immigrants... http://nzsm.webcentre.co.nz/article1834.htm


drgoon, immigrants settled every country on earth

Posted on 02-04-2015 09:08 | By Peter Dey

drgoon does not seem to realise that human life on earth began in Africa, and that all countries were gradually settled by migration from Africa. The indigenous peoples of the world are those who first inhabited their homelands. The United Nations recognises over 4000 indigenous peoples and Maori are one of them. The internet Free Dictionary has one definition of indigenous as "the original inhabitants of a particular place". All of the Polynesian peoples in Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, and Tahiti immigrated to their homelands. They are all indigenous and Maori are no different.


immigrants settled every country on earth

Posted on 02-04-2015 15:18 | By YOGI BEAR

There you go Peter and Robin you have now admitted the obvious, so what is all this stuff and claims then?


Anonymity,the licence for stupidity.

Posted on 03-04-2015 08:58 | By robin bell

Yogi bear proves the truth of this yet again. Ably backed up by drgoon,macca and jimmy ehu. Robin Bell.


Fresh Thoughts

Posted on 03-04-2015 19:47 | By Jitter

Prof Atholl Anderson FRSNZ former Uni of Otago anthropologist believes first colonists to NZ were exiles with no way of returning home.Prof Anderson is of Kai Tahu descent. He together with the late Dame Judith Binney and Dr Aroha Harris have written "Tangatua Whenua: An Illustrated History" spanning 5000 years (not 500) a comprehensive history of Maori. The book shoots down traditional history and asks " Who were these first colonists ?". This may put a flea or two in the ears of Messers Dey and Bell. The book I understand has only recently been published but should be a very enlightening and interesting read.


Jitter,

Posted on 04-04-2015 09:03 | By Peter Dey

Jitter does not seem to have read the book "Tangata Whenua". The co-author, Atholl Anderson, is also one of the co-authors of Janet Wilmshurst's 2011 radiocarbon dating paper that provided the evidence that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD. The traditional history that the book "Tangata Whenua" shoots down is the myth that there were pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand. The 5000 year period referred to is the period of migration by Maori from Asia through Polynesia and then to New Zealand. The book does not say that there were inhabitants in New Zealand before Maori arrived.


If it can't be dated it's not evidence

Posted on 04-04-2015 14:06 | By Peter Dey

Unfortunately for those who think they have evidence of pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand, anything made of rock or metal cannot be dated. Ian Wishart, writing "The Great Divide" in 2012, referred to the claims of Julius von Haast in the late 1800's. Julius von Haast was an enormously capable scientist who collected a great many artefacts that convinced him that there were pre-Maori inhabitants in New Zealand. However none of his relics can be dated, and they can all be explained away as not being pre-Maori. Ian Wishart's claims of pre-Maori inhabitants have sunk without trace because if something cannot be dated it is not evidence. Carbon-dated evidence simply outweighs anything that cannot be dated.


Interesting

Posted on 04-04-2015 14:56 | By Jitter

I will leave any further comment on this until I have read the book myself.


The really interesting thing,jitter

Posted on 05-04-2015 10:10 | By robin bell

is how you can write opinions and summaries on books you have yet to read. Perhaps typical of the anti Maori,anti treaty brigade. Robin Bell.


Who knows

Posted on 05-04-2015 12:09 | By Masthead

May I quote from a book writen by the son of perhaps the first (white)settler,Memoirs of Cameron Buchanan.(resident 1857-1873 AHU AHU. "The circular enclosure of stones" I am sorry i cannot recall the inscriptionon the entrance stone to the circle. The stones were about 4ft high above the groundand must have been movedsome distance.--- The circle was about 14ft in diameter. The two front stones abouta foot -18inches higher than the others.You had to turn sideways to enter. the stones wererough, not trimmed. I understand they were moved and built into the wall of the woolshed on the beach. end quote. All we have to do is find the site of the old woolshed.worth a dig dont you think


Robin Bell

Posted on 05-04-2015 17:22 | By Jitter

My comments were based on a recent article in the Otago Daily Times covering a lengthy interview with Prof Atholl Anderson. So before you start sniping check your facts. The late Dame Judith Binney and Dr Aroha Harris were and are both brilliant anthropology authors in their own right. Judith Binney's "Encircled Lands - Te Urewera, 1820-1921" is brilliant and tells the truth about much of the Tuhoe land.


Jitter is confused,

Posted on 06-04-2015 08:49 | By robin bell

when he puts his faith in the unqualified opinions of anti Maori anti treaty writers. He accuses me of sniping,when that is exactly the purpose of such writers.None of these writers have yet submitted a shred of evidence for their claims,ranging from false interpretations of mythology to false interpretations of legitimate archaeology. Looking for, and accepting the truth has to be in the hands of FULLY QUALIFIED experts.Accusations of corruption (yogi bear) are simply a reflection of dishonesty. Robin Bell.


Robin is muddled up?

Posted on 06-04-2015 14:45 | By YOGI BEAR

He is confusing to very simple but distinctly different things, he own thoughts and the truth it everything. hence the lack of insight into what Jitter is saying, the truth.


Very really interesting thing Robin

Posted on 06-04-2015 14:50 | By YOGI BEAR

How you can read a thing and get the pre-determined and desired meaning each and every time. On top of that an absolute perfect record of ignoring the existence of everything that is an "Inconvenient truth" to your current desired beliefs, it is indeed breath taking and some.


Myths or explantions

Posted on 06-04-2015 18:14 | By Pat

Legend is that Maui caught the sun in a net and slowed it down. Truth if you lived in the island the sun rises at 6 am and sets at 6pm every day of the year. So how do they explain when they arrived in New Zealand(most likely in Summer) that the days are long and the night is short. You write a story that becomes a legend but is it a myth. NO it is an explanation but not the TRUTH. All legends/myths have some truth in them it is up to us all to find out what the writers truth he/she is trying to explain. I believe that there was not 7 canoes but 7 migrations of many canoes. Is this the truth a myth can you prove it's not true? I know it's is true as I was there prove me wrong.


Pat

Posted on 07-04-2015 08:42 | By YOGI BEAR

The 7 Canoe story is clearly recorded as being recorded in writing by General Zheng He, his 7 sailing ships picked up a few Islanders to boost numbers onboard. He found that they were useless and dropped them off at the next island (had a lot of smoke, volcano erupting, not cloud) the DNZ record shows mixing of blood lines at that time, the peoples here already ended up being taken over by the new arrivals (butchering and enslavement) such is their ways. End result we have ex Pacific Islanders "dropped off" in NZ by others, this is recorded in writing, end of story.


Myths and Legends

Posted on 07-04-2015 09:57 | By YOGI BEAR

Pat, that subject has been well and truly clarified, Peter has stated categorically that no ex Islander myth or Legend can be relied on, they are all made up and are all changed on a daily basis to suit the storyteller of the day. Unfortunately Robin as has not been keeping up and still thinks that the ex Islander myths are like "truthful" and science and verified as in all respects correct and beyond question from anyone anytime. Quite amazing really.


Pat.

Posted on 07-04-2015 10:40 | By robin bell

A well written comment.I for one agree,there is always some truth to legends/myths but have a more practical interpretation.Your example of the legend of Maui is a good one and may well be true. However there is no way of proving it,so it becomes a matter of science against personal interpretations. We have to go with the science, if not we all end up like YOGI BEAR,totally confused and desperate for recognition. Robin Bell.


Robin, gone fishing

Posted on 07-04-2015 16:57 | By YOGI BEAR

Yeah that sounds about right Robin, off on some hopelessly wishful "trek around the universe" looking for Maui the great fish catcher (in case readers are unsure, Robin thinks that Maui, hooked the north island, a fish that Maui caught and brought to the surface. Maui then hacked the surface (that's called caring about the animals environment and hence the hills and mountain areas all over the place) creating it all. Funny thing is that Robin has not produced any science to prove it, not even the hook used? Perhaps another angle to look at is why after 500 years odd in NZ has it not yet decayed? The smell would be something right? Perhaps a better angle would be to look at what Peter said and ask Robin why he is Peters mate but they are opposite in this? How strange it all is.


Kissing the Blarney stone.

Posted on 07-04-2015 17:22 | By robin bell

or something else. Works of historical conjecture such as 1421 and 1432 rely on a number of persuasive techniques. These include the use of false logic also called "begging the question" or circular argumentation. The all pervasive and persuasive presentation of assertions as though they were established facts,the selective use of "evidence" and frequent repetition. The "Menzies Team" and there local representative YOGI BEAR are the source of the insulting,totally unsubstantiated garbage in reference to the origins of the Maori people. Robin Bell.


Whos indigenous and where?

Posted on 07-04-2015 21:29 | By YOGI BEAR

If the part Maori/ex islander stance was right then they should also be claiming the following other lands: - all pacific islands, all of Taiwan, China, SE Asia and so on all the way back to the African rift valley. Surely if one just breezes through a place then an entitlement automatically follows for the lot. Good luck on that. PS I would suggest that you send a delegation to China to put in a claim, I would suggest that as many as possible attend to this in person, however I suspect a return ticket wont be needed. Let see what happens … good luck. Wouldn't want to be at the reception when you get there. However if you went to China for approval to take over Taiwan they might listen to that you could become the advance invasion party good lucky on that to.


20,000ha Tauranga lands

Posted on 07-04-2015 21:30 | By YOGI BEAR

Wake up Peter, the NZ Government had a signed treaty that was well and truly multiple time breached. Ex islanders were warned repeatedly that slaughtering settlors going about their lawful business (Queens law) would result in a reaction, military response and confiscation of lands. Ex Islanders continued with the settlor snacks in the cooking pots. Without any surprise the red costs turned up and had a scrap at gate Pa. That for a start did not go so well for the red coats. however the decent ex islanders with the red coats took it upon themselves to wander off after the local nasties and eventually caught up with them and dished out a bit of Utu. In end result the NZ Government confiscated 290,000ha, later returning (cant think why?) around 240,000ha. There ends the lesson for Peter.


Kissing the Blarney stone

Posted on 08-04-2015 15:34 | By YOGI BEAR

Yes Robin, I am glad you now realise your wanderings off from reality, I hope I am able to welcome you back to reality sometime soon however the cleaning process is difficult and painful for you to complete without assurance of success, good luck.


Plato's apology 29a,

Posted on 08-04-2015 15:47 | By robin bell

Prejudice,(yogi bear)is when someone thinks himself wise,when he is not.Of thinking he knows when he does not know. There is clearly nothing new,in YOGI BEARS ranting Nonsense, even Plato experienced it. Robin Bell.


YOGI BEAR, confiscation was illegal

Posted on 08-04-2015 17:47 | By Peter Dey

When the Government warned Maori that they would have their land confiscated, that did not make the Government confiscation legal. A thief does not make his actions legal if he warns the victim first. Maori were granted the individual rights of British citizens. They had the right to be charged individually in court if they committed some crime. Wholesale confiscation of 20,000 hectares of land from individuals who did not fight and were never charged with any crime was illegal. The Government broke their own law when they did it. The Waitangi Tribunal, including Tribunal critic Michael Bassett agreed. The confiscation of 20,000 of Tauranga Maori land was correctly redressed by the present Government.


Plato's apology

Posted on 08-04-2015 21:27 | By YOGI BEAR

Not sure how you are able to create that, my last blog stands I believe, good luck and see you when you return.


Confusus say ...

Posted on 08-04-2015 21:57 | By YOGI BEAR

When man has his hand in the cookie jar is hard to let go or cookies.


Give it up

Posted on 09-04-2015 03:53 | By Kenworthlogger

ROBIN give it up. You have been demolished! Everyone can see it. You sound desperate...


Plato

Posted on 09-04-2015 09:29 | By YOGI BEAR

I know how he must have felt.


YOGI BEAR, land confiscation was illegal

Posted on 09-04-2015 15:11 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR seems to believe that Governments can ignore their own laws. Maori were granted all the rights of British citizens. That meant that they had the right to be charged individually for any crime. Wholesale confiscation of Maori land from individuals who did not fight the Government and who were not charged individually with any crime, was a clear breach by the Government of its own laws. That is why we have had hundreds of Treaty claims and settlements because Governments now recognise that they are bound to uphold the law the same as individual citizens.


Yogi Bear v The Queen.

Posted on 09-04-2015 20:17 | By robin bell

In her apology to Tainui,Waikato and Bay of Plenty Maori the Queen apologised for the illegal confiscation of land and the illegal insurgency by Crown forces, leading to death and destruction of innocent Maori. So do we believe YOGI BEAR? or the Queen. In spite of Kenny's dismissal of me (a sign of desperation)the Queen makes far more sense and always will,she speaks the truth,yogi doesn't,simple really. Robin Bell.


Kenworthlogger, you give YOGI BEAR too much credibility

Posted on 09-04-2015 20:22 | By Peter Dey

Kenworthlogger does not seem to realise that debating with YOGI BEAR is an irrational exercise because YOGI BEAR continually repeats claims that have been clearly shown to be nonsense. YOGI BEAR is clearly motivated by beliefs that he does not honestly reveal. He cannot justify the views that he expresses, but continues to express them regardless. The only explanation for YOGI BEAR's irrational arguments is that he has some anti-Maori prejudice that he is unwilling to be honest about.


land confiscation?

Posted on 09-04-2015 20:35 | By YOGI BEAR

Thanks for the help there Peter, perhaps you could confirm if the same rule applies in he Chatham Islands where part Maori/ex Islanders raided the place, wiped out most of the locals and took everything. Of the present day very hard to find a islander left alive. Please confirm that the part Maori/ex Islander activities were legal?


Kenworthlogger

Posted on 09-04-2015 20:55 | By YOGI BEAR

Good on ya mate, well said, the subject is nailed, we just have to wait for the Muppets to catch up.


Contrary

Posted on 10-04-2015 08:13 | By Kenworthlogger

Yes they choose to ignore all the land confiscation by other Maori thru warfare as there is no money in that one!!!!


Kenworthlogger

Posted on 10-04-2015 08:16 | By robin bell

Thank you for your deeply incisive advise. Sadly I can't comply.As long as you and yogi bear continue,I think you will find Peter and I will counter the insulting,dishonest drivel that is his strategy. Robin Bell.


YOGI BEAR, British law started in 1840

Posted on 10-04-2015 08:48 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR again pretends that facts do not exist when he criticises Maori atrocities in the Chatham Islands. These atrocities were committed before 1840. They were a terrible period for the Chatham Islands and the behaviour of Maori was barbaric but there was no British law at that time, so the Maori actions were not illegal. There was no British law to break. Treaty claims apply from 1840 when Maori were granted all the individual rights of British citizens.


Yogi Bear v The Queen

Posted on 10-04-2015 10:42 | By YOGI BEAR

it was not really the Queen, it was the Minister of Treaty settlements Finlayson, you know the guy who was on the Treaty gate payroll years ago. Bit like yourself a vested interest in the outcome.


insulting,dishonest drivel ?

Posted on 10-04-2015 10:48 | By YOGI BEAR

Robin I think you will find that Kenworth Logger has figured out where the problem is like many others. I am sure both yourself and Peter will be able to console each other and live happily ever after. More than happy you do and continue to do so. You are doing a wonderful job for the vast majority of kiwis and that is really appreciated. Without your wasteful commentaries the majority of bloggers here would not be able to see the estranged position of the Treaty-gate trougher's and the non-benign nature of their intentions. Again Robin (Peter also) with your commentaries the rest of NZ would not know, please do carry on, step it up, more more more please!!!!


YOGI BEAR v THE TRUTH,

Posted on 10-04-2015 12:17 | By robin bell

THE TRUTH wins every time. In her speech to Tainui in 1995 The Queen personally delivered her apology. Chris Finlayson became minister for treaty settlements in 2008. YOGI BEAR twists and turns but cannot escape.There is no escape from the TRUTH. Robin Bell.


kenworth logger, please inform us

Posted on 10-04-2015 13:15 | By Peter Dey

Kenworthlogger thinks that YOGI BEAR is informing us truthfully. It would be good if kenworthlogger would tell us what claims YOGI BEAR has made that are supported by credible evidence.


YOGI BEAR v THE TRUTH

Posted on 10-04-2015 13:35 | By YOGI BEAR

Same thing, thanks Robin.


kenworthlogger, Maori land theft after 1840 was not ignored

Posted on 10-04-2015 14:51 | By Peter Dey

Kenworthlogger should believe nothing that YOGI BEAR claims. After 1840 any illegal taking of land by Maori from other Maori was dealt with by the law. Treaty settlements deal with Government theft of Maori land wrongfully after 1840, and there was about $20 billion of Maori land wrongfully taken by the Government. Maori land taken by force by other Maori before 1840 is history that British justice after 1840 could not possibly deal with. When YOGI BEAR brings this issue up he is once again choosing to pretend that inconvenient facts do not exist.


part Maori land wrongfully taken by part maori

Posted on 10-04-2015 16:23 | By YOGI BEAR

Before 1840 seems all to have disappeared under the carpet, looks like a case of the those that was on the land that were dispossessed by other part Maori are in fact unable to claim anything as they were dispossessed by a bit more than the land at the time as they were sliding into the cooking pot the night of the completion of the raids. Any notions of Government wrong doings are a fabrication of a magnitude only the Waitangi WTF Tribunal could create behind closed doors. Perhaps the answer here is the Robin goes and asked David Rankin of Ngi tahu for his views, his view seems to be close to Sir Aphiane Ngati back in the late 1920's "all claims have been settled already ...". Bit hard to get past such a learned gentlemen's expert but "inconvenient" view isn't it.


YOGI BEAR, Apirana Ngata got it wrong

Posted on 11-04-2015 09:21 | By Peter Dey

When Sir Apirana Ngata said that confiscation of Maori land by the Government was justified he expressed the view of the Pakeha Government that he was a part of. No other Maori leaders have said that confiscation was justified. All Governments since 1985 have agreed that confiscation was not justified. New Zealand has been making Treaty settlements since 1989 based on the fact that every Government and every reputable historian now agrees that Sir Apirana Ngata got it wrong. Confiscation of Maori land was a decision by the Government of the time that it could pretend that it had not granted Maori all the individual rights of British citizens. The views of David Rankin of Ngapuhi are not credible because he cannot back his views up with credible argument and he seems to reject scientific evidence. YOGI BEAR still fails to produce credible evidence to support his claims.


Who speaks for the majority

Posted on 11-04-2015 14:18 | By YOGI BEAR

Looks to me on this page and others, that the vast majority seem to be expressing a view all by themselves, I am merely doing the same. You and you few separatist mates need to go back for retraining, your views seem to be mirroring Hitler and his distain for the irrelevant majority, as I recall he came to a stick end too.


Sir Apirana Ngata on false claims

Posted on 11-04-2015 17:08 | By YOGI BEAR

I am sure without doubt he would turn in his grave should he know of the dastardly deeds done since and especially from 1974 onwards. Perhaps Peter, to note your words on the just land confiscations, perhaps you could maybe provide some evidence, facts and so on such as a written record of the time from a credible person without a vested interest in the result, i.e. you have a vested interest so what you say "listen to with a grain of salt".


Sir Apirana Ngata on false claims

Posted on 12-04-2015 00:33 | By YOGI BEAR

Putting it another way Peter, show me the facts, show me the science. If you are unsure what I am really saying then go talk to Robin about how to get that right, you know Janet Wilmshurst type class act stuff that really helps so much to show what a sham the Waitangi gravy trail is all about.


Sir Apirana Ngata got it right

Posted on 12-04-2015 00:34 | By YOGI BEAR

He was spot on Peter, David Rankin proves it now, all you have to do is make the simple link between the two, the time frame and period covered. If you think that they are wrong then you are shooting yourself in the foot here. With all respect I have a little more faith in them than you considering their position, knowledge and that neither had there greasy mitts still in the cookie jar feasting and wanting to preserve that feasting.


Peter, looking but can not see

Posted on 12-04-2015 00:35 | By YOGI BEAR

Listening but can not hear, it is a choice that is made, nothing more, nothing less. The evidence is there if you choice to see, read and learn something new, not predetermined (example Janet Wilmshurst), no one can help you with this addiction, it is something you alone have to deal with. Meanwhile your commentaries are very appreciated as it provides a complete insight to the insanity of the Waitangi Tribunal and all that relates to it.


Reputable historian ?

Posted on 12-04-2015 00:35 | By YOGI BEAR

Peter, next you will be telling me that includes Janet Wilmshurst right? You sort of well and truly make things clear when that is the angle. Actually 1974 will be looked upon as the beginning of the NZ "dark ages" the point in time when justice and commonsense are replaced by fraud, mischief and the indulgence of a few at he expense of the many (apartheid begins). The end game here will be civil war because of the unjust and inequities 'created' deliberately for self gain and nothing else. I see no good coming from this path, but greed and self interest dictate the path of the few, the conclusion will be hard to avoid, it is a matter of when.


Public Record, YOGI BEAR

Posted on 12-04-2015 09:07 | By robin bell

Raglan land theft,and how it was done.WW1 govn't seized land.Never used, 1928 The Public Works Act codified justification for keeping the land.1967 THE TRIBE EVICTED and forced to rebuild their community. The govn't sold or gifted the land to the Raglan Golf Course. 1972 Eve Rickard began her campaign to restore ownership to the rightful owners. Vilified as a Maori trouble maker by the press (AND NO DOUBT YOU)she persisted.Eventually the Prime Minister offered to SELL the land to the tribe(imagine the cheek of it all) In 1983 the govn't surrendered and freely returned the land to its rightful owners. Lots more like that in the bag yogi. Robin Bell.


YOGI BEAR, try Parliament, Waitangi Tribunal, and the Queen

Posted on 12-04-2015 09:22 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR does not accept that Parliament, the Waitangi Tribunal, and the Queen have credibility over Treaty settlements. They have all endorsed Treaty settlements since 1985. YOGI BEAR needs to remember Sir Apirana Ngata's reason for saying that confiscation of Maori land was justified. He said it was Maori utu so it was fair. Maori utu finished in 1840 when British justice took over. YOGI BEAR is saying that he rejects the credibility of Parliament, the Waitangi Tribunal, and the Queen, but accepts the credibility of Sir Apirana Ngata whose reason for supporting confiscation is clearly total nonsense, and was supported by no other Maori leaders.


YOGI BEAR, anonymous writers avoid justifying themselves

Posted on 12-04-2015 09:32 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR claims to be part of a majority who share his view. However most who share his anti-Maori view choose to remain anonymous because they are unable to justify their anti-Maori view. Anybody who holds a weak point of view that they cannot justify looks foolish if other people know. People who take the trouble to find out the facts and put their own name to their opinion do not share the extremist view of YOGI BEAR.


YOGI BEAR, more irrelevance

Posted on 12-04-2015 10:12 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR has again raised the issue of Maori atrocities before 1840, and been given the same answer every time. YOGI BEAR chooses to pretend that what happened before the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 should now be considered in Treaty settlements. What happened before 1840 is irrelevant to Treaty settlements because there was no Treaty before 1840. What Maori did to other Maori before 1840 is history. What happened to Maori after 1840 is governed by British justice. That is what Maori signed up to in the Treaty. The Government also signed up to being governed by British law. So the Government could not ignore the individual rights of Maori under British law and wholesale confiscate tribal land. YOGI BEAR's discussion of events before 1840 is just a deliberate attempt to avoid the facts.


YOGI BEAR, your unjustified false claims

Posted on 12-04-2015 10:39 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR has been unable to justify the following claims. That ancient Moriori were here before Maori arrived; that the research report by Janet Wilmshurst, Atholl Anderson, Carl Lipo, and Terry Hunt showing the arrival of Maori about 1250AD was wrong; that events before 1840 should be considered in Treaty settlements; that critics of anti-Maori writers accuse them all of being racist; that there were 7 other cultures in New Zealand when Maori arrived; that Chinese admiral Zheng He came to New Zealand; that if Maori are indigenous to New Zealand they must be indigenous to all Pacific islands and China; that confiscation of 290,000 hectares of Tauranga Maori land was utu and was therefore justified; that the Queen did not apologise to Tainui for wrongful land confiscations; and that Sir Apirana Ngata was credible when he said that land confiscation was right because it was Maori utu.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.