last sentence nonesense

Posted on 05-04-2013 14:38 | By YOGI

Says it all, to have any faith in these two completely undermines all else said, it was almost believable until that part. Of course add to it that the Maori treaty was translated to English, many an old timer respectable Maori leader of the time accepted and confirmed that as so.

Electromagnetic: What of it?

Posted on 05-04-2013 17:39 | By algail

Ignoring the bulk of the letter re electromagnetic spectrum may I point out that Maori were never conquered by England or any country the wars ended in a truce not a victory or defeat. May I also point out that the electromagnetic spectrum knows no boundaries earthbound or interstellar so such an argument should not exist. Nobody can own something they did not create design build or buy Alastair Bethlehem

fairy tales

Posted on 05-04-2013 23:34 | By Captain Sensible

Alys, it is incredible that someone like yourself conversant with the Fairy Tale version of history, could burst into print like that, oblivious of what really happened. There is one version of the treaty...the one that maori signed. The English versions you speak of were drafts, rough copies!! The "Littlewood" treaty is the english version of the maori version, and this only was discovered in an old drawer in the late 1980s. Please, I beg you, put your "Once upon a time..." books away and read what was written in the 1800s. The rewritten modern version is written for the grievance industry and has nothing to do with the truth. Do you have any evidence to back up your fairy tales?

HERE WE GO AGAIN

Posted on 06-04-2013 08:30 | By crazyhorse

We want compensation,now for the air waves, next the air, look at it any way you like its just Maori with there hands out BEGGING,what an embarrassment to Maori and Newzealand.

April 1st joke ??

Posted on 06-04-2013 08:42 | By Major Think

Your letter is so full of untruths, I can only assume its a belated April 01 joke.

UNBELIEVABLE.

Posted on 06-04-2013 09:47 | By crazyhorse

How did we get to the treaty of waitangi promising the electromagnetic spectrum. It was a treaty asked for by maori for protection from the crown from other Maori, that was the major reason for the Treaty of Waitangi, to stop enslavement. cannibalism, and Maori killing other Maori,because of weak politicians and corrupt historians we could soon be paying for the air we breath.

Crazyhorse

Posted on 06-04-2013 15:37 | By PLONKER

The Treaty did not promise: - electromagnetic forces, water, land, beaches, fish, air, fishing boats or anything like it, it is all just "created" since by "adjusting" history so as to justify all the claims since.

Maori were promised fairness

Posted on 06-04-2013 16:11 | By Peter Dey

The Treaty of Waitangi(English version) said that the Queen wished to protect the just rights of Maori. That is why the Government has a commitment to treat Maori fairly, and why Maori were given a fair share of the Television spectrum to set up Maori television. That is why the Government considers it fair to give $30 million to Maori instead of an allocation of frequency on the present occasion. This is not begging it is simply pointing out what fair ttreatment would be.

@ ParoaPete

Posted on 06-04-2013 19:49 | By The Big Tomatosaurus

Come on Pete, you are being mischievous. There is only one version of the treaty...the maori version that most maori signed. The english versions you speak of were drafts, and the only true english translation is the 'Littlewood' treaty, only recently found. The maori were guaranteed the same rights as all citizens and the maori chiefs were extremely happy with it. Just read the journals, diaries, transcriptions etc from that era. BTW could you explain how Tuhoe got $170 million yet never signed a treaty?

embarrassing

Posted on 07-04-2013 08:18 | By The Big Tomatosaurus

Maori were promised equality and all the rights of British subjects. They had the right, for the first time ever, to own land and keep it or sell it. No other tribe could just take it from them. Most chose to legally sell it. Because no share of the EM spectrum is offered to non-maori for free, how then can maori be treated equally yet get special EM spectrum rights? The greed of maori is repulsive and embarrassing.

NZ Archives has two Treaty versions

Posted on 07-04-2013 22:11 | By Peter Dey

Big Tomatosaurus does not seem to know that the National Archives in Wellington have the original Treaties of Waitangi (English and Maori versions) still available for viewing and also available to be seen on the internet. These two versions were each signed by Maori chiefs and Governor Hobson. Governor Hobson also sent copies of these two versions to his superior, Governor Gipps, in Sydney as official versions of the Treaty. It seems clear that the Littlewood version is the closest English translation of the Maori version but that does not change the fact that Governor Hobson produced two official versions and they are in the National Archives. Tuhoe got $170 million because that was a measure of what the Government unfairly took off them. The Waitangi Tribunal Act allows any Maori group to claim against injustice by the Government whether they signed the Treaty or not. It would be ridiculous for the Government to say that injustice against Maori who did not sign the Treaty is alright.

No Maori King supporters at Kohimarama

Posted on 07-04-2013 22:36 | 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.

Posted on 09-04-2013 16:12 | By [email protected]

there is only one treaty and that is in Maori which gave Maori the same rights as anyone else.the treaty was put together because Maori wanted protection from the warring Maori. The final English draft that was translated into Maori is not the draft that has been used but a rejected draft, that is were the problem is as it was put in place by Geoffrey Palmer> Maori know this, if the true English draft was used them there would not be any Treaty Claims. Ian Brougham Wanganui

@ ParoaPete

Posted on 09-04-2013 20:25 | By Major Think

So if Tuhoe got $170 million "because that was a measure of what the Government unfairly took off them", when will maori be compensating the Moriori? When will the descendants of European settlers be compensated by maori for atrocities committed by maori? If Tuhoe never signed, they are not entitled to anything. Once again the very biased Waitangi Tribunal have muddied the water with bizarre rulings that favour the grievance industry.

international treaty law

Posted on 10-04-2013 13:10 | By Captain Sensible

There is only one treaty...the maori version. If there was more than one, in differing languages, international treaty law states the one written in the native language ( maori are not native but for this, that does not matter) is the only one that counts. You can not have your cake and eat it.

The original English Treaty is official

Posted on 10-04-2013 15:06 | By Peter Dey

The statement by Ian Brougham that there is only one Treaty and it is the Maori one does not make sense because Governor Hobson produced an official English version which still survives and is in the National Archives in Wellington. Anti-Maori protesters want the Maori Treaty to be the only one but they are deluding themselves. Major Think is confused about Moriori. The only Moriori are from the Chatham Islands and they have been compensated. Atrocities committed against Pakeha by Maori after 1840 have been dealt with by the law. That was what the Treaty introduced. Major Think may believe that Tuhoe do not deserve fairness because they did not sign the Treaty but the majority of New Zealanders do not agree with him. They believe that everyone deserves fair treatment by the Government.

International treaties in two languages

Posted on 10-04-2013 20:22 | By Peter Dey

Captain Sensible is spreading some widely believed but false information. Article 33 of the Vienna convention on the Law of Treaties states that 'When a treaty has been authenticated in two or more languages, the text is equally authoritative in each language.” So the English and Maori versions of the Treaty of Waitangi are equally authoritative. When Captain Sensible writes that the native language (Maori) version is the only one that counts he is passing on false information which is what many anti-Maori protesters do. They are told something by another anti-Maori protester and they just pass it on without knowing that it has come from a non-credible source.

$40 billion

Posted on 10-04-2013 21:37 | By The Big Tomatosaurus

There is only one version of the treaty - the one that nearly all the chiefs signed. The drafts Paroapete speaks of have fraudulent Hobson signatures because they were drafts. The english drafts have only been "authenticated" by griever maori for the sake of more claims. There is sufficient evidence to suggest it is a draft but the loaded biased Waitangi Tribunal have decided what they want to believe and nobody is allowed to question it. The Littlewoods is the the english version of the maori treaty. Why is the truth so abhorrent to maori? Because it will end their handout industry that depends on lies and rewritten false versions of history. Maori have taken nearly $40 billion from the taxpayers of NZ and still want more!

maori king copied from english system

Posted on 11-04-2013 07:24 | By Captain Sensible

Actually ParoaPete, a treaty can only be between states, so technically the treaty of waitangi is not a treaty. Any half decent lawyer with a backbone and not too worried about getting a handout can tell you that. Maori at that time were just tribes of warring cannibals and could never be described as a unified state...unless you read the new reinvented history of NZ where maori were all peacefully living together in villages etc. The ToW is only a guarantee that maori have the same rights as British subjects and protected them from each other. As for your theory on the maori king movement which was adopted by very few tribes to copy the english system, tell us how many tribes went with the maori king and then tell us how many did not.

Electromagnetic

Posted on 11-04-2013 11:26 | By Papamoaner

Daylight is actually electromagnetic, so if the maoris are switched on, and own it, they must have the ability to switch it off and keep us all in the dark, so why haven't they done it?

Opinion is not fact

Posted on 11-04-2013 22:16 | By Peter Dey

Alys is quite right that more than $30 billion of land was taken from Maori so $30 million is just a pittance. Big Tomatosaurus is completely wrong that Maori have received $40 billion. Figures from the Office of Treaty Settlements show that Treaty settlements so far have reached only about $1.5 billion, and that has taken twenty years. Big Tomatosaurus is writing nonsense when he writes that Hobson's signature on the English versions of the Treaty is a fake. National Archives will confirm that there were many copies of the English version sent out with the Maori versions in 1840, all with Hobson's genuine signature. They were not drafts. They were Hobson's chosen official English version. It is Big Tomatosaurus who is denying the truth. Captain Sensible is getting wound up splitting hairs. Ian Wishart is an unreliable source of information because he completely ignored the fact that only Government supporters went to the Kohimarama conference in 1860. The Waitangi Tribunal has not said that the electromagnetic spectrum is a taonga. The Government, to be fair to Maori, simply offered Maori $30 million instead of an additional share of the spectrum.

ParoaPete

Posted on 12-04-2013 07:23 | By Major Think

PararoaPete, of course they were drafts!! There is only one version and its the maori version. This was translated into English aka the "littlewoods treaty", only recently found and annoying for the grievance industry so it's never mentioned. The wording in the drafts suits maori claims so they claim its the real treaty, yet the maori version is different. Go figure! Experts have estimated $38 million in cash and land been given to maori. A lot of the land was actually sold by maori but now want it back. Like that cloak they gave to the Chinese in the 1950s, they want to borrow it back and Sharples wants to keep it. All those tatooed heads sold in the 1800s now the maori want back again. Carvings sold or given away they want back as well. Even a delegation of maori went to Asia to rescue a kumera. Usually a plane load of maori travel the world at taxpayers expense sifting through museums for some "sacred" whatever ( that they flicked off for a profit a hundred years ago). How do I know that? I was on a plane once with a party of maori travelling to Europe to get some 'sacred' artifact and several told me how they had the dream job. Just another taxpayer funded rort.

@ Major Think; Typo

Posted on 12-04-2013 11:18 | By The Big Tomatosaurus

You mean $38 billion, not $38 million I presume? Typo? But I get what you are saying.

Missed the point

Posted on 15-04-2013 21:03 | By Ian Wishart

ParaoaPete wrote of me: "Ian Wishart is an unreliable source of information because he completely ignored the fact that only Government supporters went to the Kohimarama conference in 1860." Newsflash. Pete missed the point that my usage of Kohimarama was aimed at correcting the myth that Maori did not understand sovereignty had been ceded at Waitangi. The Kohimarama hui notes, painstakingly recorded by Maori scribes and handed to each speaker for correction before publication (Hansard style) make it extremely clear that Maori in 1860, including those who signed at Waitangi in 1840, knew full well what they were doing and what sovereignty meant. In The Great Divide I also cover the views of the rebels extensively, so Pete is barking up the wrong tree.

That quaint poem

Posted on 16-04-2013 08:37 | By Papamoaner

Read Banjo Patterson's early poem "The Maori's Wool" It's a gem, and explains it all.

Point not missed but disputed

Posted on 16-04-2013 14:19 | By Peter Dey

Ian Wishart's interpretation of the Kohimarama Conference is debatable. The Conference was asked to condemn the King movement but refused to do so. The Conference simply declared 'recognition of the Queen's sovereignty”. It did not declare that the Queen's sovereignty over-ruled tino rangatiratanga. Individual speakers may have but the Conference did not. Ian Wishart is unreliable in his comments on pre-Maori settlement in New Zealand. Ian completely ignores the 2011 radiocarbon evidence of Janet Wilmshurst which makes the first chapter of his book out of date and irrelevant. Ian Wishart is also unreliable in his comments on the ‘official' English version of the Treaty of Waitangi. He completely ignores the fact that Governor Hobson sent a copy of this to Governor Gipps in Sydney on February 6 1840, thus making it an official version of the Treaty. Peter Dey.