Mary Brooks of Tauranga says Bruce Moon of Nelson has set forth the 'true wording” of the 'real” Treaty of Waitangi which is being continually distorted by Maori. There is no 'true wording” only interpretation that is extracted and acted upon in accordance with the documents three articles. There is of course more than one treaty, Te Tiriti o Waitangi allowed the English to come here and live without interference, the so called 'real” Treaty of Waitangi asked for the sovereignty of Maori to be relinquished and conceptually extinguished for all purposes. This is the power/curse of the English Treaty. These distortions may be seen as interpretations and vice versa depending on your point of view. Unfortunately for Maori it was to their own demise that they could not extract the most simplistic of objectives from the document. Let alone from the desperate souls whose lust for wealth and possession saw no end to the lengths they would go to in an all-out national effort to secure their own future at the expense of, yet again, another Indigenous group. Mary claims Maori 'Taonga” in her ever narrowing mind comprised of flax, potatoes, pork and timber no more no less, she is clearly ignorant if not arrogant about what Taonga is so I will put it in terms she may be able to understand. Maori Taonga is made up of every resource the English wanted starting with the land 66,400,000 acres.
Richard Matthews, Tauranga.


15 comments
research required
Posted on 05-04-2013 23:38 | By Captain Sensible
Ermmm, no Richard, the word "Taonga" in an 1840 dictionary stated that it meant "treasures procured by the spear", and this was never questioned until recently. Why the delay? I'll tell you shall I? It's because the word has been reinvented to suit the grievance industry. Feel free to do your own research on what the word meant back then and let me know.
History rewritten
Posted on 06-04-2013 08:51 | By Major Think
1800 maori never knew if they would be alive the next day. By signing the treaty they became British subjects and the never ending tribal wars finally ended. Maori slaves (these slaves were owned by maori, not european) were set free. Maori never owned the land, they used it until fleeing from another tribe or dying on it. I can tell you are a student of the "modern" versions of history ( written by 'academics' who think they know what happened) but sadly the documents and diaries and journals of the time do not agree. I would always read the writings of the time to get my facts, rather than the reinvented modern version.
research results
Posted on 06-04-2013 22:03 | By Peter Dey
‘Major think' thinks he is reading the true writings of the time (1840) but he is reading only someone else's tiny selection. Academics have spent 30 years or more reading thousands of documents including documents written at the time (1840). In a discussion they would make ‘Major think' look totally stupid. Captain Sensible refers to Hongi Hika's meaning of the word taonga. The Williams dictionary written at the time (1840) has taonga as ‘anything highly prized', and includes the haka as an example of something highly prized. Captain Sensible is using someone else's tiny selection of information. Captain Sensible would not even be able to have a sensible discussion with Maori language experts.
History what history
Posted on 07-04-2013 09:59 | By crazyhorse
Thanks to corrupt historians the treaty and Maori history doesnt even resemble what really happened especially the treaty every year it all gets more and more bizarre, i cant wait to read nz history in about 10 years time, how Maori came to nz on Ngatahu built 876 air craft fashioned from flax and bamboo, and a previous expedition had set up mana and money machines all around both islands so Maori could walk with pride and finances where ever they went, you may laugh but we are not far from it.wake up and smell the coffee campers.
There is no evidence of corrupt history
Posted on 07-04-2013 21:22 | By Peter Dey
Crazyhorse has no evidence that there are corrupt historians making up Maori history. Standard New Zealand history books available in bookshops all tell the same story of Maori history. Treaty settlements are ratified by Parliament so if they were based on false history it would be obvious by now. People who complain about Treaty settlements have had twenty years to come up with valid criticism but have been unable to do so. The only people getting worked up about Maori history are Pakeha protesters who simply repeat wrong information from unreliable sources.
@ ParoaPete
Posted on 07-04-2013 21:31 | By Captain Sensible
How about some quotes and references from the 1840s then Pete? There were hundreds of maori chiefs at Kohimarama in 1860s to discuss the treaty and I think not one complained, yet many many spoke of how great it has turned out. And be honest about it Pete, are you saying the majority were unhappy or just a few?
@ ParoaPete
Posted on 07-04-2013 21:33 | By Captain Sensible
So you are saying the electromagnetic spectrum, Mighty River Power, TV, etc were "highly prized" in 1840?! Yeah....right!
Maori deserve a fair share
Posted on 07-04-2013 22:59 | By Peter Dey
Captain Sensible does not seem to realise that neither the Government nor the Waitangi Tribunal view the electromagnetic spectrum as a taonga. They believe that the Treaty of Waitangi requires the Government to be fair to Maori, and that the Maori language is a taonga which the Treaty of Waitangi requires the Government to protect by providing a fair share of television coverage. So the Government has provided a share of the electromagnetic spectrum for Maori so as to be fair to Maori and to the Maori language, not because the electromagnetic spectrum is a taonga.
evidence
Posted on 08-04-2013 07:28 | By Major Think
There is evidence of corrupt historians making it up. Michael King has been found to be missing vital words from so called quotes to totally distort the truth. It has been shown to be no error but a deliberate attempt to create a lie. His books are used in Treaty claims as text books. So how about you give us some evidence that the majority of maori in 1840 did not want the treaty. If the maori thought a haka was a "treasure", they likely thought eating meat from other maori was also a "treasure". So are you saying canibalism is a taonga and can be continued by law?
ready away bro
Posted on 08-04-2013 08:27 | By crazyhorse
try reading travesty at Waitangi by S.C Scott or may be the real bell ringer Twisting the treaty- a tribal grab for power written by John Robinson, Bruce Moon ,David Round,Mike Butler,Hugh Barr and Peter Cresswell, you probably have one of them mixed up with Paul Moon who is in charge of writing fairy tales.
@ParoaPete
Posted on 08-04-2013 16:06 | By crazyhorse
If your keen to learn how recent historians have twisted history, try reading, Travesty at Waitangi and Twisting the treaty, both will explain in detail what has happened in recent years, history books written any where before about 1960 will also back this up and most of them were written from Maori accounts.
No maori king supporters at Kohimarama
Posted on 09-04-2013 13:12 | By Peter Dey
Captain Sensible seems to be getting his information from Ian Wishart who is not a reliable source. Ian Wishart wrote a whole chapter about the Kohimarama conference of Maori chiefs in 1860 because the conference supported the Treaty view of the Governor at the time. However Ian Wishart completely ignores the fact that the Maori King supporters were not at Kohimarama. They had already stopped supporting the Government. The conference was also asked to oppose the Maori King movement and did not do so. So the decisions of the Kohimarama conference were not decisions of all Maori chiefs, only Government supporters, and even they did not oppose the Kingitanga. The idea that the Maori King Movement chiefs were insignificant is also nonsense. They kept Pakeha out of the King Country for 20 years, and provided sanctuary for Te Kooti when he was pursued by the Government.
principles
Posted on 09-04-2013 20:30 | By Major Think
Just wondering how the "principles of the treaty" and "spirit of the treaty" apply to electromagnetic spectrums etc. Seems maori just pick out bits & pieces that they like and disregard the bits they don't like.
No distortions here?
Posted on 10-04-2013 17:36 | By PLONKER
It is in fact a compelte RORT, that it has been compeltely turned upside down and inside out to be something that is was never to be, never was ...
Its time to grow up
Posted on 17-09-2013 19:55 | By NewsViews
This book was designed to drive working and middle class Pakeha into a fear driven frenzy toward a non existent threat, to direct their attention away from the real threat. Standard PR 101. Don't be so gullible people. There's more important things at stake and the only reason its easy to lash out at Maori is because the real problem looks bigger than you and you think your too small to contend with it. But just remember, your only ever as small as your mind. Evolve!
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.