2 Letters‎ > ‎Unpublished letters‎ > ‎

Unpublished Letters 2018

Dear Editor, (Sent to The Press 31/12/18) 
The difference between the end of the Stone Age amongst our European forebears and Maoris which Katherine Gillard (Press, 31/12/18) should appreciate is that in our case it ceased around 4500 years ago - varying somewhat from place to place - and for the latter a mere 200 years ago. In the Maori case, it was entirely due to the efforts of Europeans and they would have remained in a state of Stone Age isolation had enterprising Europeans not found these islands not long beforehand. Pretending that there is any real association between a library and anything from Maori culture is fatuous nonsense.

Again, the benevolent Santa Claus in his jolly red robe is a feature of European culture which has spread around the world and for Gillard to suggest the artificiality "Mere Kirihimere" instead of "Merry Christmas" is to contrive yet more irrelevant nonsense.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 13/12/18) 
Re Front page of the Chronicle Tuesday Dec 13th “Mayor slams leaker of treaty document”, is it because he doesn’t want the people of Wanganui to know the truth.

The sale of old Wanganui by May 24th 1848 nearly eight years of waiting, arrangements were so far completed between Mr McLean and the natives that a draft deed was drawn up relating to the absolute sale of the district.

All though our canoe is large and has many in it yet all are of the same mind.

Let no one attempt to infringe upon the lands now about to be sold to the Europeans.

The land is now married to the white man; let them take it, and let the natives remember; if they now intrude it will be a breach of the Seventh Commandment.

Pg 320: The block sold contained 80,000 acres for which the magnificent sum of 1000 pounds was paid.

Listen all people who see or know of this paper giving up or parting with land. Now, we, the people of “Wanganui,: of Wangaehu,” of “Kai iwi,” consent on behalf of ourselves, our relatives, children, and all who may be descended of us or succeed us, to entirely give up all our lands within the boundaries hereinafter written,

Maori never owned the land as they took it off the ancient people who were here before them. This new land claim should not proceed.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Sunday Star-Times 12/12/18) 
In her article pertaining to the Treaty of Waitangi, History teacher Clementine Fraser makes many interesting observations which are ably answered by Alan Richards.

One point that I would take up with her is: What if Maori weren’t the first people in New Zealand?

Firstly – all credible evidence points to the fact that they were...” Where does she get her “credible evidence” from, that august body, the Waitangi Tribunal?

Has she heard of the Jesus watch, the glyphs on rocks at Raglan, the cave drawings in Canterbury and Otago?

Has she heard about the leader of the Patupaiarehe people, who were here 1000 years before Maori, who stood to address the Waitangi Tribunal and was told to shut up and sit down because she was extinct? Possibily not!

“I believe everyone in New Zealand should know about, and engage in discussion around, the Treaty. It’s interesting, it’s necessary, it’s ours,” Clementine states. I agree. Let us have a television debate!
KEVAN G. MARKS, Kaipara.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Christchurch Press 10/12/18) 
Professor Angus McFarlane of the University of Canterbury relates that “Educators are calling for the Treaty of Waitangi to be taught accurately and in depth in schools, but lack of teaching material and underlying resistance is getting in the way”.

I agree! There are some 4000 sights throughout the country which could reveal material of interest to our pre-Maori history, according to an English archaeologist.

He further states that “If you are passionate about being a New Zealander, you must be passionate about the Treaty of Waitangi”.

Well, to a degree. What we should be passionate about is celebrating Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter/Letters Patent on November 16, 1840, separating New Zealand from the New South Wales Government and a Constitution to form a Government to make and enforce laws and which have been completely ignored by successive Governments and academics!
KEVAN G. MARKS, Kaipara.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Nelson Mail 9/12/18) 
In a talk about Maori studies, Social Studies teacher Mary Greenland, of Nelson, states that: “students do not have a great deal of in depth knowledge, a lot of it is quite superficial. Another barrier to teaching about the treaty is that the students were often not very enthused.”

Perhaps they are aware that there were people here before Maori, and should be part of the school curriculum.

A leader of the Patupaiarehe people, who were here 1000 years before Maori, was addressing the Waitangi Tribunal recently and was told to shut up and sit down because she was extinct.

What gross effrontery! Forbidden History, a book by John Dudley Aldworth, should be part of the history which is taught at schools!
KEVAN G. MARKS, Kaipara.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Mangawhai Focus 9/12/18) 
Professor Angus McFarlane of the University of Canterbury relates that “Educators are calling for the Treaty of Waitangi to be taught accurately and in depth in schools, but lack of teaching material and underlying resistance is getting in the way.” I agree, but not for the same reason. He further states that “If you are passionate about being a New Zealander, you must be passionate about the Treaty of Waitangi.”

Well, to a degree. What we should be passionate about is celebrating Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter/Letters Patent on November 16, 1840, separating New Zealand from the New South Wales Government and a Constitution to form a Government to make and enforce laws, and which has been completely ignored by Government and academics!

I am informed by an English archaeologist that there some 4000 sights that he would like to come back and dig about in, many of which may prove that there were people here before the people we now collectively know as Maori. Many Maori themselves will tell you that.

Social Studies teacher Mary Greenland, of Nelson, agrees with Angus. “Many of them do not have a great deal of in depth knowledge, a lot of it is quite superficial,” she says. “Another barrier to teaching about the treaty is that the students were often not very enthused,” she continues.

Perhaps they are not stupid! Maybe they are aware that there is more to our history than “meets the eye”.

History teacher Clementine Frazer states that “everyone in New Zealand should know about, and engage in discussion around, the treaty, it’s interesting, it’s necessary, it’s ours”. There again, I agree!

She makes some good points, but Alan Richards replies admirably to each of her many statements in Kiwi Frontline. It makes excellent reading.

In her 12 years teaching the history of the treaty, has she taught them about the Jesus watch, the glyphs in stones at Raglan, the cave drawings in South Canterbury and Otago?

Has she taught her pupils about the 60,000 plus human skeletons that Northern Maori took to Robinsons Mill in Auckland to be ground up for fertiliser and paid 3 pence for each bag of bones brought to them?

What happened to the Patupaiarehe (Ngati Hotu) people who were here about 1000 years before Maori arrived, and some 3000 of them still walk among us today, and the Waitaha people who followed them some 300 years later?

Has she taught them about a leader of the Patupaiarehe who, when she got up to address the Waitangi Tribunal, was told to shut up and sit down because she was extinct?

These are just a few of many questions that come to mind. I agree that we should know more about the treaty, how it saved Maori from cannibalism, slavery, and gave them the greatest gift of the time, i.e. British Citizenship!

How about a debate to be set up on one of our TV stations to answer these, and many other questions?

Let us have a nationwide discussion. Surely we can find people who will be able to give us a lively discussion as well and would be interesting to many people.

There are some 80/90 books written about the history of the nation, as well as articles and artifacts held in museums and libraries. One of the latest books is Forbidden History, by John Dudley Aldworth. This book should be read by every school child.

Dear Editor, (Sent to various papers, date unknown) 
Re article by Jacob McSweeny Saturday 17th Wanganui Chronicle “What iwi want” a leaked document reveals what will be on the table ahead of Wanganui treaty Land claims. What people haven’t been told is the chiefs of Wanganui sold the land.

In a copy of translation deed of purchase for Wanganui tells you that Maori sold the land to the Europeans. Maori never owned land they occupied it until other Maori invaded and took it off them.

Maori originals took the land off the earlier inhabitants, the Ngatu Hotu (Celts), Patupairehe and Waitaha. They were the pre-Maori who lived in peace with one another hundreds of years before the people called Maori arrived here.

The Treaty of Waitangi had nothing to do with land claims but to bring law and order to the country.

Governments over the years have allowed many of the descendants of the tangata Maori to twist the truth about the true history of new Zealand, until Governments it’s historians the universities and Te Papa is no more than propaganda to allow today’s part maori to be paid compensation or given valuable assets by governments they do not deserve or are entitled when the truth is known. It’s all for the people of New Zealand.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Waikato Times 28/10/18) 
Interesting opinion by Tom O’Connor (27/10/18), however I wonder if he is aware that these chiefs that he says “would have expelled the Brits 20 years prior to 1840” actually co-signed a letter written to King William IV in 1831 begging for British protection from the French and fellow marauding tribes?

After 1840 many laws were passed with good intention to benefit maori, sadly some commentators today twist these to put them in bad light, had these laws not been passed the same detractors would now be beating the Waitangi Tribunal door down complaining that Maori had not been looked after – Government damned if it did and damned if it didn’t.

Only 2.31% of New Zealands total land mass remained legally confiscated after 1928 (Sims Report). The confiscations were the consequence of rebel tribes taking up arms (a treaty breach) against the settler government and Queen.

I understand that there are no full blooded NZ maori today which proves Hobson correct ‘we are one people’, or should be?

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Northland Age and Mangawai Focus 22/10/18) 
Is the Western World in a state of collapse one may ask? Our news media seems intent on giving us little, if any, good news whatsover about the United States, as President Donald Trump receives bouquets of stones rather than roses for all his efforts to “make the United States great again”. Is he on his way to achieving it? Our news media doesn’t give us much news about that.

Australian parliamentarians still treat each other like sheep stealers but are now sending immigrants who commit crimes back to their countries of birth, which is rather ironic. It wasn’t that long ago that one had to be a criminal to get there.

The European Union seems to be one utter shambles. A young Islamic woman was slain in Germany recently by her father and brothers to bring honour back to the family because she was raped by three men. Will Britain be the only country to leave the European Union? There is much angst from other countries but there is not a word about it from our media ghouls.

Global warming may well become a Maunder Minimum (mini ice age), but again, little, if anything, from the media. It seems that scientists and the media are still out on that one.

Winston Churchill once said: “A fervent minority will replace the complacent majority”. A line attributed to Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States, stated: “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”. How right their words were, and are just as true today. The best way to stop a disease is to nip it in the bud, not after it takes hold.

We take pride in the fact that we live in one of the more freer countries in the world, but that freedom is under threat, and I call upon our parliamentarians to stop the threat forthwith, even though it started from them! It comes in the form of the Waitangi Tribunal, the Maori elite, the racist Maori seats in parliament and to some extent the Race Relations Commission, not to mention the “principles” and “partnership” of the Treaty of Waitangi.

What principles and partnership? What are they? Nobody seems to know! Is it a figment of sombody’s imagination? These incideous groups are chewing at the very fabric of our society, and must be stopped. Their demands include ownership of fresh water, the coast around the country, and now street names in bolder type than the English names in certain towns and cities, insisting that Maori language be taught in schools, among other demands, which are added to almost daily, not to mention the millions of dollars that they have ferreted away from the taxpayers of this country. What for? Ask these Maori elitists what happened to the original inhabitants of “Aotearoa New Zealand”! What happened to them, and how many of them are left now? There are no prizes for guessing. Let’s hear their story.

We should be thankful that most Maori people are peaceful and “we are now one people”, as Governor William Hobson stated in 1840.

Prepare for the worst. You won’t be disappointed.
KEVAN G. MARKS, Kaipara.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Herald 24/10/18)
Some people were shocked that the National Party has racial preferences in their MP line-up. Their reaction shows how out-of-touch they are.

All of our political parties have race policies.

All of our legislation now includes racial bias.

Every public organisation is seeking ‘diversity’ and giving Maori levels of privilege – check out our councils and hospitals.

Every private organisation is obliged to show how they are doing the same if they want to win business from the public sector.

What – we fought against apartheid? That was so yesterday!

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Waikato Times 22/10/18) 
If Tom O’Connor (Waikato Times 20/10/18) thinks some Maori (he hasn’t defined which ones) own water because their ancestors might have offer some to early visitors to these shores, then he should think a little more deeply. Tribes also offered food and women. So do “select Maori” own all food and women in this country too?

As that pre-eminent historian Michael Bassett has said, “What the Treaty doesn’t say, they (Maori elite) make up, and the liberal intelligentsia are “yes, yes, rah, rah”. (https://tinyurl.com/ycemr2nn)

In the 21st century, we are supposed to live in a democratic country in which the government rules for the benefit of all the people – with no discrimination for race, gender or religion.

The government should judiciously allocate water rights subject to need and demand, with any returns benefiting all New Zealanders, not a select, self-appointed, greedy few.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Herald 13/10/18) 
You report alleging racial basis against prem babies in our hospitals doesn’t seem likely. Having spent much time of late visiting unwell relatives, I was amazed at the multicultural variety of our medical teams. Despite our hectic and overloaded infrastructure, these skilled and competent people performed amazingly well under very trying conditions. There was no evidence of racism to be seen. Perhaps instead the answer lies in those wanting any excuse to indoctrinate health staff with a particular political bias?

Dear Editor, (Sent to The Press 16/10/18) 

I know that I am pale, male and stale, as ridiculed by at least one female MP, but it does seem to me that decorating the Christchurch City Library with a swarm of Maori labels is nothing but the nonsense of wet-eared liberals and earnest do-gooders.

They must be blithely ignorant of the fact that Maoris had no written language, no books, no libraries and so no words for any of these.

Hence we have now the artificial word “puka’ for “books” while in my day as a resident of Diamond Harbour, the branch library there was labelled “kete wananga”, its derivation being, I suppose, “wisdom basket”. Cute, eh? But just so juvenile!

Letter to the editor (Sent to the Tauranga Sun 10/9/18) 
In response to letters from Parish,Dey and Jacombs and to substantiate what R Paterson is suggesting re the Maori language. You have to realise that back in 1840 there were no such people as the Maori Race, they were all separate tribes that came from Taiwan, India and the South Pacific that's why they were always fighting each other along with other dreadful things. therefore they all had different dialects and then it was the English Colonials that created a written language for them when the treaty was signed in 1840 still as the United Tribes. It wasn't til around 1860-70 that somehow they evolved to become the Maori race. Maori were not indigenous!

So, why should we 85 percent of the population have it forced on us to have Te Reo language made compulsory as suggested? By all means have it as an option, for those who wish to learn. The people are tiring of this language obsession, that every library has a Maori label ,no English at all, place names being changed to Maori. What a headache to Tourists never mind the locals! All to appease a minority.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 8/9/18) 
To get the full understanding of the treaty David James (letters 7/9/18) and fellow treaty twisters need to look at the total Maori language text (that over 500 chiefs signed) to see what is said elsewhere in the Treaty of Waitangi, rather than making stuff up.

The preamble shows references to both Maori (already here), and Settlers (here and arriving). Also clearly states for the protection of settlers as well as the natives.

Article One, the chiefs (Maori) cede sovereignty.

Article Two, property rights for Chiefs and tribes (Maori), and ALL the people of New Zealand (settlers and others)

Article Three, for the cession of their (Maori) Sovereignty they shall be protected by the Queen and have the rights and privileges of British subjects (settlers were already subjects there was no need to mention them here).

James harps on about ‘New Zealanders’, the term not even mentioned in the Treaty or Bruce Moon’s letter (27/8/18), he has convinced nobody.

Dear Editor (Sent to the Northern Advocate 7/9/18) 
Thomas Lauterbach’s besottedness with the Maori language (letters 8th August) is not shared by over 75% of Kiwis as various public polls regularly show. And the ‘Maori race’ numbers are only propped up by the controversial statutory definition in the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974.

Apart from State Schools prohibiting Maori language being spoken in schools (1860s), at the request of the astute Maori elders, there has never been any law preventing Maori from maintaining or speaking their language and of course this should be encouraged.

It seems, Maori like the cuckoo bird are depositing their language in everyone else’s nest in the hope that it will survive, as they seemingly have not the interest nor the will to nurture it themselves. The catalyst currently is people are being forced to learn Maori if they want a job, retain their job or get a promotion and that is unacceptable compulsion.

Lauterbach also seems unaware of the ceaseless government promotion and the tens of millions of dollars pumped into Maori language every year by the Kiwi taxpayer, money that would be far better spent on health, housing and beneficial education for all Kiwis.

While the Maori language and culture may be treasured by those few who value it, to others who do not it means very little.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 6/9/18) 
Jock Lee (Wanganui Chronicle 6/9/18) doesn’t appear to know he is using a fabricated version of Te Tiriti to espouse his personal ideology in criticising Don Brash. 
He is using the re-translation done by Sir Hugh Kawharu and promoted by the Waitangi Tribunal.

This was not the treaty signed by chiefs in 1840 that was drafted in English and translated into Maori with the word “rangatiratanga” in article 2 translating the word “possession”.

Article 2 confirmed and guaranteed “to the chiefs and the tribes and to all the people of New Zealand, the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property”.

Mr Lee is following a re-definition of “possession” as “chiefly authority” arrived at by Kawharu who translated “rangatiratanga” from Maori according to what he in the 1980s thought the chiefs might have understood in 1840.

Kawharu ignored missionary William Colenso’s eyewitness account in which it was quite clear that chiefs understood and many did not like the prospect of ceding sovereignty.

If truth is an “essential precursor to reconciliation” then we should at least pay attention to a truthful understanding of the words of the treaty.

Mr Lee may not have realised that treaty twisting has got us into a divided mess.

Dear Editor, (Short & Sweet section) (Sent to the NZ Herald 6/9/18) 
Re John Tamihere’s ‘Deep respect in Kingitanga movement’ - this movement, which threatened to attack Auckland in the 1860s, was a rejection of European rule, and ultimately of European influence which was in contrast to the unity in the Treaty of Waitangi. In short – a treaty breach.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 30/8/18) 
Does Rhodes scholar Ross Lee (Letters 27/8/18) really expect us to believe that Hobson and Busby were so inept as to draft a treaty where the Maoris clearly ceded sovereignty in Article 1 (read Colenso’s record) and then a contradiction in Article 2 in saying they somehow retained their sovereignty?

Whatever the meaning of “tino rangatiratanga” in Article 2 it means nothing remotely like sovereignty.

The only tenable meaning is “full possession”. Moreover it was assured to ALL the people of NZ.

Further, it appears Lee does not know that the chiefs wrote to King William IV asking for protection and that letter clearly showed that the chiefs concerns were not so much the lawless few Pakeha at Kororeka, it was mainly the French (Marian) and the fear of utu from fellow now armed tribes.

In closing I challenge Mr Lee to point to the clause/s or word/s that he believes even infer a Crown/Maori ‘partnership’ in the true Maori language treaty which approx 500 chiefs signed.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Northland Age) 
Re article in Herald on Sunday 13th August. “It is time to blow the whistle on the Haka”. Lets look at the Haka and where it came from, Although Te Rauparaha wrote the words to it, it is a bastardise version of the “Dance of Bes” of Egypt.

Bes was a bow legged dwarf with red hair who used to perform a dance for the women and children and their home as there protector. Been a dwarf he would stand in a squatting stance bow legged just like what the All Backs and others do. He holds a rod in one hand and he moves about, this was a spiritual dance to do a blessing and keep any evil spirits away.

It was also performed over new born babies, and over planted crops to help glow and bear food for its people. This was done in a positive way. The ancient people of New Zealand lived this way in love and peace before the maori arrived not a negative way done by the All Blacks poking out their tongues and slitting the throat.

This Haka is now taught in school it will bring about hatred in the children to act in an aggressive way. It about time the Haka is stopped as it has been overdone.

Dear Editor (Sent to the Dominion Post 19/8/8) 
Its a funny old world where someone can be called a racist for advocating for democracy, equally of citizenship and supporting free speech.

Philip Mathews in his editorial claims that Don Brash's comments on the intellect of Jews is based on pseudo-science. An internet search would have shown him that there is plenty of recent research to support Brash's comment.

The Ashkenazim (a distinct Jewish race) average IQ, rates 15 points higher than average European/Caucasian IQ. Perhaps a read of, for example, J P Rushton and A R Jensen 2005 “Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability”, may give him some food for thought.https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

Mathews is right that this is an area of research that causes unease but to brand it as “pseudo-science” because you, or, you believe others are offended by it, is elevate sensitivity over truth.

We need to be country where we celebrate our differences, where our diversity enriches us, where ethnicity matters but does not bestow privilege, where all all citizens are united equality under the law. If we continue down the path of separatism and don't unite as New Zealanders we will fail as country.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Press 19/8/18) 
As an example of hate speech, your editorial by Philip Matthews on Don Brash (18/8/18) would be hard to beat. Neither Brash nor the Free Speech Coalition backed Southern and Molyneux as he claims. They did back their right to speak which is a very different thing.

His statements about Jews were simple facts but apparently our supposed right to free speech does not allow us to suggest that some cultures are actually superior to others. "Moral relativism" rules OK?

And at Orewa, what Brash actually said was “The Treaty of Waitangi should not be used as the basis for giving greater civil, political or democratic rights to anyparticular ethnic group.” [His emphasis]. If Matthews disagrees, perhaps he should explain why.

Dear Editor, (Sent to The Press 15/8/18) 
I fully concur with Fiona Elworthy that we must talk about our history and that the purpose of remembering should not be to sow division and disharmony but to bind us together as a nation that can openly and honestly confront its past. Unfortunately, in my opinion, Dr Vincent O’Malley is one of the foremost protagonists in doing precisely the opposite.

The dedication in his recent book The Great War for New Zealand which states “In memory of the victims of the Waikato War and those who founded and fought to defend the Kingitanga”, shows his partiality. Moreover, the contrast between what he says in interviews and book advertorials and what is published in his book speaks to an agenda quite different from what might be expected of a professional historian.

Again, I agree with Fiona Elworthy that it is important to learn the history of both sides to these conflicts - with the emphasis on both. That history needs to be assessed in the context of the times and with sensitivity to the fact that these are not stories from far flung lands but are our stories of our ancestors and our extended families.
CHRIS LEE, Tauranga

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Weekend Sun/Sunlive 14/8/18) 
NewZealanders that assert a maori race as such doesn’t exist are quite correct as it meets no universal definition of race only being propped up by the controversial statutory (a legal fiction) definition in MaoriAffairsAmendmentAct 1974. Kiwis that affiliate to the maori label invariably have considerably more other ancestry than maori .

Treatyists besottedness with the maori language is not voluntarily shared by over 75% of Kiwis who don’t particularly treasure maori as various public polls regularly show.

Apart from State Schools (at request of Maori leaders) prohibiting maori language being spoken in schools, for a short time early last century, there has never been any law preventing maori from maintaining or speaking their language which is encouraged.

It seems, however maori like the cuckoo bird are depositing their modern fabricated language (bearing little resemblance to original maori language) in everyone else’s nest in the misguided hope that it might survive. The catalyst currently is that Kiwis are being forced to learn maori if they want a job or retain their job/get promotion and that is unacceptable COMPULSION.

Kiwi taxpayers, bankroll the maori language excesses annually - $millions that would be far better spent on health, housing and beneficial education for all Kiwis.

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 12/8/18 
Andrew Little will grow old attempting to get the Ngapuhi leaders to work together. They have 200 years history of squabbling over riches.

What puzzles me is just how “Statistics NZ” work out Iwi numbers to declare that Ngapuhi are the largest Maori group in the country.

There is only one Iwi question in the census and many Maori fill in multiple boxes.

Little also states that many (most?) Ngapuhi live out of their rohe and many also don’t know their Hapu.

I would suggest that if you don’t know who you are and where you come from then your grievance is imagined rather than real.

Dear Editor, (Sent to The Press 8/8/18) 
You report (August 6, page 9) the publication of a book for schools which is allegedly a “New Translation for Treaty”, “two years in the making” which “unpack[s] the two versions”.

There is only one Treaty of Waitangi in the Ngapuhi dialect, a straightforward translation from Hobson’s final draft in English. It says simply in essence that the chiefs agreed to cede sovereignty to the Queen completely and for ever and that all Maoris would get the full rights of the people of England, their many slaves included. Thus it is apparent that for two years less five minutes, the authors were wasting their time and the taxpayer’s money. Moreover, the so-called “treaty in English” is a fake composed by Hobson’s snobbish secretary Freeman to send to dignitaries overseas and it is brainwashing of our children to present it to them in any other terms.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Northland Age and 4 other papers 27/6/18) 
Who are these people called Maori.

Are they the people that stole the land from the tangata whenua ( the original inhabitants) in the 14thcentury?

Are they the people that begged Britain to protect them in 1831?

Are they the people that were on the brink of becoming extinct because of their love of human flesh?

Are they the people that Britain gave the same rights as the people of England without lifting a finger in 1840?

Are they the people called tangata Maori in the Tiriti o Waitangi, not tangata whenua?

Are they the people that have intermarried of their own free will with people from other lands until today they are only Maori in legislation?

And finally, are they the people that government believe are a special group that should have a say in how our country is run when their ancestors couldn’t run it in 1831 and asked for Britain’s help?

Dear Editor, (Sent to various papers 16/7/18) 
From an Ancient chart of “Peoples of the Earth” going from Noah’s blood line to Japheth them to Magog father of all the Asiatic peoples the people called maori were Caucasian people.

From an old history book “Who are the maori” Maoris are dominantly Caucasian Aryan-Mongolic.

Asia was the original home of the maori.

Maori are not pure-bred race is evident to all who have seen them, the chiefs are usually distinctly Caucasian. Every now and then appear among the descendants of slaves persons who are clearly of Melanesian or Papuan descent, All facts that maori are off spring of Caucasian Aryans.

Among Tuhoe tribe appear a number of Maoris with red hair, blue eyes, lighter complexions and Aryan noses. these fair people are called urukehu, some of their women are more English looking than the ordinary maori.

A very noticeable fact among the Maoris is that so many children have reddish or rusty hair which afterwards turns dark-showing of course that some of their ancestors far back must have been a red –haired race.

Some Maoris colour of skin mistaken for Europeans, because of their features, and their eyes.

The daughters of some maori chiefs are not darker than Spanish women, showing a high –class ancestry which is clearly Caucasian.

The legends of the maori shows that they originally sprang from a white race the word maori means descendants of Ma. In maori ma means white, pale.

Many people think Maoris grew up in the Pacific Islands No race of men grew up spontaneously in islands. The human race began in a continent and thence spread to smaller islands.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Nelson Mail 15/6/18) 
In a referendum in the recent past, 79% of Nelson electors who voted said "No" to tribal representation on the City Council. In a blatantly racist move and in denial of democracy and the clearly expressed position of Nelson citizens, the forthcoming Council agenda include the following:

"Agenda item 12 for the Nelson City Council meeting on Thursday 21 June.

Approves subject to equivalent approval by Tasman District Council, ... to provide that iwi representatives be remunerated in accordance with the joint policy for the remuneration of independent persons appointed to joint committees and business units; and ...

Approves subject to equivalent approval by Tasman District Council, that the remuneration for iwi representatives be set at $8000 per annum for the first term of appointment".

Dear Ed, (‘Sent to the NZ Herald 30/5/18) 
This question was asked by your correspondence Ray Gilbert (letters 30/5)

The surest road to poverty is uncontrolled breeding and it is hard to understand in an age where proven, safe, reversible contraception is available to both sexes. The most logical would seem to be long term implants.

The real answer of course is that the Maori hierarchy actually encourages excessive breeding and our social welfare organisations do nothing to discourage such practices.

One would have thought that a responsible welfare system would encourage their young clients to take advantage of what is available.

Paying a mother with a brood of more than two to have an implant would surely be more cost effective than watching her go on to have six, seven or more children.

Who don’t they proffer such advice? Maybe it is patch protection?

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 26/5/180 
It’s a topsy-turvey world. Those wanting equality without racial discrimination are labelled right wing by Lizzie Marvelly (26/5/18). Meanwhile, she holds up apartheid-politics as something to aspire to. Tell that to all the brave souls who campaigned against South Africa’s legal racism or fought the Nazis in WWII.

The emperor is certainly wearing no clothes when she describes her own ethnicity as Maori – despite her dominant ethnicity, her upbringing, her life. But she’s in the process of converting, so that’s OK. Ethnicity is a choice in New Zealand, just as religion is. But please, Lizzie, don’t suggest that it’s OK to rewrite our laws and political structure to suit such personal preferences.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Northland Age 6/5/18) 
Shortage of Kumara workers.

Growers report this is the worst season ever for getting workers to harvest the crop.

There are about 100000 16 to 24 year olds in New Zealand who have nothing to do. They are not in work, education or training.

My guess is the Kumara growing area of Northland has more than its fair share of such people.

While some will have genuine reasons for choosing to lie in each morning I suspect that many just have no inclination to work.

How do they survive? Crime, cash jobs and benefits may be part of the story but I suggest we need to take a very hard look at the generosity of our welfare system. Unless we do soon the situation is only going to get worse.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the New Zealand Herald 4/5/18) 
Labour has a bill drawn from the ballot to entrench Maori electoral seats. When NZ moved to MMP, the political architects recommended these seats be scrapped as they would be totally unnecessary under the new system. Even under first-past-the-post they were redundant since all Maori men got the vote back in 1867 – well before non-landowning men got it in 1879 and way before women in 1893.

The number of MPs with Maori blood in our Parliament today actively demonstrates how farcical this separatism is. Race-based seats are not needed and are only desired by those wanting to destroy our democracy.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Nelson Mail 4/5/18) 
What Gary Clover writes (“Mail”, 25/4/18) is most misleading. He omits saying that on Tuesday morning (24th) he telephoned me and after a brief exchange he called me a liar and slammed down the receiver. I await his explanation. To quote him: “I have academic qualifications to write of the Treaty”. His letter is neither informed nor academic. Nor are his weak secondary sources, Claudia Orange in particular. His inference that only persons with his academic qualifications may write of the Treaty is intellectual arrogance.

Referring to the Nelson Provincial Museum, its webpage opens thus:

“Creating unforgettable experiences that stimulate awareness, celebrate diversity, entertain, and excite action."

Implicit in this is that presentations will be professionally researched, accurate and relevant; the more so since that the Museum is funded from public money. Regrettably, the ‘Taranaki War’ exhibition was not accurate, appropriately researched nor relevant. The director at that time did not feel comfortable with being called out on it but he has assured me he played no part in the move to have my Nelson Institute talk cancelled. It is now up to Mr Clover to disclose the source of his allegations and those involved in the cancellation of my talk who are apparently known to him.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Daily Post Rotorua 27/4/18) 
All legislation may have the possibility of discriminating against or marginalising someone, however the statutes promulgated by past Govts, relating to Maori were always done in the best interests and for the benefit of Maori, usually on the initiative of maori leaders.

However latter day twisters like Wairangi Jones (Daily Post 25 April ) make sure any such legislation is categorised as damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Race-based legislation pandering to an unjustified sense of entitlement by maori interests is to the detriment of every other Kiwi.

One wonders why the 'shocking' negative `Maori' statistics are skyrocketing when Mr Jones claims, NZ society is slowly embracing the panacea of the Maori world view — could that perhaps be the problem in itself?

Strange how modem day part-maori allege they still feel the pain of colonisation (the current whipping. boy for all ills) which in reality brought so many undeniable benefits while inter-tribal warring killed off at least 10 times more fellow maori creating more hardship and displacements than colonisation ever did. Benefiting only the tribal strong there was of course never any Maori nation, simply a disparate group of warring tribes.

It is encouraging MrJones utilises his/our library (perhaps he means local or city libraries) as they are usually an excellent resource for those in need of facts and the truth, - may he find these soon, provided he doesn't suffer from tunnel vision.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Northland Age, Northern Advocate (20/4/18) & Mangawai Focus 23/4/18) 
There is much talk about calling our country Aotearoa New Zealand, and I wonder just when the name of New Zealand will slip off the end and disappear. I get the impression that certain TV newsreaders think that it is already a done deal.

It has been said that Aotearoa means “Land of the Long White Cloud,” and that was named by some pakeha, but I disagree. I think that it is a most appropriate name for our country at present because it should mean “Up in the Clouds” for two reasons: (1) That we dig into the past to show that there were people living here before Maori. I can understand the chagrin of the Maori elite, but facts are facts, and must be faced, and (2) when are we going to learn to live as one people? Up in the Clouds is where the country is at present.

Our country is being torn apart at the seams and our major political parties, Labour, National, and the Greens, must each take responsibility. All three are now past their use by date!

The Maori seats in Parliament, Maori Party, the Waitangi Tribunal and the one-eyed Race Relations Commission should be abolished! They are an anathema to a peaceful, prosperous, progressive nation.

My challenge to our political representatives, learned colleages of the judiciary, educationists, archaeologists and historians still stands: Sort out our true history, because this country is going nowhere until we do so! Let the truth be told.
KEVAN G. MARKS, Kaipara.

Dear Sir, (Sent to the Northland Age, date unknown) 
Peter Jackson’s editorial (Christians are Fare Game, Northland Age, April 24) is very much to the point.

Professional rugby player, Israel Folau, and his wife, Silver Fern player, Maria (nee Tutaia) were both vilified for saying that homosexuals will not get to Heaven. The media ghouls ran with the story like hyenas into carrion to such an extent that Israel has offered to resign from his rugby career.

Why should he? Brian Tamaki, of the Destiny Church, was castigated for saying much the same thing.

What a performance! Shakespeare would have had a field day, “Much Ado About Nothing”.

It was not that long ago that Prime Minister Rob Muldoon sallied into a homosexual MP to such an extent that he retired from Parliament.

Israel has made a statement that, no doubt, many Christian people will agree with. So What?

With homosexuality now legalised, perhaps the media ghouls, educationists, “learned colleagues” of the legal profession, and politicians who voted to legalise it, should band together to write it out of the Bible, so that there is no confusion. While you are at it, bring the whole book up to date so that we can go down the same road as ancient Rome!

What the media ghouls should be doing is to get their collective teeth into New Zealand’s pre-maori history.

.There are some 90 odd books about our history, which have been taken from bookshelves pertaining to our early history because the maori elite want it that way.

Why? It has been worth some 2 billion dollars to them so far and will be worth much more because they have yet to reach the end of their claims and will receive “top ups” for ever after, unless we, the tax-paying public, stop it, and soon.

There are some 4000 sites which could give enlightenment into the pre-maori past in this country. Some say that there is no evidence whatsoever of pre-maori residents here, but what about the Jesus watch, the ancient writings on rocks at Raglan, the stone buildings and walls in the north?

Then there is the dozen or so ancient oak trees which were cut down by the Department of Conservation because “they were not part of our history”. But that is exactly what they were! Each one was some six feet thick, meaning they were planted many hundreds of years ago. By whom? You can bet that it was not maori! A count of their annular rings would have yielded valuable information.
KAWENA HORI MAAKA (Kevan George Marks), Kaipara

Letters to Ed. (Sent to the NZ Herald 23/4/18) 
The Royal Society wants scientific researchers to consult with Maori.

I can see some positive gains here.

As I age walking up hill has become a problem. Maybe the Maori scientists could tinker with gravity a bit?

They could also intervene on the effect of wind on the sea. If the sea was less choppy maybe I could go fishing more often.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Herald 21/4/18)
Anne Salmond (Herald, 21/4/18) displays her ignorance of science, which transcends all cultures and nationalities.

Modern science just happened to be born in Western Europe.

Hitler and Stalin tried to establish “German” and “Soviet” science and both failed.

Chinese science was solely empirical and came to a dead end.

I myself have taught modern physics to Tibetans at the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics in Dharamsala, India because the Dalai Lama recognized that classic Tibetan culture was deficient in that respect, albeit offering profound insights on other aspects of being human.

No reputable scientist claims that any culture “has a monopoly on human wisdom” of which modern science is but one vital part. And “complementarity”, not Anne’s “complimentary” is not exclusive to quantum physics. The wave and particle properties of light provide another example.

Bohr’s “tai chi” symbol was neat but not science.

The Royal Society of New Zealand has lost its way; bogged down in the morass of political correctness.
BRUCE MOON Fellow, Institute of Physics (UK) Honorary Fellow, Information Technology Professionals (NZ), NELSON

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 20/4/18) 
Jeff Hayward (“Divisive Schools 20/4/18) claims charter schools are teaching religion or ideology. Whether that be true or not, it’s certainly not restricted to private schools. Our public system is full of religious ideology, but couched in PC terms that we must never question.

The new ‘Code of Professional Responsibility’ requires all teachers to encourage critical thinking, except not where it comes to “te ai Maori (Maori world view)”. They must “ learn, use and demonstrate respect for Maori beliefs, language, culture and customary protocols, histories, heritages.”

If a teacher’s educated world view leads her to classify taniwha as mythology, for example, she could be had up for “dismissing or belittling Maori cultural or spiritual beliefs, or making derogatory comments about te ai Maori”. Then the teacher would really be getting into Mao’s cultural revolutionary mode, having to “engage in critical inquiry to evaluate the effectiveness of her teaching”.

Combine this with prayers in te reo and it suggests a fairly devout religion to me.

Dear Editor (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 14/4/18) 
Potonga has got my Whakapapa wrong. I like he are Ngati Kiwi - a New Zealander borne and bred as were many of our ancestors. In fact if we follow are ancestry far enough back we will find common ancestors (unless of course the Bible or more modern DNA analysis is wrong).

So ‘cuz’ lets fight together to make New Zealand a place where we and our children all have jobs and 80% or so of the wealth of this country (and the world) is not held in the hands of an over privileged few.

Potonga knows, as well as I do, that there are Maori multimillionaires who have no intention of sharing their wealth with Iwi or hapu or anyone else. They are, like Potonga and myself, human and like us they need to do better.

Not only has Potonga got my whakapapa/ancestry wrong but the Irish were forced to disperse all around the world because of the destruction of the Commons . Which for those who don’t know was the land held and used in common by the ordinary people which is what will happen here if the 500 or so Iwi Coastal claims are allowed to proceed and radical Iwi get their way.

The 500 or so coastal claims which the Attorney General has described as ‘overlapping’ , illustrate that there was no ‘'Maori Nation”, just in my opinion, a feuding self seeking set of tribes who wanted what someone else had. The worst example of this being the Musket Wars where Tau (war bands) killed, raped and pillaged their way through most of New Zealand often using the slain as a source of food (or just eating the brains of those of high Mana) .

Unfortunately some of those involved were the ancestors of Potongas heros, but to be fair we all have feet of clay and if we go far enough in anyones ancestry we will all find a tribal past that involves similar nastyness.

As I said, and will keep saying, we are all human with a common whakapapa/ancestry and if we look ,can find ways to do better.

Also, in my opinion, Iwi and the rest of New Zealand are being deliberately divided to allow the rich and greedy to not only maintain control but to take as much of New Zealands land and wealth as they can and in many cases to sell it off to overseas interests.

Furthermore successive Governments are putting up millions of taxpayers dollars to support Iwi claims while forcing those who have counter claims, that show there has not been continual and exclusive use by Iwi,to use their own money to go to the High Court to oppose these taxpayer funded claims.

Finally we need to remember we have much to thank local Iwi for, one of the reasons being their defence of Wanganui (probably then Petre ?) by repelling the Hauhau who where coming down river to kill, eat and wipe out the settlement. We have a checkered past but working together is the only way forward.

Dear Editor (Sent to the Bay of Plenty Times 11/4/18) 
When giving lessons from your moral high ground it important to get you facts right, particular when you are trying to give lessons to the formidable Cr. Margaret Murray-Benge.

Avril Manley (BOP Times 11 April) in claiming that the Crown accepted the Waitangi Tribunal’s 2014 Report that sovereignty was not ceded is simply wrong. The Report has no legal status and is not binding on the Crown. The Crown have simply chosen to ignore it. Crown lawyer, at the time, Mr Irwin informed the Tribunal, "That simply is the situation under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, there is no requirement that the Crown responds to any Tribunal report."

In a brief statement, subsequently, in responding to the report, Attorney-General and Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson said: "There is no question that the Crown has sovereignty in New Zealand. This report doesn't change that fact."

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Otago Daily Times 9/4/18 
Here it is again !

This time it's Julie Anne Genter, Minister for Women ( why no Minister for men ? ), saying that old white men should "move on from company boards".

If Ms Genter had the faintest idea of what she and the rest of humanity owes to "old" ( and not so old ) "white men", then she and all others similarly indoctrinated would hold their tongues.

Certainly, men, old and young, have done more than their share of evil, but this is only because they have done more than their share of everything

As the unusually fair- minded feminist / lesbian Camille Paglia said : "If civilisation had been left to women we would still be living in grass huts".

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Wanganui Chronicle 20/3/18) 
Yet again (20/3/18) Potonga produces a deluded view of history with a false claim that Bob Jones and Don Brash write racist propaganda when they state that Maori were saved from self-annihilation by the arrival of Europeans in colonial times.

Chief Taipari of the Bay of Plenty said exactly the same thing while at the 1940 opening of the meeting house at Waitangi, statesman Sir Apirana Ngata, said “but for the sovereignty handed over to her majesty and her descendants I doubt that there would be a free Maori race in New Zealand today”.

More than 30,000 Maoris were killed and eaten by other Maoris in a few decades before 1840, about 1200 when the Waikato tribes captured the Te Ati Awa pa Pukerangiora in 1831 while more that 2000 met the same fate in 1821 when Ngapuhi captured Mauinaina pa at Tamaki.

There were less deaths in all the tribal rebellions of colonial times. Who were Potonga’s real savages? The answer is obvious.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Bay of Plenty Times and Rotorua Daily Post 20/3/18) 
Tommy Wilson may have great admiration for Vincent O'Malley and Jock Phillips ('Times', 19/3/18) but all three write fake history in claiming that a church full of women and children was burnt to the ground by troops at Rangiaowhia.

Let them identify the blackened bones of the supposed victims if they can.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the BoP Times 4/3/18) 
Simon Bridges to Corin Dann on Maori language, 4/3/18: “”I think we have an obligation, actually, under the Treaty of Waitangi fundamentally to make it available, to encourage it.” I am quite sure too that if we tried, we could find a politician to assert that we have an obligation, actually, under the Treaty of Waitangi fundamentally to provide every Maori with free toilet paper. After all, it is a “taonga” if ever there was one!

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Dominion Post 28/2/18)
Numerous polls have repeatedly shown that the majority of New Zealanders feel the same as Jo Murphy. She is calling for some commonsense regarding the wholesale promotion of te reo and making Wellington a bilingual city (Letters 28/2/18).

Wellington City Council is dictatorially foisting maorification on their residents. They arrogantly ask “how do we achieve this?” rather than asking the people whether they even want it!

Landowners are obliged to pay rates for the building and maintaining of infrastructure and essential services. Rates are certainly not paid so that elected public servants can push their pet ideologies.

In the news media just recently WCC is looking at introducing a ‘bed tax’ to make ends meet, in affect visitors to the city are paying for the maoriorising of the city.

Kiwis wanting the Council to get a grip, can sign Kiwi Frontline’s petition: ‘Council must meet Wellington’s basic needs, NOT push ideology’. It’s available online at Change.org

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 25/2/18) 
Editorial "Case of Race" in Herald on Sunday is pretty well on the mark.The recent Racial Bias ( looking in the right place ? ) decision by the Court of Appeal effectively overturning the DistrictCourt Judge's conviction that an accused had 1.5g of cocaine is possibly Alice In Wonderland stuff. Readers need to peruse the case summary, look at the police team involved check out the composition of the Court of Appeal and then judge for themselves whether this decision could ever withstand scutiny or whether the law is again being made to look like an ass (lex asinus).Speak up sheeple.
ROB PATERSON, Mt Maunganui

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Dominion Post 18/2/18) 
Dr Keri Mills article 16th February :Who owns the Water”. I suggest Dr Keri Mills look into our history and will find Chief Justice Sir James Prendergast ruled the Treaty, a simple nullity” in 1877. and his ruling has never been over-ruled.

The so called “English version Mills quotes is a fake concocted by Hobson”s secretary Freeman to send overseas. Mills is Dishonestly quoting selectively from the real treaty in Maori by omitting the key phrase applying it to “taonga katoa o Nu Tireni”, that is “all the people of New Zealand”. “Taonga katoa” meant ordinary property such as iron cooking pots and blankets in 1840 and it is nothing by but pretence to claim or imply that it includes fresh water.

If Dr Keri is a New Zealand historian based at The Policy Observatory, AUT. What else does Keri get wrong.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Dominion Post 11/2/18) 
Article 3 of the Treaty states “Maoris to be given the same rights as the English”, now they want all New Zealanders to be taught the new language Te Reo, Maori academics changed the noble language from “Maori” to “Te Reo”, changed the meaning of many words, invented as many more words, changed the meaning of some of those new words and to complicate matters changed its staccato rhythm to and English pattern, totally unrecognisable to the original. Then Hon Pita Sharples stated on 1 News, “If its our language we can make it mean anything we want to”! Can’t he see this means that Te Reo cannot be translated! To crown it all it’s Maori who are blamed for the language dropping off, academics who made all the changes.

Don’t blame Maoris, blame Governments and academics. Only Governments can make or change laws.

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 12/2/18) 
Frustration from the NZ people is bubbling over and now finally from the
Wealthy, ( Jones and Gallagher ) surprised it took so long!

Radical greedy Maori have brought this country to its knees, sucking
Billions from the economy.claims on Sovereignty all beaches everything!

Kiwis (all races)are paying the price, high cost of living, homeless, low

Selfish elite Maori need to examine their hearts, if they have one?
C. HUMPHREYS, Katikati

Dear Editor (Sent to the Hawkes Bay Today 11/2/18) 
As a parenting tip, a more accurate way to talk about the Treaty of Waitangi to children (HBT, Feb 10, p10) is to talk about how the treaty made New Zealand a land of freedom and opportunity.

Freedom is like living on a beautiful beach where you can do what you like within certain rules.

Opportunity is where your parents can earn as much money as they want to send you to whatever school you like.

New Zealand wasn’t always like this.

Before the treaty was signed in 1840, there were no jobs, no schools, few could read or write, and there were always wars between the tribes living here.

Whenever there was a disagreement between people in different areas, they had to fight to the death to settle it.

Some people were kept as slaves, and when food ran out were sometimes killed, cooked, and eaten.

The treaty brought us laws so that adults did not have to fight to settle disputes.

The treaty also brought freedom to those held in slavery and opportunity for everyone.

By the way, the name of our nation is New Zealand, not Aotearoa.

Mike’s letter refers to the following article: 

Hawke's Bay Today has paired up with The Parenting Place to run a weekly Parenting Hot Tip

Talking about the treaty with your children might be different if you are Maori or if you're pakeha— or if you don't have children. If your family has moved here from a different country, it might feel unfamiliar and tricky to engage with. It might not even feel applicable. But if you've made Aotearoa your home, the treaty does affect you. Here are some ways to start the conversation.

Tell them the story. Not every child loves discussing politics, history or the translation differences in Article Two. But they do love stories. Our history is a story. Tell them stories about our country so that they can see how they are a part of it. Place them in the story.

Paint scenarios and ask questions that help your child engage with the idea of ownership and sharing. They could imagine they live on a beautiful beach and can surf every day on uncrowded waves. Then one day people show up and want to live on the beach and surf the waves too. Is that fair? How would you make that work for everyone? Give them an analogy.

If your child has ever been to a wedding then you could use that as an analogy. A marriage is when two very different people make a whole lot of promises to each other so that they can make one relationship work. That is sort of what a treaty is. Making a marriage work isn't easy. It is learning to see through the eyes of our pater, being willing to compromise and learning to put the interests of our partner ahead of our own. When we're able to do this, we are building healthy relationships.
Hawkes Bay Today Feb 10, 2018 – page 10

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 9/2/18) 
Lets give credit where credit is due.Good on the Minister of Education and Labour Party for taking meaningful steps to shut down the Charter schools thing.Next step get rid of the race based total immersion schools and stop the inane headlong plunge into the compulsory maori language nonsense in all schools as this is all playing havoc with Kiwi kids learning and achievement levels.

First and foremost ensure proficiency with and fluency in our national language English which is acknowledged and accepted as the most dominant language worldwide.Another positive would be to take steps to have the Education Council amend the current NZ teachers Code another race orientated unworkable aberation causing angst in teaching circles.

On a completely different tack the Government must dismantle the private prison system which is fraught with difficulties on all fronts.After all Labour slagged PPP in 2016 saying it had no place in NZ.
ROB PATERSON, Mt Maunganui

Dear Editor (Sent to the Dominion Post 8/2/18) 
Commentators are at least correct about one thing WaitangiDay turned out to be eerily quiet almost an orchestrated non-event one might say.

So why’s that so - well it was probably Ms.Arderns 5day prep talks with Northland maoris and playing the fawning toady game. Looks like she gave into demands sending out the vibes they wanted and in return they temporarily shutup stopped bleating and stirring.

This assertion is evidenced by Ms.Arderns inane ideological pronouncements like *theTreaty is a living document *we have treated maori poorly *inviting maori to hold the Government to account (should be other way around) *throwing $squillions at self inflicted child poverty ,*fantasising about freshwater rights and so forth.

No wonder the locals shutup with the privileged wish list safely tucked away in the bank -who wouldn't .

These little race based games are just so blatant you can read them like a book and the consequences of resultant entitlements is that those who have contributed nothing to Kiwi society feel we owe them something just for inflicting their unwelcome presence upon us.

For the record let’s make it quite clear the National mob were no better than the current Labour /Greens /NZ First mish mash.
ROB PATERSON, Mount Maunganui
PS: Ms. Ardern’s Philosophy.” I don’t like to think before I speak. I like to be just as surprised as everyone else about what I say”

Dear Edtitor (Sent to the NZ Herald 1/2/18) 
So Hoskings Column NZHerald (1February) scores Ardern's 100days plan highly solely on the basis of political announcements made which simply follows Labours manifesto. Not actually doing anything more like 100days of inactivity and deferrment.

However Ms Ardern ingratiated herself to the Ratana clan (a religious/ political /holistic type race based outfit ) threw a cat among the pigeons with her industrial relations spiel ,announced her pregnancy and confinement endorsing a surrogate stand in PM and foolishly agreed to attend Waitangi Day celebrations plus spend 5days kowtowing to the local tribes.

Seriously does that rate a pass mark - I think not and when the action does come it will be misery all round.
ROB PATERSON, Mt Maunganui

Dear Editor (Sent to the NZHerald 26/1/18) 
"Just taking orders...."
In writing of the United Nations’ Holocaust Remembrance Day, Benji Flacks makes a great point about the need for us all to take a stand, and not simply be bystanders.

Seductive ideologies start quietly and benignly. They can be hard to identify in this time of western tolerance of others’ values, but we should never forget that our democracy evolved from the mistakes of previous eras.

If we carry on loosening our insistence on legal equality of all regardless of ethnicity, public access rights to rivers and the coast, private property rights, and law and order – our country too will eventually experience a fall from grace.

It’s important that people stand up for what’s right well before violence is involved.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangapararaoa

Dear Editor, (Sent to the Otago Daily Times 20/1/18)
I am well aware that I am dependent on your goodwill for any letter of mine to appear in the ODT. I am aware too that, primarily for reasons of space, abridgement is sometimes necessary. However, that does no entitle you – or anybody – to censor my words for the sake of political correctness or any other insubstantial reason.

My letter of 16th January at 91 words was surely brief enough. I made an important statement of fact in my third sentence, with a reference to confirm it and you chose to delete it. That is censorship, not abridgement, inappropriate in a country where freedom of speech is counted important, even fundamental.

Again, I am fully entitled to make a straightforward claim so that “believe I can” is an intrusion. Did Captain Cook say in May 1840 “I believe I can claim sovereignty etc.?” If others have, or believe they have, a stronger claim let them state it.

FYI, my reference to Harper is: “Pioneer Work in the Alps of New Zealand”. extensively quoted in “One Treaty, One Nation”, 2015, ISBN 1872970443, pp. 235-6.

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Herald 16/1/18)
If all New Zealand children are to learn a second language - Maori or any other - what is to be left out to make room for it? Kapa Haka maybe?

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Listener 8/1/18) 
Radio NZ Has a sense of humour

Recently RNZ has started Te Reo lessons. On the 5th of January I listened to Mihi Forbes discussing with Alex Perrottet “how to have a cup of tea”. Over about four minutes they effectively proved Don Brash’s case. The vast majority of the words used (tea, coffee, sugar, teaspoon etc) were made up, but given a Maori accent.

I look forward to future lessons on traditional Maori matters. Maybe the next one could be named, “how to give the Fergie a valve grind”

Dear Editor, (Sent to the NZ Herald 2/1/18) 
Robin Osborne (Euthanasia bill misunderstood – 2/1/18) wonders if MPs ever read the bills before parliament before arguing their positions. Having read the 2011 bill and listened to the government’s manoeuvrings over iwi’s claims to our coastline, I’d conclude that either they don’t or they simply lie.

Past PM John Key said there’d only ever be a handful of claims to our coast and his Attorney General called the concerned ‘clowns’. The media went along with their line. Well, six years later and those clowns have been proven to have had a case. In 2017, 600 claims were lodged, covering every centimetre of NZ’s coast. These claims affect all catchments, harbours, seabed and water columns. Now that the truth is out, it would be helpful if the media actually reported these facts so people enjoying the coast this summer could do something about protecting their rights when these claims are heard.

Or are lies, secrecy and suppression of the truth the real facts of life here in Godzone?