This is an outrage… This is Political oppression of those of us who do not bow down to our ‘Great leader’.
This is how Socialist Tyranny begins and is what happened in Venezuela to those who dared voice opposition to Chavez and Maduro.
Standard practice: Gun bans, and confiscations from critics of the Regime.
New Zealand is now headed down that road.
We can no longer be considered a free democratic Western Nation.
For the thought crime of speaking out against the Police State of Jacinda Ardern…..
Conservative Christian Pastor Carl Bromley has come under the Evil Eye several times over the past year.
He received visits from the NZ Police with regards to maintaining his religious right to hold small worship services in the face of a Covid Lockdown despite no cases of Covid being detected in the entire South Island.
This proved the lockdowns have little to do with medical science/ public health and everything to do with power and control… forcing mindless obedience and compliance… and breaking Christian resistance to tyranny.
Watch/Read a derogitory mainstream media post Newshub here….
It has been in response to such overt tyranny and rights violations that has alarmed many ordinary New Zealanders… how Draconian our nation has become under Comrade Ardern’s heavy hand.
Many are joining the growing peaceful protest movement against compulsory vaccinations, mask mandates, and lockdowns.
Some of the biggest demonstrations in the history of our nation have been going on in recent months all across the country and outside the Beehive, largely ignored by the compromised Mainstream media who are failing in their moral duty to keep NZ Citizens informed about real News that affects them. Whenever such protests are mentioned it is always in derogatory terms and purposeful falsehoods about the numbers of protesters in attendance.
All part of a concerted effort to Keep New Zealanders scared, Isolated, and in the dark about the scale of Democratic resistance to Ardern’s Globalist Tyranny.
The plan is to keep the sheeple thinking resistance is futile.
Carl Bromley is no sheep!
He is one such conservative New Zealander and Christian who has become alarmed at what has been going on under Ardern and has been actively doing his part to defend the Kiwi dream.
True to his Christian values and deep sense of community, He has been doing so in a completely peaceful manor motivated by high ideals and charity.
This is the sort of man he is… and yet the evil political powers of our day have an agenda they seek to Ram trough which is at sharp variance with New Zealand’s freedom loving, self reliant, and independent ways, and it is good people like Carl who stand in their way.
He and his ilk must therefore be stomped into submission and silenced.
Voice your disapproval of the Powers that be?… Lose your firearms license!
That’s how the system works now in NZ…esp if you are poor and cannot afford expensive lawyers.
By taking the side of freedom this peaceful Good man has found himself exposed to the hate and violence of Far left Radicals, and under the spotlight of a newly politicised Police State.
Peacefully fulfilling his moral duty as a concerned citizen and member of a Democratic society, Carl attends public rallies and protests.
These rallies are usually openly advertised… time and place on Social media sites… and this makes it possible for Radical Far Left Purple haired Gender confused supporters of Ardern’s tyranny to turn up and create trouble.
They have zero respect for Free speech and live to create chaos.
It was while attending such a rally that Carl was assaulted by a Far left Radical, and having also been slandered on-line Carl lodged a complaint with the Police.
They chose to ignore it.
Such is the state of our Nation… White Male Christian freedom advocates can be slandered and assaulted with Official impunity… esp when they have been flagged as being ‘Anti-government racist radicals’.
Like so many Vocal defenders of Kiwi Freedom and rights Carl has no doubt been put on the Police Shit list…(they have these now for political dissenters, bloggers, etc) while the real dangerous malicious radicals of the Far left operate openly… virtually with official sanction… as they share much in common with our Socialist PM.
Being flagged as a possible dangerous Extremist not only will make it harder for people like Carl to get the police to act on any complaints they make, it opens them up to being the target of Police intimidation and injustice.
This is happening now in New Zealand.
New Laws expose New Zealanders to heavy Police intrusions on the smallest of pretext.
Under such a climate all it takes to trigger a heavy handed response from the NZ Police is for some petty minded and malicious person who has a grudge against someone like Carl to make a false complaint.
And there is now a gang of Nasty Left wing Antifa types operating in New Zealand doing precisely this.
And they have been destroying peoples lives.
Please bear with me as I stitch together how what has happened to Carl fits into the big picture.
His is not an isolated case.
One high profile example of the activities of this malicious Far left Deplatform Gang’s was the sacking of Independent You Tuber and political commentator Lee Williams.
Lee, via his ‘Cross the Rubicon’ You Tube channel was very critical of Jacinda Ardern’s globalist politics, and was also locked into an online ideological war with several members of the Radical Far left Deplatform Gang.
Jealous of Lee Williams growing You tube following These nasty underhanded radicals used slanderous lies to blackmail Lee’s then Employers Synlait Dairy company with ‘Employing White Supremacist’s’. Synlait caved into this extortion and sacked Lee for the sake of avoiding damage to their companies reputation.
Lee is not a White Supremacist!
Lee in fact challenged systemic racism embedded in the New Zealand system in favour of racial quality before the law!
That was Lee’s crime… pointing out the corrupt racism inherent in our system.
Yet the Liars prevailed and Lee’s life was destroyed.
To escape the persecution he was facing Lee left New Zealand.
All this made the national news (except the truth about this being a Far left extremist extortion Con job).
Lee’s struggles were better covered by independent media sites like The BFD, and Blogs like ‘Eternal vigilance’, and others.
Lee got zero justice from the New Zealand Police for what he endured… The fraudulent slander and extortion that led to his unfair dismissal.
Because Lee in their book was flagged as a ‘troublemaker’ who does not deserve fair treatment.
So Like Carl’s complaint to the Police about being assaulted… Lee’s injustice also was not investigated.
The deplatforming gang faced zero legal consequences for their extortion racket, which will have only served to embolden them to continue.
Lee’s condemnation of Ardern’s Apartheid ambitions centered around her secreting of the He Pua Pua report that is a blueprint for handing over vast resources and powers to Maori Tribal Elites reached the halls of Power in particular Ardern’s Collaborators in the Maori Party.
These MPs joined in on the extortion of Synlait Dairy company, and persecution of Lee… some even calling for his residency to be revoked and for him to be deported.
All this because Lee spoke his personal political views on a small Youtube channel!
With this sort of persecution going on for anyone voicing dissenting opinions, you can easily imagine the dampening effect this has had on open political discourse in New Zealand.
You can be sure New Zealand Intelligence services opened up a Dossier on Williams and began collating who his associate were, etc, with a view of painting them as ‘Potential Domestic Terrorists’.
Picture: ‘Cross the Rubicon’ Youtuber Lee Williams.
It is public knowledge that Carl Bromely is a close friend of Lee Williams.
Carl is a man who stood up in defense of Lee when he was undergoing his ordeal.
This activity puts yet another X against his name in Police files.
Even if we put aside Carl’s own defiance regarding his right to worship, his mere association with Lee Williams is reason alone for us to suspect the New Zealand Police have a low opinion of Carl and care little about what injustices he suffers at the hands of Far Left extremists.
To the far Left, virtually everybody else on the political spectrum is considered ‘far right’.
From his bold defense of Lee Williams Carl will have drawn upon himself the malevolent attention of the Deplatforming Gang who destroyed his friends life.
You don’t need to be Sherlock Holmes to suspect that Carl Bromley is most likely the latest target of this well known Far Left Deplatforming Gang.
The police ought to have been aware of the high probability the complaint questioning Carl’s fitness to hold a firearms license was a malicious lie.
If this proves to be true it makes what the Police did to Carl Bromely not simply an act of gross incompetence… but a serious pre-meditated injustice.
Either the Police were easily fooled into committing violence against an innocent man, or they knew the complaint was fraudulent yet moved to take Carl’s gun anyway!
That’s blatant corruption!
Carl called the complaint ‘Bogus’ and we can be certain that it was Bogus because of Carl’s impeccable character.
Carl has Zero Police record, yet given how the Gun Laws work and Police powers and discretion, it is very difficult *for anyone* to srutinise whether or not the Police are acting upon accurate information because the whole process is cloaked in secrecy… so basically… unless you can raise a ton of cash for Lawyers etc… The Police can do whatever they please… and fabricate bogus arguments that arbitrarily call *anyone’s character or mental fitness* into question to quazi-justify their Draconian activities.
Where is the impartial oversight in how such cases are executed whereby abuses can be called out?
This must be investigated.
The veracity of the complaint that was used to raid Carls home must be scrutised.
At a minimum this raid shows that there is a lack of safeguards protecting citizens from suffering such an arbitrary home invasion by the police and confiscation of legitimately held firearms.
The Far Left Deplatforming gang must broken up, and face criminal charges.
These things must be done and yet the political corruption of our democracy is far more serious than the activities of a malicious gang of Far left Nut jobs.
The Police need to own up to their grievous error and return Carl’s lawful property.
They need to compensate him for the damages they caused and the torment they inflicted on his wife.
And most importantly they must expunge from his records any hint of wrongdoing that might stain his reputation in the future.
There is the serious matter of the attitude of the Police towards a Good Kiwi Citizen who had done nothing wrong, but simply expressed his vocal critisism of the government of the day.
I want you my reader to understand how the Ardern Regime has politisised the Police and turned them into an instrument for attacking the democratic rights of New Zealanders who want to see Ardern thrown out of office… via the democratic process… which includes the rights to free speech, to assemble, and to protest.
These are absolutely essential for the just functionality of a democratic system of governance whereby those in power only hold office by the ongoing consent of the governed.
What must be understood is that not only did Ardern shamelessly capitalise on the Christchurch Terror attack to confiscate New Zealand citizens guns, She also used this atrocity as a justification for weaponising the Police against her political opponents.
Notice how holding religious views, or political opinions outside the mainstream is viewed as Potential Terrorist traits.
And the assertion that our ‘Open internet’ makes us vulnerable to terrorist attacks!
Hmmmm so the government should take control of the internet… ‘to keep us safe from terrorism’… yeah right!
That way they could block Youtube channels Like Lee’s and Carl’s that critisise Ardern’s genius!
Yes! that will make New Zealand ‘Safer from terrorism’.
Notice how the democratic right to protest has been lumped next to terrorism by the simple addition of the word ‘Violent’. So in the mindset of the Police, anyone who attends a protest could be a potential Terrorist.
Is that really a fair and just… or sane way for the Police to look at Citizens exercising their Democratic rights?
Is the likelihood of New Zealand suffering a serious Terrorist attack really ‘Medium’ or Low?
It serves Ardern’s Political purposes to say the likelihood of terrorist attack is “Medium, feasible, and could well occur” because this allows her to put the Police and army in a state of Active preparation.
“Get out there and find those Anti-government Far Right White supremacist religious Extremist Domestic terrorists!!!! Start by snooping about on You Tube! Anyone who does not like Jacinda Ardern is probably a terrorist!”
The government’s own counter terrorist web page states…
“Our strongest defence against terrorism is a cohesive, resilient society.”
With this in mind it must be pointed out that heavy handed Police raids etc *has the very opposite effect!*
Such draconian behaviour is not conducive to harmonious social order but fosters resentment and outrage… and rightly so!
If the Police wanted to promote a cohesive resilient society they would respect the rights of the people to hold their own views.
They should respect liberty and enforce the law fairly and without political prejudice.
And yet we see at so many points Arderns ‘Inclusive Society’ excludes anyone who disagrees with her personal Political ideology.
Ardern demands obedience and submission by all.
We are expected to allow her to do what ever she pleases without murmur.
That is not how a Free society functions.
That is how a Dictatorship functions.
By becoming heavy handed the Police themselves are creating civil unrest.
While I personally believe the threat of Terrorism is extremely low, given how belligerent Ardern has been towards the rights of the New Zealand people, and mobilising the Police against her detractors… the threat of Anti-Ardern Protests turning ugly is inevitably on the rise.
Ardern seeks to use the Police as a shield while she continues to radically alter our Nation with absolute contempt for due process and the safeguards that would normally prevent such Autocratic behavior.
She has seen the growing protests. She knows she no longer enjoys the support of the people.
This is why under Ardern protests are being viewed by Police as potential Terrorist activities.
Democracy is fundamentally about the peaceful transfer of power based upon the will of the people, yet socialist dictators once in power have a long history of subverting democracy for the sake of retaining power… at any price.
Peaceful, good natured, freedom loving Carl Bromley, as a religious person who holds strong resentment for what Comrade Ardern is doing tick’s a heck of a lot of her government’s ‘Counter-Terrorism ‘ Boxes’, and we can be sure that they wanted to take away his guns ( make no mistake… they would like to take away everyone’s guns!).
Getting a fake complaint was what they were waiting for… and all they needed to do precisely that.
This fixation on ‘Domestic terrorism’ is a psychological contagion that has poisoned the New Zealand Polices outlook towards the people they serve.
It has turned them into Ardern’s Goon Squad.
Keeping the people in line and under her subjection.
So the New Zealand Police have been diverted from busting burglars and rapists and turned into policing political opinions.
I fear the Police are being prepped for war against the citizens of our country.
The Political elites know their Covid Bullshit is hurting a lot of people and making them very pissed off.
They realise that growing Public outrage to what the Ardern regime is hell bent on doing is highly likely to escalate into serious civil unrest.
The mask of ‘Kindness’ has fallen.
As our Cold hearted Great Leader shows Iron resolve to push through her revolutionary agenda at any price, She has implemented a heavy handed strategy to keep the people in check.
This is what Anti-democratic tyranny looks like!
No Joke. I believe the Police are in full preparation to put down a popular uprising against the State.
All the signs are there to see.
This puts the Police in opposition to the will of the people, propping up the unpopular dictatorial power.
This Police State makes the democratic peaceful transfer of power impossible and creates the conditions for serious civil unrest.
What Globalist influences have been at work indoctrinating our Police to prevent the New Zealand people defending our National Autonomy?
Have they been warned about the coming Global economic collapse?
Have they been warned about the Great Reset and move towards a Global cashless society?
It is only these sorts of scenario that makes what they have been doing lately explicable.
All their activities are flagrant attempts to forcefully suppress voices of opposition to Ardern’s Rule.
This same scenario is being played out in democracies all across the globe. Many nations have their own ‘Globalist Ideologues’ at the helm whose actions clearly demonstrate their loyalty is to the New World Order, not their own peoples independence. And people in these nations can see they are being taken for a ride to a destination they don’t want to be.
We have just seen peaceful Anti Vax Mandates/ Anti-lockdown protests in the Netherlands explode into all out riots.
Even though All Protests in New Zealand have been absolutely peaceful, it would be foolish for us not to appreciate that the New Zealand government is watching such overseas events with trepidation and that as such are unjustly transferring their fears that similar things could happen here. The Globalists seeking to subjugate the planet have also calculated how to prevent popular uprisings from thwarting their ultimate goals, and it is with this in mind that their minions in every Nation have been politicising and conditioning the Police and military to be prepared to use their arms against their own Citizens… as enemies of the State.
History is irrefutable that this is how Socialist Systems operate and maintain themselves… by keeping the people down. Under Jacinda Ardern our Nation is sinking fast!
We have now reached a point where to protest against what she is doing is to risk being labeled a danger to the State and losing your firearms license!
Only subservient supporters of the Regime get to enjoy such privilege!
Where does the loyalty of the average Policeman stand?
Any Police reading this need to ask themselves this important moral question.
Is it the duty and purpose of the Police to stand With the People and defend their rights… or do they consider it their job to be the Mindless enforcers of the Party Politicians who have managed to get hold of the levers of Power?
If Americans ever wondered what it would be like if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was running the USA they need look no further than how Jacinda Ardern has behaved while she has been at the helm in New Zealand.
Like AOC Ardern is a far Left Extremist. Like AOC Ardern has zero grip on the real world, or the catastrophe far left political ideology represents.
Ardern clearly shows she is prepared to lie, deceive, bankrupt our nation, and create a police state to impose her globalist delusions upon the people of New Zealand.
She has been the Perfect Storm.
Take a look at what happened in Venezuela when the shit hit the fan and the tyrannical Socialist government bankrupted the Nation and started killing it’s own citizens who dared protest.
Today Venezuela is in ruins and its people are starving… where would you stand if you were a member of the Police in such a crisis?
Where ought your loyalties lie?
It could very well be that with the ever increasing stranglehold this government places on the throats of the New Zealand public, that unless peaceful protests prevail in reversing our nations freefall into Totalitarianism… The struggle could turn very ugly… Peaceful means having failed it could come to civil war… The People vs the Corrupt State.
Unless they are prepared to disobey unjust orders, The New Zealand Police could quickly become like so many Jackbooted thugs in Communist Nations used to crush, Murder, and imprison Good brave Citizens who have been compelled to turn to Force to oust the tyrants who have sort to destroy and oppress their Nations.
In such cases the Criminals are the ones in power.
Far be it from me to ever advocate for such a situation!
Though the right of revolution to overthrow tyrannical government is a fundamental right of the people, it is for me too terrible to be contemplated.
If attempted it would also be highly likely to fail, and result in greater atrocities and injustices.
Unless the Military and the Police were on the side of the people.
We should watch what happens now in the Netherlands very carefully.
Will the Netherlands government capitulate in the face of such Violent protests or will they double down on their tyranny?
What will happen is depended upon how far the Socialist globalists in power there are prepared to go to retain their grip on power.
I believe the greatest hope Freedom advocates everywhere have of winning Freedom back is to shun all acts of Violence, Vandalism, Rioting, and destruction, and instead maintain our peaceful stand… even in the face of such injustices as have been dished out to Carl Bromely.
We should rally around such people.
We must protest against what was done, and yet we ought to remain civil at all times… This makes it very difficult for the tyrants to deploy the Jackboots against us with Full fury… because More people see what they are doing… see how unjust the régime is… and their ability to govern evaporates.
With the passing of time more and more people join the ranks of Resistance.
Despite such atrocities as Tiananmen Square in 1989
Peaceful resistance can break the resolve of all but the most brutal of tyrannies.
History proves that Peaceful people movements can defeat vastly stronger Political interests.
Two noteworthy examples are the Peaceful protest movements of Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King Junior.
The essential thing is for the People to stand in protest *before* such Absolute tyranny gains a strong grasp.
Given that the New Zealand people have zero stomach for Bloody Revolution and little means by which such measures might be achieved, Peaceful resistance offers the best prospects of success by far.
So I assert that Peaceful resistance is not only the Higher moral path, but also is the most pragmatic reason for hope that we shall prevail in keeping our Nation Independent and Free from the Globalist Tyranny.
But to achieve this we must Bravely stand together!
We cannot allow such things as happened to Our Boy Carl Bromley to go unchallenged, without voicing strong displeasure and a demand for justice.
The Police need to be censured and know New Zealanders will not respect them unless they respect our rights!
What happened to Carl ought to stimulate us to stand even more resolved for our Free Nation!
We cannot allow such vile police State antics to become the norm.
Nor should we tolerate the Police’s Anti-private Firearm ownership attitude.
This in itself shows the Police have become arrogant and forget their place… that is as our servants.
Citizens have strong gun Rights… Slaves do not.
The Freedom movement must also be on the watch for Subversive ‘Wolves in sheeps clothing’ entering in among us seeking to corrupt our movement from within.
Beware any so-called freedom activists who start to promote Hatred, violence, or Riotous behavior.
It is only by walking the righteous path that we can avoid being legitimately labeled a danger to civil order.
Any Civil disobedience must be 100% peaceful. The evil powers that be would love to see the freedom movement collapse into Mayhem, for that would be their opportunity to send in the jackboots.
As long as we adhere to Peaceful Protest we have the upper hand and occupy the Moral high ground.
Peacefully Protest. Peacefully Resist. Peacefully refuse to Comply.
I speak with certainty that Carl Bromley will whole heartedly agree with those sentiments.
I will also say We must never surrender our rights. We will not show our papers. We will not accept a cashless system. We will not surrender our National independence to any Global overlords.
Carl Bromley is a man of Peace, Freedom, and Justice.
Watch (below) what Carl had to say only a few weeks ago… and what probably triggered some Radical leftist or some Ardern Minion in Government to target him and conspire to get the New Zealand Police to oppress him.
Screenshot from Twitter: Newsroom NZ’s gloating Woke radical Marc Daalder expounding the Leftist anti-free speech ‘dictum’ ‘deplatforming works’ that advocates for the censorship and deplatforming of political critics and dissenters of woke radicalism, and Leftist government policies.
Marc celebrates ‘cancel culture’ and the reprehensible practice of ‘deplatforming’ independent voices.
Deplatforming is a truly despicable act that not only silences citizens exercising their legitimate democratic rights, but often also involves slander and extortion of third parties… threats to business reputations and results in the devastation of peoples lives.
The date of this Twitter post correlates perfectly with the deplatforming of Kiwi Vinny Eastwood from Youtube. Vinny’s channel boasted more subscribers than any mainstream NZ media outlet.
Now it’s gone. In January this year Daalder labeled Vinny ‘Far Right’.
Read Daalder’s celebration of Twitters heavily partisan deplatforming of Donald Trump, and thousands of other on the ‘Far Right’ here. for ‘wrong think’ and discussing ‘forbidden opinions’.
This Blogpost is the first in the series I am writing to expose an active Far Left extremist deplatforming gang that has been attacking New Zealand political commentators on radio, and on You Tube. This operation has been coined ‘The Great Deplatforming of Matariki 2021’ by the Racist Radicals and Alt Leftists committing these abuses.
I will be focusing today on the activities and ideas of one of New Zealand’s most malicious peddlers of Far Left Extremism and misinformation.
Newsroom’s Propagandist Marc Daalder.
My next Blog will zero in on Daalders ideological followers and fellow deplatformers… a nasty bunch of Racist radicals and far left nut jobs who have been engaged in despicable deeds.
Attacks on free speech via cancel culture, deplatforming, esp on the internet have reached frightening Levels both here in New Zealand and globally to the degree that they threaten Democracy!
These Attacks come from one direction… the Far Left, with the Woke Technocrats controlling the internet the Left have been blatantly stacking the deck in favour of their own political prejudices, and acting as the chief arbiters of what may or may not be expressed on line.
This exposes the voting public to heavy political bias.
This corruption of the public square is very much welcomed and encouraged by globalist socialist parties and politicians all working to overthrow capitalism, and traditional Christian values upon which Western civilisation is founded.
Socialists despise individual rights and liberties that set limits to government power.
As a result of the ascendency of Leftist ideology Western nations have become a mere shadow of what they once were.
Freedom and independence are in retreat as Leftist Socialism spreads like a cancerous growth… mostly via the tyrannical control of the flow of Information.
Leftist propaganda and Toxic doctrines infect minds en Masse creating hysteria and Psychotic outrage.
The hate, the racism, the sexism generated by the Woke Left is very real and extreme, and yet it is all cloaked in the fake garb of ‘social justice’, and ‘saving the planet’… fake virtue and fake virtue signaling.
That is how the Far Left roll.
The hypocrisy of it all is rank!
The Left has turned the truth on it’s head!
This is why violent and criminal far left organizations like Antifa and ‘Black Lives Matter’ have sprung up and are wreaking so much havoc, mob violence, and wanton destruction.
BLM is run by the most bigoted racists, and yet claims to be fighting racism.
The same thing can easily be proven to be true of the Maori Radicals in the Maori Party… all the while being excused by Radical leftist politicians like Jacinda Ardern and the Greens.
And the compromised fake news mainstream media.
Toxic Leftist doctrines ferment and pseudo-legitimize bigotry and racism, violence and chaos, and outrage… via the fraudulent excuse that they are fighting bigotry and racism, and violence, and oppression.
These people are so lobotimised they cant see the wood for the trees!
This is all thanks to Radical Far left wing ideology and propaganda that blinds the gullible devotee and turns them into useful idiots for furthering the aims of Far Left Politicians.
Fear of impending Doom guarantees the Billions of dumfounded sheeple accept the proliferation of new Police States because in believing the world faces extreme crisis… they assume this justifies extreme measures and that individual rights must be sacrificed upon the alter of greater common good.
This is pure Communism.
One of the greatest political scams being foisted upon western populations today by the Far Left via mass propaganda campaigns and mis-information is that Western Societies are in grave danger from ‘Far Right Extremism’ and that this threat justifies heavy censorship, deplatforming, of political commentators the left themselves deem to be far right exponents, and also is being used to justify the criminalization of opinions and speech that does not conform with leftist ideals.
This is the real hidden reason why there is a push across Western societies for new hate speech legislations and censorship powers… it has zero to do with humanitarianism, and everything to do with seizing absolute power and the establish a New World Order.
Wolf in Sheep’s clothing, Jacinda Ardern has proven to be the most opaque and devious PM in the history of New Zealand, most of the time keeping her ultimate ambitions as closely guarded secrets because her Far Left ideals are in sharp variance with mainstream New Zealand’s hopes and aspirations, which is why she must veil her activities, and implement her agenda with the least public discourse as possible.
Ardern exposed her true colours in a Pro-Globalist speech she made at the UN in 2019 when she rebuked calls made by Trump for ‘More Nationalism’.
Trump had called world leaders to focus on problems at home as that is where their primary loyalty ought to be.
Ardern exclaimed…”Experiences in recent years should lead us to all question whether any of us ever truly operate in isolation anymore.”, and “Our globalised, borderless world asks us to be guardians not just for our people, but for all people.”
This speech rang alarm bells for many New Zealanders as it indicated Ardern was seeking to sell out our nation to Socialist Globalism.
In keeping with this under Ardern in New Zealand signed up to the UN Global Compact on Migration which at the time sparked concerns about the abrogation of our national sovereignty and included a section not merely to propagandise the public into accepting open boarders, but also included advocacy for censorship and ‘hate speech laws’ that framed any opposition to the UN scheme as being ‘hateful Xenophobia’… to be criminalised.
It is obvious to some Kiwis that to achieve the Socialist Globalist New world Order will require an incremental strategy that first puts in place the tyrannical tools to manipulate the public into acquiescence, minimise any possibility of public protests, and punish critics as ‘far right mongers of hate against ‘vulnerable minorities’.
This is the game plan the Machiavellian Globalists are implementing with precision, and it just so happens that all this grand scheming by our Woke Globalist PM did not escape the attention of several Kiwi based Independent Youtubers who began to make you tube videos in which they expressed their opinions about what they believed was going on.
They are not Racists. They are not Far Right, but conservatives.
They are seeking Racial Equality before the Law. not systemic entrenched racism… its the leftists like Ardern who advocate for that!
One was the ordinary working bloke Lee Williams, who some of you will know was the target of the hateful and malicious campaign by the nasty far left radicals which are the central topic of this blogpost.
Not only intent on getting him deplatformed from You tube, these Sociopaths also set about to destroy his life. Another You tuber who made videos highly critical of Jacinda Ardern was a guy called Damien De Ment.
By making videos critical of the Far Left Socialist Agenda these two guy became the focus of Far Left hatred, and were then targeted for slander and deplatforming.
A textbook New Zealand example of a professional Far Left Globalist operative, propagandist and expert in mis-information embedded in the New Zealand media. Newsroom’s Marc Daalder
Exhibiting all the duplicity, dishonesty, Fear mongering, and advocacy of censorship and deplatforming that is distinctive to the diseased Far Left mind.
Daalder is an Igor-like minion and worshipper of our own personification of Woke-Evil the ‘Free Hugs’ ‘Rush through oppressive Legislation’ Prime minister Jacinda Ardern.
We shall see that Mark Daalder was on the hunt for targets to become the focus of his Radical Left vehemence when at some point Lee Williams and Damien De Ment came to his attention, possibly when they both spoke at an anti-lockdown protest in Auckland.
Having discovered they had expressed criticism of the UN Global Compact for Migration on their You tube channels was all Marc needed for his purposes.
Marc knew this could be used as propaganda to frame them as ‘Far Right extremists’ and he set about to sell this narrative to the New Zealand public.
Photo: Newsroom Article/hit piece by Marc Daalder. ‘Far-right speakers Featured at anti-lockdown march’ Sept 15 2020
In an article written in September 2020, Daalder would label both Lee Williams and Damien De Ment ‘Far Right Speakers’.
The protest was peaceful and aptly named ‘The Liberty March’, and organised to voice legitimate concerns about how the Ardern government had acted in an oppressive manner in her handling of the Covid 19 pandemic.
Marc Daalder’s Noowsroom article (Far-right speakers featured at anti-lockdown march Sept15 2020) is a textbook piece of Left wing propaganda designed to discredit public protests against Left Wing Socialist Prime minister Jacinda Ardern by associating the protest with the Boogie man of ‘Far Right Extremism’.
When investigating what sort of ‘reporter’ Marc Daalder is we do not find an objective thinker applying high journalistic integrity. No.
Marc is not hogtied by pesky and antiquated ethics of Journalism.
We find a Far left Radical, a Propagandist and Spin Doctor for Leftist Globalism, a schemer, and peddler of misinformation.
The above screenshot is from Daalders Twitter profile descripting himself as ‘Senior Political Reporter at Newsroom NZ covering Covid-19, Climate Change, far-right extremism and misinformation, tech and energy.
That is basically a bullet point checklist for a textbook Far Left Wing Propagandist, and subsequent analysis of his published articles confirms this in spades.
Any Newspaper, or media outlet that was seeking to build a reputation for quality Journalism with high integrity looking to employ reporters capable of producing objective and well balanced accounts of newsworthy events… Marc Daalder would not qualify let alone be ‘Senior Reporter’. It would be impossible for him to present ‘the other side’ of any story with fairness.
Note how he self identifies as a reporter on ‘Far Right Extremism and Miss-information’.
His political prejudice could not be more overt, and the inference to be drawn here is that manufacturing Leftist counter-propaganda is his specialty.
Seeing the world through his glasses automatically means labeling any criticism of leftist ideology as ‘Far right miss-information’.
The skew on reality is that when you are seeking to ‘normalise’ far left extremism, you must sell the lie that mere Conservatism now occupies ‘Far Right’.
Lefties like Daalder think the best way to mount a counter-offensive is not to employ sound arguments, but to slander their character, then insinuate they are dangerous and ought to be censored and deplatformed.
Marc retweeted a whole series of graphs that demonstrated to fellow radicals the efficacy of deplatforming in reducing the reach cancelled Youtubers.
The question I ask is who at Newsroom is ‘Senior Political Reporter for ***Left Wing Extremism and Misinformation***???
They probably don’t believe Far left extremism even exists.
What about the serious dangers posed by Maori Radicalism?
Who at Newsroom is investigating and reporting on this well known variant of Racist Extremism?
What about Green extremists?
Anyone remember the would-be Terrorist cell Tame Iti and the Radical Greens running around in the Urewera’s training for Terrorist attacks?
What were *their beliefs and ambitions*?
And are these same ideas being promoted today?
If so by whom?
These sorts of questions are *forbidden* to even contemplate!
To do so evidences far Right Extremism!
Photo: From Anna McAllister’s public Twitter feed.
Introducing Anna McAllister. Artist, government employee, and Maori Radical. And Overt Racist against White people. She is a member of the deplatforming gang that destroyed Lee Williams life.
In part 2 of this series on ‘The Great Deplatforming of Matariki 2020’ we shall profile Anna, and see several other of Daalder’s own followers are Maori Radicals, and that they put into practice Daalder’s personal Anti-free speech/ pro censorship pro deplatforming… gutter scraping … political subversion tactics.
Daalder is not just a instigator. He was himself was personally involved in the deplatforming of Lee Williams from You Tube, cloaking his activity as ‘simply doing his job’… and yet gloating about it at the same time in his article…
‘Brighter spotlight on far-right YouTubers’ June 3 2021.
” Williams has struggled to keep his channel going in the face of increased scrutiny. He has deleted the vast bulk of the videos from his channel after receiving a two week ban. The ban came after Newsroom asked YouTube why some videos, which appeared to conflict with its community standards, had been approved to remain online by the company.”
Not merely reporting the story… Daalder boasts about taking part in the story.
Such ‘Activist Journalism’ practiced by Daalder is straight out of the Woke Far Left handbook… so too is bragging about it, otherwise known as ‘Virtue signaling.
He sees himself as being a bit like an armchair superman fighting super villain’s, though his target Lee Williams was not actually a criminal, and not actually doing anything wrong, but was simply guilty of having his own contrary opinions which he shared from his soapbox on Youtube… you know… exercising his democratic rights to free speech!
Photo: What an actual Far Right Extremist looks like… Phil Arps. he posted actual threats of violence towards the Muslim community.
You gotta feel a bit sorry for Daalder… The great would-be slayer of Far Right Extremists doesn’t have any truly impressive super villain’s to slay!
New Zealand completely lacks any *Real* politically active Alt-Right Swastika waving White supremacist’s* that believe in Arianism supremacy and still want to ‘Exterminate Sub humans’.
Unfortunately for Marc Daalder, yet fortunately for New Zealand Race haters on the Right such as the now notorious ‘Phil Arps’ are as rare as hens teeth!
Far Right Extremism here is a non-event!
Even the once infamous Kyle Chapman has found Jesus and now loves charity work!
This is why Marc must make do with slaying much less menacing types… meek and tiny fish Like Lee Williams… who is not even a racist… he just is concerned with the UN Compact for migration.
He just disagrees with Arderns Draconian handling of Covid 19.
Newsflash to Daalder!
Believing in controlled immigration that focuses upon migrants suitability to fit in well with New Zealanders common values and beliefs is *Not Far Right Extremism*!
I’m sure Marc knows this, yet is intentionally applying his own ‘misinformation’ for the sake of duping New Zealanders into thinking anyone who critisises Jacinda Ardern, or the UN Global Compact on Migration is an extremist.
The Truth be known national sovereignty and boarder controls are Mainstream Kiwi beliefs!
Not Radical… not extreme… and the desire to keep things this way is called Conservatism!
The reverse is also true… calling for open boarders while maintaining a welfare State *is extreme*… and that makes Daalder and Ardern the extremists at variance with most New Zealanders.
What part if any did Marc Daalder’s minions play in the Deplatforming of John Banks from Magic Talk Radio show, that ultimately also claimed Sean Plunket I have no evidence, and yet we can clearly See Daalder is making a point of slandering Talk back host Peter William’s.
Daalder obviously would twitter his joy should we loose yet another commentator with the courage to question the activities of the Ardern regime.
While this gang of Extortionists are at work there is every possibility that Peter Williams will some time be deplatformed.
Daalder already accuses Peter of granting a platform to ‘Anti-Vaxxers’ when all Williams was doing was informing the public about how dodgy Jacinda Arden’s Roll out of the Covid vaccination was! Lawyer Sue Grey took the Ardern regime to court for breaking the Health act… and won! Yet instead of complying with the spirit of the Law, Ardern and co rushed through legislation in the dead of nite… again without public consultation to legalise their formerly illegal vaccination scheme!
New Zealanders must wake up to the fact that the far left have been busy censoring people who hold fundamentally the same ideals they themselves and appreciate the blatant Bias and Anti-Free Speech toxic rubbish which flows for Daalders pen for what it really is!
It certainly is not reasonable to suggest that New Zealand based ‘Far Right Extremists’ had anything at all to do with the horrific Christchurch Terror attack against Muslims and yet Daalder does his very best to try and implicate Lee Williams in that tragedy by saying Lee was visited by Police twice after the March 15 Terror Attack… that is how despicably dishonest he is!
That the police started harassing innocent New Zealanders in the wake of that event was a gross violation of their rights, and the beginning of Ardern’s ‘Thought Police’ mentality.
Obviously this meets with Daalders personal stamp of approval!
Everybody knows the Terrorist Brenton Tarrant was not even a New Zealander!
Had the SIS been spying like Hawks 24/7 on the handful of actual Neo-Nazis who vagrant New Zealand this would not have prevented the atrocity from happening!
This is a simple fact.
And just to trigger Marc Daalder further still a good argument can be made that Tarrant was in fact a far Left Environmentalist Extremist… not Right wing at all!
New Zealanders have been treated like untrustworthy children with respect to being able to openly discuss what actually happened that frightful day in March 2019, or to really come to grips with what Tarrant really represented as his manifesto ‘The Great Replacement’ was speedily outlawed.
The reasons for doing so are pathetic… Bogus… given how important it is for our nation to fully come to terms with what happened and our right to know the facts!
My Goodness… the bullshit sandwiches we get fed by the Ardern regime!
The Royal Commission of inquiry into the Christchurch mass shooting was also farcical and much of it suppressed for 30 years!
The Christchurch Atrocity was a random act of madness of a foreign Extremist.
A lone psychopath, and does not reflect anything about the nature of New Zealanders!
He was not radicalised by any dangerous New Zealand far right ideologues.
None exist here, and that this is a fact is why our own intelligence services ranked the level of risk New Zealanders face from Far Right Terrorism to be very low.
The day Newsroom wakes up to the fact that there is virtually zero far right extremism in New Zealand Marc Daalder could potentially find his services as being ‘Surplus to requirements’. Daalder could find himself on the Unemployment benefit!
Oh dear how sad!
Would not that be poetic justice given his part as ideological prophet advocating fordeplatforming of Independent voices like Lee Williams who in the process was targeted by Daalders own social media followers and ended up losing his job!
These are Marc’s ‘people’.
Marc Daalders blatant political bias destroys the objective trustworthiness in what he writes.
New Zealanders need to understand his nefarious Game!
Daalder is not a reporter of facts, but a blatant prejudiced Propagandist and Spin doctor for the very partisan powers and interests.
He’s a dangerous extremist.
The Irony is Daalder spends so much time extolling how dangerous an influence people like Lee William’s YouTube channel ‘Cross the Rubicon’ represented to fostering violent rightwing extremism, never contemplating how easily his own philosophy can be far more reasonably applied *to his own rabid Far Left extremism* and the dangers that represents in fostering violent Left wing extremism!
Daalder himself ‘Dog whistles’ to dangerous Far Left extremists all the Ding dong day!
In truth all the toxic Leftist doctrines about ‘Pakeha Oppression’ and ‘Colonial injustices’ not only ferments real race hate from many Maori towards Pakeha, it also prevents Maori from taking ownership of their own plight that they themselves are responsible for the high crime rates, incarcerations, poor health, etc which is the first vital step towards escaping their shocking social statistics.
This will have to suffice for part 1 of 2 posts on ‘The Great Deplatforming of Matariki 2021’.
So much more could be said about Daalders warped political perspectives.
Part 2 will expose several of the truly malicious and disturbed Leftist radicals who extorted Synlait Dairy company, costing Lee Williams his Job, and much more.
Hopefully by the end of it just how despicable the practice of deplatforming is will be apparent to all.
I believe this business demonstrates the need for Anti-discrimination protections to render this sort of deplatforming operation and extortion racket Illegal.
It is so dangerous to the right to free speech.
I’d be interested in hearing opinions on this.
Having written this blogpost, I know I will become the focus of these nasty radicals… because that is how they roll.
This is not a task I take any pleasure in.
They will probably start plotting my downfall.
I hope this article puts them on notice that their evil doings shall be their own undoing.
They cannot play the victim… they are the offenders… the haters.
I in fact only feel pity for their sorry condition having allowed themselves to duped by toxic ideas, and filled with malice.
This is for justice for Lee Williams and for the sake of free speech in New Zealand.
To borrow from Project Veritas… Be brave. Do something.
Was I dreaming… or did the New Zealand Act Party just completed a National tour boldly announcing they were making Free Speech one of their main election platforms this election cycle?
I personally attended their Hamilton public meeting and was encouraged by what I herd… am I a simple fool?
Did David Seymour really mean it when he said that Act was New Zealand’s Free Speech Party?
Free Speech in New Zealand has been under serious attack in recent times, especially under the tyranny of radical Leftist Socialist Jacinda Ardern.
Not only did she release the Thought Police in the wake of the Christchurch Terrorist attack, she and her emasculated sidekick Andrew Little have drafted new ‘Hate Speech Legislation’ which they intend incrementally enacting as opportunity arises.
The latest being the ‘Films, Videos, and Publications Classification (Urgent Interim Classification Of Publications And Prevention of Online Harm) Amendment Bill’.
Ardern has trotted the Globe promoting government control and censorship of the internet with her ‘Christchurch call’.
Her serpentine Deputy PM Winston Peters signed New Zealand up the the Global Compact on migration which contains injunctions not only to ‘sell’ mass immigration to docile populations, but also to censor and criminalise critics and protesters who oppose this globalist agenda.
New Zealand has seen international high profile Non-woke (and white) personalities and speakers de-platformed, and some of our own have also been forbidden to speak… most notably Ex PM Don Brash was forbidden to deliver a speech at Massey University because the Vice Chancellor Jan Thomas considered Brash’s opposition to Waitangi Treaty separatism, and Race based electoral system as being ‘Racist’.
Stale Pale Males promoting racial equality before the law not welcome!
Massey University has become a cesspool of Radical leftist Wokery… parents be warned sending your impressionable young there!
They are highly likely to return to you lobotomised, radicalised, lost and gender-confused.
The rise of Leftist intolerance to Free speech and open dialogue in New Zealand mirrors a global militancy and oppressive ideological tactic coming from the Radical left, and it is in response to this threat to our democracy that I and several other Independent thinkers contributed to a book called ‘Free Speech Under Attack’ (Tross Publishing) which looked at the various ways Free Speech was being undermined and censored in Woke New Zealand, and it was for the same reasons that David Seymour’s Act Party decided to make Free Speech a Party Election platform.
In Britain we have seen Street Preachers being arrested for sharing their Christian Faith.
In Canada Police have used ‘Covid 19’ restrictions to Jail several pastors because they insisted on Preaching to their flocks on Sundays in peaceful civil disobedience.
It was also at this time that Don Brash and some of his colleagues formed ‘The Free Speech Coalition’ to take on the ‘Cancel Culture’ and heavy political prejudices that were on display by Woke folk in high Aotearoaian places.
The Coalition recently rebranded themselves as ‘The Free Speech Union’, and yet recent events have dampened my hope that finally New Zealand had a lobby Group, and a political party that were going to stand up for Free speech in New Zealand… esp for the ‘little people who are so easily trampled underfoot these days by rampant workery!
Much to my sorrow… it appears as if both the Act Party and the Free Speech Union are as useless as Tits on a Bull!
It pains me to say this because I have had such high hopes which are being dashed because of their failure to Rally for what I see as the greatest attack on Free Speech in New Zealand since Ardern released the flying monkeys to threatening Social media users following the Christchurch Terror attack!
The case is pivotal to free speech in New Zealand, to the degree that if nothing is done to get justice for the victim of this vicious violation of his rights, this bodes Deathly ill for the rights of all of us… esp those of us who are critical of the powers that be!
This case is absolutely central to our democracy, and the perpetrators of this great injustice… and there are many of them… rollic and gloat upon their success on destroying a mans life… and silencing one of their vocal opponents.
What they have done to this Good man, they intend doing to more people just like him… Vocal independent Kiwis with no means of defending themselves from this malicious and hateful Mob activity.
Don Brash had enough powerful friends and ‘public capital’/ celebrity status not to be absolutely decimated by the Maori Party, and their Woke white collaborators.
The man I am talking about has suffered a complete wipe out… and yet not a Peep has been herd… not even a murmur in his defense from Act or the Free Speech Union!
let me recount what evils have been at work, and what has befallen one of New Zealand’s Rare Brave Independent Social Media commentators… and why our Country should be alarmed!
Over the past month South Island based Independent Citizen Journalist and You Tube Commentator Lee Williams has been systematically attacked by Maori Party activists… these attacks being fully supported by Maori Party MPs, which has resulted in his wrongful dismissal from Synlait Dairy Company, Him being robbed by ‘Go Fund Me’ crowd fund raising site of thousands of Dollars that were willingly donated by friends and supporters to help him. He has suffered further injustice and bigotry from Westpac who shut down a personal Bank account he had with them, and ultimately now he has lost his You Tube Channel with near 16 000 followers.
Lee’s ‘crimes’ were for daring to critisise Maori Party politics and the He Pua pua Report that seeks to surrender the nation to Maori under the pretense of ‘honouring’ the UN declaration of Indigenous rights’, and for making Spoof/Satire videos mocking Maori Party MP Rawiri Waititi… who…we are supposed to believe that because he is *a Maori*… that this renders him somehow morally beyond being humorously caricaturised… almost like Mohammed… a Politically incorrect crime!
We apparently live in a politically post-Humor post-ridicule age.
They don’t seem to have been able to contend with Lee via normal civilised political debate. No.
For these ‘insults’ they went out after him… to destroy his life.
Lee has been unjustly slandered, and illtreated by all of the businesses I mentioned above because Maori Party activists have been harassing and extorting everyone and anyone with whom Lee has any association… targeting his Income, and financial arrangements, and now he has lost even his You Tube Channel.. all without any form of due process by which he could defend himself from the vile slander of being accused of being a White Supremacist and a Racist.
Lee is neither a racist nor a white supremacist!
To label him such is a classic Socialist ploy to discredit their opponents!
This tactic is so common that back in 2019 I wrote about what an actual white supremacist looks like here PHIL ARPS: A PORTRAIT OF A REAL ALT RIGHT NATIONALIST WHITE SUPREMACIST: COMBATING MALICIOUS LEFT WING PROPAGANDA.
The truth is the Radical Woke Left have hijacked the political discourse and skewed what truly and historically defines ‘Far Alt Right/ White supremacist / Nationalist’ to mean anyone who disagrees with their own Radical Far Left doctrines.
To lump Lee in the same political boat as Phill Arps is a despicable sleight of hand ruse.
Lee is in fact a Conservative… who holds traditionally Kiwi values and beliefs, and that is why he has butted heads with Radical Socialists like Ardern and the Maori Party… because these Leftist radicals hate traditional New Zealand, and are systematically and intentionally seeking it’s overthrow!
It is no exaggeration to say the Ardern government is radically subversive and treasonous.
They are in fact seeking to render holding traditional values and beliefs to be ‘Hate crimes’.
I have also written a previous Blog about Lees plight and the malicious political attack he has been enduring here… in which I made the observation that Lee’s troubles with Synlait Dairy company is not the first time brave outspoken New Zealanders have fallen prey to these despicable tactics. It has happened before…
“The latest occurrence was when Media Works Corp decided to ‘let go’ 2 of their best broadcasters, John Banks and Sean Plunket, because like Lee, they dared to take less than agreeable positions with the racist radical agenda that divides New Zealand into a two tier society… First class citizens being those with special indigenous rights… and Second Class citizenship goes to all the rest.
If you complain about being rendered a second class citizen, the Maori party will call you racist!
Woke left wing activists successfully applied the very same pressure Synlait is now experiencing to several of Mediaworks major advertisers who then threatened to pull their advertising revenues from Media works unless they ‘deplatformed’ Ex Mayor of Auckland John Banks.
Fellow Radio Works talk show host Sean Plunket made ‘the mistake’ of speaking up for Banks.
When the despicable tactics of the radical Left got the results they hoped for New Zealand lost two prominent public voices brave enough to challenge the racist policies of the Maori Party and others in parliament.
Now they have turned their sights on defender of the Kiwi Dream, and You Tuber Lee Williams.
These tactics are what has become known globally as ‘Cancel culture’ and are a clear demonstration of how leftist militant political activists are systematically undermining legitimate free speech, and attacking their critics… not in a civilised manor with superior reason and facts, but with Bulling and threats, and slander… going for their throats by attacking their jobs and livelihoods.
These underhanded and Machiavellian tactics cause New Zealanders to shut their mouths to the vile antics and policies of these radicals out of fear of coming under attack themselves.
These despicable tactics are running amok across Western societies because of a failure of Parliaments to recognize this subversive political behavior for what it really is.
Hateful, malevolent, and anti-democratic.”
When I wrote those words Lee’s employment with Synlait was ‘suspended’ while they deliberated among themselves how they were going to get out of this ugly mess the Maori radicals had created.
I had written to them via an open letter to inform them of the true nature of the extortion they were experiencing at the hands of malevolent Political subversives hoping they might do the right, honorable, and Legal thing… and refuse to play the ball these Maori Radicals were throwing… and yet I was not at all surprised when soon after I was informed that Synlait chose to take the low road… and unlawfully dismiss Lee on false grounds… saying he had committed serious misconduct by damaging Synlait’s reputation.
Lee had done no such thing… it was the Maori Radicals and Maori Party who had engineered this entire scam!
Lee has a very strong grounds for a personal grievance case against Synlait for wrongful dismissal… and yet to do this will take Legal and financial support.
And that is just the first step in getting justice for Lee and setting a very much needed legal precedent that will protect all New Zealanders Free speech from such extortion with respect to their employment.
Yet that is only the start… the defenders of the Right to Free Speech must go after and prosecute the ring leaders and even the MPs involved in this scandal.
The only hope I see is that the Act Party, and The Free Speech Union get up off their couches and get to work!
For the sake of our nation!
To grasp the serious implications of what has been done to Lee, and how absolutely essential it is to Free Speech in New Zealand that Justice is served upon those who have behaved in such ignorant and malicious manner, please read my earlier Blogpost…
I am declaring an SOS emergency call out to theses self appointed champions, and indeed to anyone out there who cares about Free Speech in New Zealand, to take up Lee’s cause… because if what has been done to him is allowed to go unchallenged, it will set a string of Anti-free speech precedents that will leave Free Speech activists and critics of the government without Legal protection from oppression and persecution by the Powers that be.
This is a crisis for our Democracy.
At a minimum should the perpetrators of this racket get away Scot-free, this injustice will only emboldened them to continue to target others the disapprove of… and destroy their lives too.
I find it incredulous to suppose that Act, or the Free Speech Union are unaware of Lee’s plight, or the seriousness of his case for Free Speech in our country, which leads me to the alternative conclusion that they know about what has been going on, and yet are unwilling to lift a finger to help Lee.
For what good reasons have you failed to step up in Lee’s defense?
Is it because Lee has been accused of being ‘A White Superracist’?
Of All Lobby groups and Political parties in New Zealand *you two organisations* have the least excuse for inaction as you full well know the evils of the Maori Party and the dirty tactics they employ… and the slander they throw about like confetti upon anyone who dares challenge their patently Racist and self serving politics.
I want to explore what possible point of contention that may be hindering these self proclaimed defenders of Free Speech from taking up Lee’s cause.
To put it bluntly… they may not like Lee.
Ie the reason they might not be jumping to Lee’s defense *is personal*???
They may have found his behavior on his you tube channel as being ‘vulgar’.
Maybe these people actually believe Lee really is some sort of ‘Far Right Racist’… hence somehow ‘deserves’ what has happened to him.
Maybe they are even pleased to see his Channel wiped out?
Do they think that free speech should only be a right for the refined, cultured, and eloquent… ie for themselves… and their own?
What about the rest of us ordinary uncouth non-politically correct Cretans?
Don’t our rights to speak our minds matter?
I will be the first to admit that some of Lee’s video’s did make me cringe, in particular his ‘Satire’ video’s…
I have already stated on another post that I do not endorse all of Lee’s perspectives… and yet I condemn in the strongest terms what has been done to him for the sake of silencing him, censoring him, and punishing’s him for simply exercising his legitimate rights to free speech and criticizing politicians and Members of Parliament.
Lee has been a vocal supporter of Donald Trump.
Lee has been a scathing critic of Jacinda Ardern.
And I know Lee has been critical of both Act Leader David Seymour’s support for the UN Migration Pact, and of Don Brash’s Anti-Trump views… could it be from a personal agnst that these Heavy hitters are choosing to let him burn?
If so… that would signify very poor character on their part, because to truly be a champion of free speech, a person must be willing to defend the free speech even of one’s own critics and opponents.
Conversely should they wake up, and rally in Lee’s defense, that would demonstrate High character and integrity on their part.
Lee is a very critical person who does not pull his punches.
Lee speaks his mind, openly expresses his disappointment when politicians support things Lee believes to be wrong, He calls MPs… even our Prime Minster Jacinda Ardern corrupt! Treasonous Globalist! etc, which of course is his right to say, I have said similar things oft myself here at Eternal Vigilance Blog which is to say Lee and I do share many similar views on a broad range of topics… which is why by and large I enjoyed watching Lee’s channel. I respected his forthright expositions. And yet as I have already said… I felt his satire was imprudent and in bad taste.
Yet I still understand why he did it!
He did it from *shear principle* that The Maori Party have no *Divine Right* not to be mocked… no Divine right not to have the Piss taken out of them… and certainly no divine right not to be offended!
It is an essential aspect of Freedom in a democracy that citizens may mock, chide, criticize, and take the mickey out of politicians and elected members of parliament… and even prime ministers, and presidents!
*Citizens have the right to be as Eloquent or as Obnoxious as they please!*
It is a defining characteristic of Tyranny where it is illegal to take the piss out of the Leadership of the Nation, or be forbidden in criticizing any policy or institution.
It is in fact a Right and Custom in Free Nations to intentionally take the piss out of Politicians.
It is an Artform… And a Nations Comedians are often the greatest exponents of Free Speech… even in Bad Taste… It tells the Politicians that they work for us… that they are our servants… and that as such they have no right to expect to be protected from the vocal ire of the people.
We are not their slaves.
All this has in recent times come under threat by the Politically Correct Thought Police. And we know that Jacinda Ardern and Andrew Little have drafted up ‘Hate Speech laws’ and would love to render what Lee did to be ‘an actual hate crime!’.
North Korea… China anyone?
Brittish Comic Greats Rowan Atkinson and John Cleese are scathing in their critism of Politically Correct Tyranny… ‘Fascism pretending to be manners’.
Lee’s You Tube Channel is nothing more… and nothing less than an ordinary Man making full use of the technology at his disposal to exercise his democratic rights!
And as such he should be defended to the fullest extent!
There is a pompous and power-mad sickness in this world that thinks only ‘important people’ should be able to disseminate their ‘high falutin’ ideals and opinions… and that the beer swillin rabble should shut up and obey… know our place!
Well the Internet has changed the game… and the Little people now have an opportunity to be herd!
This is what the powers that be hate and want to monopolise for themselves.
To Tyrants, Lee represents the worst of the peasants… Brash, Loud and independent thinking!
Unlike the rest of the useful idiots… he has ideas of his own!
So they dream up excuses for why he should be silenced.
Lee’s satire was not particularly well done, and yet it did solicit a laugh… the point is that it was all within the bounds of Free speech… even if a bit offensive. To Lee’s perspective, Rawiri Waititi deserved to mocked… and Lee was exercising his Full Right to do so!
If Rawiri Waititi took offence to it… well tuff titties!
We live in a free country don’t we????
Well is New Zealand still a free country…. or not?
Even without further hate speech legislation when you look at what the Maori Party, Synlait, Westpac, and You Tube have done to Lee Williams… so far without any justification or recompence… the proposition that New Zealand is still a free country must be called into question.
The right to free speech is absolutely vital for a Democracy.
Yet unless those who profess to defend the rights of New Zealanders to Free Speech take up Lee’s cause, no ones Job is safe.
No ones Banking is safe.
And with this sort of extortion running amok New Zealanders with shut their traps in fear… and Free speech will be no more.
Only Madmen like myself will cry out to the void.
The so-called justification Tyrants like Ardern use for introducing Hate speech laws is that they are necessary for protecting ‘vulnerable demographics’… and yet should it become illegal to spoof Maori Party MPs… would this really be an example of ‘protecting a vulnerable demographic?
Maori Party MPs a a bunch of privileged Bullies!
Invoking hate speech laws to prohibit ridiculing their antics… like breaking out in Haka in parliament every time they don’t get their own way would only serve to further entrench their ‘Maori Supremacy’.
‘Vulnerable minority’ Give me a break!
All the evil racist retoric of the Left… Their ‘Critical Race Theory’ has turned the brains of the world to mush!
Lee with all his ‘white privileges’. Everyone automatically taking his side… because he’s white. How so then is his life today in ruins?
Oh and just how hard done by are the Maori Radicals!… you know… Cheeky Pakeha mocking your Orsum Hakas…. aye Cuzzies!
Gloating that you have destroyed a mans life.
Should Act or the Free Speech Union, or anyone else who want’s to help, I can facilitate communication with Lee.
Simply Email me at email@example.com
I encourage all New Zealanders to contact the Act Party, David Seymour, Don Brash, and The Free Speech Union and implore them to help Lee get justice, and defend our Free speech from this evil form of extortion being practiced by the Radical Left.
Lee Williams is a champion of freedom and equality for All.
Look for ‘Cross the Rubicon’ on Rumble.
Freedom loving New Zealanders must not remain divided… self defeated and impotent because of petty differences that prevent us from uniting together for the sake of Freedom for ourselves and future generations.
We must grow a pair… and get over our *ourselves* and start to function as an effective fighting force… just like the dirty dealing leftists are doing… and yet walking the higher path of integrity and principle.
For Truth and Justice are our allies if we will only rally for their sake.
Update… The Free Speech Union has now Stepped up to the plate… let’s see now how they mobalise in Lee’s Defence.
A special shout out to The Kiwi Independent News site ‘The BFD’… for publishing several stories on Lee’s plight and cajoling the Free Speech Union into action.
Read… Lee Williams – Westpac did WHAT?
And… They Did Not Come to His Rescue
I am grateful for the Free Speech Union for looking into and taking what happened to Lee as worthy of their time and energy
This blog post is an open letter to the Synlait Dairy company.
It covers matters of a very sensitive, unpleasant, yet vitally important nature to justice, freedom, and the future wellbeing of our country.
Right now, a brave and good man’s livelihood hangs in the balance.
Now He needs his countrymen to speak up in his defense.
Please share this on your Social media platforms.
To the management of Synlait Dairy Company.
I write to you in defense of Dairy worker and independent You Tuber Lee Williams for the purpose of explaining why Synlait must not dismiss Lee because to do so would be wrongful.
Your company has become ensnared in a dirty political game through no fault of your own, and for this you have my sympathy.
Take courage, most New Zealanders understand this.
New Zealanders are not blind to what is going on.
This is a matter of National importance.
Lee and Synlait are but the latest victims of despicable systematic, politically motivated attacks upon your names and character.
These attacks are attempting to circumvent the rights of free citizens to speak out against the political policies of Racist radicals peddling a blatantly racist agenda by threatening their reputations and livelihoods.
I am in this instance talking about the unscrupulous behavior of the Maori Party, who are a notorious bunch of racist radicals who do not even represent what most Maori people believe, let alone what most New Zealanders believe, yet still because of the way they operate in labeling anyone who speaks out against their racist agenda as being ‘White Supremacist’ most New Zealanders are too scared to stand up against them.
I am well aware of the pressure Synlait will be feeling having become the focus of their attention, and that the last thing you want is to be dragged through ongoing ugly public protests with a bunch of ill behaved radicals saying all sorts of nasty things about your company… until you give them what they want… the head of your worker… Lee Williams.
Every time companies cave in to such demands only serves to embolden this type of political extortion.
The latest occurrence was when Media Works Corp decided to ‘let go’ 2 of their best broadcasters, John Banks and Sean Plunket, because like Lee, they dared to take less than agreeable positions with the racist radical agenda that divides New Zealand into a two tier society… First class citizens being those with special indigenous rights… and Second Class citizenship goes to all the rest.
If you complain about being rendered a second class citizen, the Maori party will call you racist!
Woke left wing activists successfully applied the very same pressure Synlait is now experiencing to several of Mediaworks major advertisers who then threatened to pull their advertising revenues from Media works unless they ‘deplatformed’ Ex Mayor of Auckland John Banks.
Fellow Radio Works talk show host Sean Plunket made ‘the mistake’ of speaking up for Banks.
When the despicable tactics of the radical Left got the results they hoped for New Zealand lost two prominent public voices brave enough to challenge the racist policies of the Maori Party and others in parliament.
Now they have turned their sights on defender of the Kiwi Dream, and You Tuber Lee Williams.
These tactics are what has become known globally as ‘Cancel culture’ and are a clear demonstration of how leftist militant political activists are systematically undermining legitimate free speech, and attacking their critics… not in a civilised manor with superior reason and facts, but with Bulling and threats, and slander… going for their throats by attacking their jobs and livelihoods.
These underhanded and Machiavellian tactics cause New Zealanders to shut their mouths to the vile antics and policies of these radicals out of fear of coming under attack themselves.
These despicable tactics are running amok across Western societies because of a failure of Parliaments to recognize this subversive political behavior for what it really is.
Hateful, malevolent, and anti-democratic.
The Lust for power is the root of every form of evil.
Let me make this clear.
It is outrageous slander to label anyone who disagrees with the separatist policies and financial largess going on in our parliament today as being ‘White Supremacist’.
I myself am of Maori descent, and I stand with Lee, as do the majority of New Zealanders in opposition to the racially divisive agenda commonly known as ‘Treaty Separatism’.
Lee, a migrant from Britain, in his private life is a passionate defender of the Ideals and values that made New Zealand great.
Far be it that his attitude should be frowned upon!
He ought to be highly commended, esp given the caustic political environment of our times under which brave and principled people come under attack for defending such fundamental principles as racial equality before the law.
Lee did not ask me to write this.
I do not personally know Lee, nor do I agree with everything he says yet from watching his videos I can tell he is a good worker as he is often seen on his Go Pro walking in the cold and dark to work while the rest of the community are still lights out… snuggly tucked into their beds.
Synlait is fortunate to have such a conscientious man with strong work ethic on their team.
I understand the predicament he has now found himself, not because of any evil he has done, but because he has chosen to take a stand against Political corruption in high places.
He is a fighter for all that is Good about New Zealand that has become endangered by the Radical politics of Treaty separatism.
Lee now needs the Good people of New Zealand to stand up in his defense, and I for one will not cower from coming to his aid, and giving him my moral support out of fear the radical mob might turn their attention upon me.
Synlait must not submit to this Political harassment. It was a big mistake to suspend Lee because now you have sullied yourselves in private matters that are legally none of your concern.
That we are talking about *private matters* here… about what workers do in their own time… in their private lives… Lawful things that are not crimes.
These facts show the swampy ground Synlait is treading upon in suspending Lee.
In truth this should never have been made a question of his employment with your company. That it has become so is no fault of Lee, but yet another frightening example of how Radical Leftist political activists with malevolent intentions are working to ruin the lives of their political critics.
Getting people like Lee the sack from their jobs by labeling them as racists is one of their nasty tactics, and they are applying this tactic here and now, attempting to drive a wedge between Lee and his source of income… how he provides for himself.
Synlait must not allow themselves to be manipulated in such a despicable way… out of fear of being slandered in the public sphere by radical activists for refusing to play their dirty games.
You would do well to contemplate the fact that Rugby Australia had to apologise and reach a hefty settlement with Israel Folau because in dismissing Israel for things he said in private on Social media they violated Israel Folau’s rights. Though this case was in Australia, the principle is the very same as your situation with Lee Williams. If you recall, Rugby Australia had suspended Israel because he had privately expressed his Christian beliefs that among other things that Homosexuality is a sin, for which Rugby Australia had taken offence.
This is symptomatic of the vehement Social intolerance and spirit of persecution which has sprung up in Western Nations today in which private citizens come under threat simply for expressing their own personal views. And all this we are told is supposed to be making our societies ‘less hateful’.
In reality it is making our Nations Less free, and more like oppressive Socialist dictatorships, and Police States.
The only legitimate reasons Synlait might have for dismissing Lee is for serious misconduct at work, or for criminal activities.
Certainly not because of the shrill and venom filled cries of Racist radicals baying for Lee’s blood.
This is a shameful politically driven ‘witch hunt’ that must be called out for what it is and rigorously opposed.
This sort of political Bully tactics cannot be condoned.
The MPs behind this evil witch hunt should be dragged over the coals for such a malicious attempt to destroy a mans life… simply because he opposes their politics and aims.
That New Zealand countenances parliamentarians and policies that divide our nation according to race… that is the *Real Racism* New Zealand suffers.
I believe the best course for Synlait to take forward would be to engage Legal representation and make a complaint to Parliament for the behavior of Maori Party MP Debbie Ngarewa for her despicable actions that have caused your company harm to its reputation, and the well being of one of your staff… for personal political gain, esp her creation/promotion of a ‘Change.Org’ on line petition with the title ‘Synlait- Stop Employing White Supremacists’.
This crosses legal boundaries, and is a form of defamation and intimidation, and it is in the public interest that this corrupt political behavior by members of parliament be called to account.
When you read what his accusers actually say… they attack Lee because he dares to warn the public about what he perceives as the dangers of the ‘He Puapua report’… a document that Jacinda Ardern was keeping secret from the New Zealand public but an unredacted copy was leaked to the Opposition.
These same concerns that Lee expressed on You Tube have also been highlighted by the Leader of the National Party Judith Collins!
Is Judith also a ‘Far Right White Supremacist’?
The ‘He Puapua Report’ is a government commissioned blueprint upon how New Zealand might be systematically and fundamentally changed under the pretext of honoring the UN Declaration of indigenous rights, itself a document signed by the Key led National Government in 2010 which New Zealanders were told at the time was not binding.
Judeth Colin’s has publicly called out Jacinda Ardern for working in stealth towards the goals listed in the report, and asked the PM to start ‘an open public conversation’ about the contents of He Puapua to lay on the table what is at stake.
Yet here we see that the Maori party has straight away gone on the attack when Lee Williams has dared to start expressing his view on this subject… which the National party Leader herself has said we need to have public discussion!
Can we have any sort of public discussion if the Maori party is able to get people fired from their employment for simply not going along with Maori Party ambitions regarding the He Puapua Report?
The petition against Synlait and Lee Williams not only accuses Lee of ‘disseminating extreme white supremacist material’ but also say’s “Synlait espouses values such as diversity, inclusion and thriving communities. This is entirely at odds with the violent rhetoric of their employee Lee Williams.
We call upon Synlait to review his contract, in reflection of their espoused values, and make it clear that they give nothing to racism, most especially a paycheque.”
Now there is so much vile contradiction and hypocrisy in that statement (above) that beggars belief!
I will only have space here to mention a few.
Firstly Lee does not advocate or incite any violence and it is a patent falsehood and slander to say otherwise.
On the contrary it is the Maori Party themselves who disseminate ‘extreme racist materials’, and are attempting to perpetuate Real harm/violence against Lee Williams by seeking to destroy his livelihood!
This is the sort of staggering dishonesty and malicious nature of Lee’s accusers… and the whole country knows this… even if few have the moral spine to say so.
Also, and most importantly, the case at hand has very serious implications for our country’s democratic processes.
It is the right of Citizens, and permanent residents to critisise the political policies of Parties and members of parliament.
The Maori Party MPs have no special rights that render *their political views* as sacrosanct… above reproach, and the idea that anyone who disagrees with them can be labeled a racist and a white supremist is an outrage!
Offensive in the extreme and nothing more than a fallacious Ad Hominem attack upon the character of their detractors.
Maori party policies must withstand the rigors of public scrutiny and criticism just as every other political parties wares must do for this alone is how democracy justly functions.
That New Zealanders and residents should have their jobs and livelihoods placed in jeopardy for expressing legitimate dissent is despicable!
Synlaits Legal response should definitely incorporate these counter claims against the perpetrators of this witch hunt.
Some sort of Legal ‘Cease and Desist’ Order should be sort to prevent the ongoing harassment of Synlait and its employees.
Ultimately the goal should be to turn the tables upon the real Bad actors in all of this, and set a precedent whereby New Zealand Businesses and Employers demonstrate the proper demarcation between employees private affairs, and what rightfully may be deemed to be within the bounds of a fair employment contract.
A persons privately held political views cannot become the basis for discrimination in Employment contracts because this violates that persons democratic rights.
Nor should a person lose their job for lawfully and peacefully exercising their right to free speech simply because it is critical of the political policies of any Party or members of parliament.
This highlights just how dangerous are our Socialist politicians current attempts to legislate Free speech into the criminal codes because in so doing they will be able to construe what is currently lawful criticism of government policy as an actual criminal offence.
These are the grave dangers we face today as a Nation.
It is my sincere hope that Synlait takes the high road and boldly choses to defend itself, and your employee Lee Williams from this malicious activity.
In so doing you will be doing our nation a great service in defense of Free Speech, and worker rights for which the great percentage of New Zealanders will be grateful.
I offer my services to Synlait, and Lee Williams for any support I can give.
I have been actively opposing Treaty Separatism for two decades, and recently contributed to a book entitled ‘Free Speech under attack’ (Tross publishing).
I place my experience in these matters at your disposal.
My Email address is below.
Lee, If you are reading this you have my support.
Please contact me.
I understand how heavy is the burden upon your shoulders right now, yet you should not go to England at this time but remain here to defend your name.
Judith Collins calls for ‘national conversation’ from Jacinda Ardern after controversial He Puapua report.
Change.org Synlait – Stop Employing White Supremacists
Rugby Australia and Israel Folau settle legal dispute over sacking
Israel Folau and Rugby Australia settle unfair dismmissal claim over social media post.
Near the end of June 2020, Hamilton City Council released a ‘Historical Report’ they (in conjunction with Waikato Tainui) had commissioned.
‘New Zealand Historian for hire’ Dr Vincent O’Malley produced it for the fee of $10,000.
The report can be found here , and the full text has now been attached to the bottom of this Blog post.
This report was supposed to be instructive to the council in helping them consider the proposal by radical Maori activists and their supporters to ‘decolonise’ our city, by dumping the name of Hamilton in favour of ‘Kirikiriroa’ and also changing the names of Grey St, Von Tempsky st, and Bryce St… as these were named after Pakeha ‘heros’ of the wars of the later half of the 19th century.
A series of articles about the report began to appear on Stuff media, including articles about the Bronze Statue of ‘Captain Hamilton’ in Garden place that had been donated to the city by one of it’s benefactors, Sir William Gallagher.
This statue had become the target of Tainui activists who said it gave them offence.
They defaced it, and in a display of weakness Hamilton City Council had it removed.
This affair is in keeping with radical anti-colonisation activism in other parts of the country against such figures as Captain Cook, and is in fact part of a global radical Left wing movement against capitalism and ‘British/Pakeha/White Imperialism’, that manifests itself in such violent and intolerant hate groups such as Antifa and Black Lives Matters.
Reading the report I was alarmed at what I found.
The report is not what it claims to be.
Having discussed these matters with friends, and in anticipation of a public meeting Hamilton City Council was supposed to be having for the public to discuss the merits of Dr O’Malley’s report, I decided I must challenge it’s veracity… for Truths sake.
Below is my written submission, which is a rebuttal of the heavily politicised claims Dr O’Malley attempts to pass off as history.
What is at stake is of the highest import to our whole nation, because it is part of a systemic drive to rewrite history and destroy all of our Colonial heritage.
It is my desire to alert the citizens of Hamiltion as to what skulduggery is afoot and how a false historic narrative is being used to slander the good name of Hamilton city, and many of New Zealand’s greatest Pakeha Founding fathers and heroes, and to use this as an example that all New Zealanders might wake up to what is going on right across our Nation.
The same Radical Political Activist ideology is at work.
The same methods are employed… seeking the same desired result.
So for those of you who care about what is happening… for those of you who are interested in the history of the Wars of the 2nd half of the 1800s… Please read my submission in conjunction with Dr O’Malley’s report.
My intention is to vigorously defend our city’s Pakeha heritage from slander and vandalism by racist radicals via the light of historic fact.
I am still waiting for HCC to announce the expected public forum, yet I have left my submission as written for the day…
The Tross Publishing Submission is also reproduced below.
Vandalised Statue of Captain John Hamilton. Garden Place, Hamilton. Killed at the Battle of Gate Pa.
Photo from this Stuff article
Submission by Tim Wikiriwhi.
For the public review to discuss the historical report by Dr Vincent O’Malley commissioned by Hamilton City Council, in association with Waikato Tainui for the purpose of informing Hamilton City Council on the proposal to change the name of the city to Kirikiriroa, and renaming Grey, Von Tempsky, and Bryce streets.
To the Hamilton City Council, my fellow Hamiltonians, and the people of New Zealand.
In his introduction to his report Dr O’Malley states that it is not an exhaustive document, and yet it’s scope covers some of our nation’s most important events and personalities of the 19th century whose actions and reputations are being seriously maligned and misconstrued.
These are not trifling matters.
These memorials are spiritual taonga of the greatest importance to our nation’s colonial heritage, and esp to our city, so that should the council pass a rash judgement, this cannot help but result in the most shameful of consequences.
If we are to put Dr O’Malley’s ‘History’ under thorough scrutiny… it is not possible to be short and sweet, still there will be many concerns about the report that must remain unchallenged.
I emulate Dr O’Malley in saying my submission is far from exhaustive.
The admission on his part belies a dangerous reality that there is much left out of his report that is of the greatest importance, and even when I have gone some way to fill in gaps, there remains much I simply could not squeeze in.
Doctor O’Malley has been very selective in what he has chosen to include… and what he has avoided.
More on this in due course… I simply wish now to impress upon the council why I have written such a lengthy submission, and ask for you to bear with me… out of a desire to make a good judgement on the matters at hand.
I have tabled two written submissions, one by Tross Publishing, and this one written by ‘yours truly’.
I hope to speak to you directly on the general thrust of these submissions, yet trust city councilors will read them, and ponder the content before any deliberation is made.
I will present critiques of Dr O’Malley’s report… his claims, and his evaluations, and in the process offer alternative perspectives with corroborating historical citations and quotes.
Lastly, I will finish with some final points of importance.
Regarding my citations and references I have done my best to provide significant portions of texts with reference, and any that are not so provided I am more than happy to ensure the council gets them for their own evaluation.
Out of necessity that stems from the contentious matters at hand it behooves me to state for the record the personal caveat that despite appearances, and the many contrary things I am about to expound, that I do not harbour ill will towards Tainui Kingitanga.
I understand them.
I even empathise with them.
Yet still I cannot support what they are trying to do to our city.
Their activists are the ones that have brought heavy accusations.
I am merely a voice for those who cannot now speak on their own behalf.
My aim is to see an end to the endless grievances that are so destructive to the fabric of our society.
I desire peaceful coexistence.
The Dead shall rise! Court is now in session.
What is going on here today is a type of trial of the dead… one that is reminiscent of the posthumous trial of the ‘Morning Star of the Reformation’ the great John Wycliffe (early 15th cent) by the Roman Catholic Church.
Though he too was long dead, The Roman Catholics held such malevolence for him and his teachings that they decide to hold a trail against him inabsentia … which obviously he could not defend himself. As a matter of course The Council of Constance found him guilty of heresy. His writings were banned, and yet because they could not seize incorporeal John and burn him at the stake… as was their custom to do to those who held contrary opinions, instead they dug up his bones and burned them… and cast his ashes into the River Swift. Take that heretic!
That we are here today engaged in such similarly dubious proceedings gives me mixed feelings.
On one hand it is with a great sense of sadness and alarm that I witness some of the greatest personalities of New Zealand history… our founding fathers. and heroes who bravely fought and died serving our country to secure peace and safety, and re-establish order in our nation are being maligned in the most contemptible fashion.
I believe these brave men earned the honours and memorials bestowed upon them by a grateful people. How sad it is that with the process of time their worthiness has faded from memory! Lest we forget.
On the other hand it is with a sense of personal pride and burden that I contemplate that fate has bestowed upon me the opportunity to now step forward in their defense… and do battle for their good reputation, their names sake… for their enduring legacy against a tiny faction of slanderers.
And I intend to fight for their good names with all my heart and mind… and if by some miracle the council can be persuaded to reject the proposal to strip our city of it’s affiliations with these great and honorable men, then I myself will die satisfied in the knowledge that in their hour of need… when there had gathered against them a foe intent on their posthumous character assassination… to strip them of their rightful honours… that it was I… the insignificant Tim Wikiriwhi who knowing the injustice that was afoot and the seriousness of the situation marched towards the sound of the guns.
These are things that are dear to me.
In making this defense on behalf of men who cannot speak for themselves risks bringing undue contempt upon myself from some quarters, yet I will take solace in the fact my intentions are noble and not at all malicious, and should the proposals be rejected as I hope… I will have made a significant contribution to our city’s future well being.
Today I seek to construct a redoubt for the future defense of our pioneering and colonial heritage, and the precious values that have made our nation so prosperous and a great place to live… for everyone.
And such a stand today is sorely needed as our colonial heritage has been under constant barrage by fanatical Liberal revisionists, and too often those that ought to stand fast… instead beat an inglorious retreat!
Come what may… from today my insignificant name will at least be briefly associated with my hero Major Gustav Von Tempsky.
A man of such heroic stature and mettle that I should almost feel ashamed were I to stand in his presence.
I am in awe of him, and despite all the accusations leveled against him today, this is a man of whom I am not ashamed to stand behind… a man who was even revered by his enemies! Von Tempsky joined the New Zealand Police and it was as a member of the Armed Constabulary that he gave his life in service to our nation!
Grey, Hamilton, Von Tempsky, and Bryce cannot be here to explain themselves in person, and yet we do have records of them speaking in their own defense!
Dr O’Malley says it was greed for land that was the motive for ‘Invading the Waikato’… yet history records Governor Grey’s vehement denunciation of that very accusation!
He gives us his rationale as to why he undertook to square off and do battle against the Kingites.
Dr O’Malley portrays Von Tempsky as a cold-hearted killer of woman and children despite the fact that we have historic records of Von Tempsky expressing sadness when such things occurred and even that he intervened when non-combatants were caught in the frey!
We can see clear evidence within his report that Dr O’Malley has a barrow to push because in the few instances that he notes the expressed sentiments and protestations of these men… speaking in their own defense Dr O’Malley without exception… makes out they are being disingenuous.
All I ask is that these men receive a fair hearing as their reputations and legacy hang in the balance.
Is the matter already settled?
Is there any point in questioning Dr O’Malley’s motives, or report that was shaped thereby?
Is it already such a well established fact that the war in the Waikato was an act of colonial oppression, or can a completely different case be raised in the defense of the accused that has greater explanatory power with more sure foundations in recorded history?
If in the minds of this council there can be no defense given for the good character of these men… and for their conduct… and their worthiness with which their names should justly remain in place, well then this whole proceedings must be called into question as a mere token gesture… a political Haka… to feign due process in a case of which the judgment is already determined before the defense has even been herd!
Political Correctness run amok!
How is it that after more than 150 years our council today is seriously contemplating such radical proposals as to change the very name of our city?
Who is setting such an agenda?
Hamilton City Council has already demonstrated a lack of spine by removing the Bronze of Captain Hamilton from the Square. Many Hamiltonians are alarmed by today’s proceedings, and the prospect that our council may absolutely crumble before the malicious activists who show absolute disregard for our city’s good name!
It is dubious in the extreme that these proceedings are imagined by anyone to have any legitimate jurisdiction or mandate to stand in judgement of the long dead in this manner and whose contemporaries…. your predecessors in council deemed to be men of the highest character having performed the greatest service to our nation.
What is going on here is part of a global calamity facing the West… a regression away from tolerance and freedom into a totalitarian framework whereby conformity is demanded to a single view of everything… and that to hold different opinions from the ‘politically correct’/ woke view is to invite fanatical outrage upon oneself and risk personal and professional damnation.
Today, if you believe gender to be biologically determined and that there are only two sexes… you will be decried as being ‘transphobic’.
If you believe in the traditional rolls of men and woman you will be slandered as being misogynistic and supportive of the oppressive ‘patriarchy’.
If you dare to question the revisionist narrative of New Zealand history that supports Treaty separatism and grievance, you risk being derided as an ignorant crack pot and racist.
In all these things and countless others to question the politically correct perspective is deemed to be guilty of *hate crimes* whereas a ‘woke’ populist can always virtue signal by emotional vocal support for such narrow opinions.
How can a fee society function under such conditions… how can public debate be carried out and the truth be weighed and determined by individuals and voters if only one side of any contentious issue is allowed to be herd, and leaders fear that defending the truth will open them up to accusations of bigotry from the rabid Left?
It takes insight and courage sadly in short supply these days.
It is imperative that freedom of speech be rigorously upheld so that more than one side of any dispute be herd.
It is wrong to allow the fanatical ‘offence takers’ to dictate what opinions may be disseminated… or what historical monuments must be cast down.
Certain factions have turned ‘offence taking’ into a profession… an art form… a powerful bludgeon by which they impose their extremist views upon an intimidated and ill-informed majority via feeble minded councils and parliaments.
Notice too how at all these points it is our traditional values which are now under attack. The values upon which Western civilsation has grown into the most prosperous nations on earth with the highest standards of living in recorded history, and the greatest levels of social justice!
Sadly today under this new PC liberal outlook it is sufficient to be found guilty of hate and oppression by simply being discovered denying collective guilt for the colour of ones skin, or expressing personal opinions supportive of our traditional values and history.
These so-called ‘liberal’ movements are in fact patently racist against whites, yet hide behind a facade of ‘protesting against historic racism’… nor are they peaceful or principled in their actions, but destructive of property and prone to rioting and violence.
See how they defaced the statue of Captain Hamilton for which they faced no prosecution!
Why were they allowed to deface public property with impunity?
That is not a legitimate form of protest, but vandalism!
Just imagine if a Pakeha stood in front of some Maori monument having defaced it… do you think they would get away scott free?
And removing the statute is a form of historical and ideological vandalism on the part of Hamilton City Council.
I hope to convince council to desist from continuation of this shameful trend.
Politically Correct Liberalism is the new Tyranny, and it is having disastrous consequences… reducing our national character to one of childishness forbidding open discussion and demanding ‘safe spaces’, etc.
Words and opinions are being conflated with violence.
The idea behind removing the statue of Captain Hamilton was to ‘create a safe space’ for those precious souls who claimed to be ‘traumatized’ at its presence there.
Taking offence is one of the easiest and weakest things in the world to do!
Contrarians like myself are deemed to be ‘hurtful’ and worthy of censorship.
The thinking today goes a bit like this:
Emotion trumps sober reason.
Feelings trump facts.
If you can’t defeat an argument deemed to be ‘offensive’ with facts and reason… you can always resort to rioting, de-platforming, and shambolic prosecutions and proceedings.
Let me give you an example of what I am talking about.
Just the other day (Stuff August 10) A woke Tasman District Councilor Dana Wensley made the news when she exclaimed “Some books about the Treaty of Waitangi on the shelves of Tasman District libraries are “very right-wing extremist”….
It is clear from the article that Dana Wensley does not like books that express ideas that are contrary to her own narrow opinions and wants to remove the people of Tasman’s opportunity to read these alternative perspectives so they may weigh up matters for themselves!
This is censorship for political ends… attempting to control the narrative so that the people only get to hear one side of any debate… the side Politicians like her want them to believe is the only ‘valid’ option.
Yet she seems to be completely deluded about what she is trying to do… she said “I’m not talking about censorship, I’m just talking about making sure that the books that are free are also academically robust because at the moment there’s a bit of an imbalance and I think that people might be getting the wrong view of our obligations to our treaty partners because of the material they could be accessing from our library, and that concerns me.”
There we have the clear admission that she only wants views that support the notion of ‘Treaty partnership’ being available in the library… other views are to be thrown out and hidden from the inquisitive public.
Rightfully Mayor Tim King said he would be reluctant to see any political influence over the library collection. “I think it’s a dangerous conversation to start having,” King said.
The above article encapsulates the political barriers and slurs cast upon anyone who challenges the Politically Correct ideology of Treaty separatism implicit in the ‘partnership doctrine’ or challenges any Politically Correct view on any topic because political correctness is itself a very narrow prejudiced viewpoint that seeks to outlaw all dissenting opinions.
And because of its pervasiveness, those barriers are present here today in this meeting and need to be contended with for this discussion to be anything other than one-sided.
Even though people like myself are in fact presenting arguments that are historically conservative against a new a pervasive radical revisionism coming chiefly from the Left… it is we who are being labeled ‘Far Right’ and ‘Extreme’.
Whereas the new radical Left doctrines are considered the ‘Woke’, the enlightened, the progressive, and the informed view.
By such a device critics of the new doctrines are lumped with Adolph Hitler, Mussolini, and Neo-Nazi skin heads…. why would anyone give such people the time of day if they are believed to keep such company?
That is how the peddlers of politically correct leftist agenda work to silence their critics and have them de-platformed… their works removed from public libraries and burned rather than facing them in open debate.
We must also ask if via all these ‘new perspectives’, is our society really improving in moral fiber via the denunciation and abandonment of all the values and historical doings that built this nation and made it great?
Are today’s academics, historians. and politicians really of a higher caliber and occupy a far higher plain than their presumably more ‘backward’ and ‘prejudiced’ predecessors of 100 years ago… whose decisions this generation seems so keen to overthrow?
Is our civilisation on the rise or in wane?
I fear the later.
Either way the fact remains that we are now much less free to hold and express our personal opinions than we were merely 20 years ago.
At all points it is now expected of us to conform to the governments decreed ‘official narratives’ at the risk of being thrown out of university, job loses, and even prosecution looks on the cards via Andrew Little’s ‘hate speech’ proposals.
This all indicates our civilisation is in retrograde. Freedom is in retreat, and we are heading towards totalitarianism.
The modern scholar will always claim their revisionism is closer to the truth than the histories of those contemporary to the facts!
It is clear the founders of our city had a very different view of the stature and worthiness of the likes of Sir George Grey, Gustav Von Tempsky, etc. than those now entertained by Dr O’Malley.
Perhaps had you councilors lived at the time when Tainui was raising a hostile army that was threatening to sack your homes… that you too would have more appreciation for the exploits of Von Tempsky… and the firm hand of Governor Grey!
Major Gustav Von Tempsky
Why I stand in defense of the victors of the Waikato war of 1863-64.
How is it that I have come to hold this man Von Tempsky in such high regard when most of my countrymen don’t even know who he was or what he did?
Quite simply it is because for a very long time it has been my passion to search out the history of such things as the colonization of New Zealand, and investigated the wars of the second half of the 19th century by reading mostly contemporary and near contemporary accounts.
In this regard my views have not been spoon fed to me by a politically slanted education system that peddles the partisan ideologies and modern historical revisionism penned by Maori radicals and their sympathisers which have become so fashionable today and which permeate the opinions expressed within Dr O’Malley’s report.
If the only understanding Hamilton City Councilors have of these momentous events are from reading the narrative supplied to them by Dr O’Malley then that itself shows a gross ignorance that ought to cause an honest person to step down from passing judgement on these matters.
To be informed a person must read contemporary accounts for themselves… rather than simply chugging down the regurgitated slurry of such a partisan revisionist as Dr O’Malley… as if he’s preaching the gospel truth.
Anyone who has read a decent amount of history written before the rise of the modern treaty grievance industry cannot help but stand in awe of Von Tempsky!
What a Man!
He was no Neanderthal!
Besides being a formidable warrior, he was also an accomplished artist, adventurer, and writer.
Even his enemies held him in the highest regard as a mighty foe.
Dr Vincent O’Malley.
Questions about Dr O’Malley’s Objectivity and Bias.
Dr O’Malley introduces his report with the words…
“This historical report has been commissioned by Hamilton City Council, in association with Waikato Tainui to assist the Mayor and council members to consider the proposals with regards to the renaming of Hamilton to Kirikiriroa and for Von Tempsky, Bryce, and Grey Streets to be renamed.
“It does not discuss these proposals or take any view on the merits of them but instead briefly examines the historical evidence concerning the naming of these streets and settlement…”
These comments are found on page 3.
Now in the very first two paragraphs of his report Dr O’Malley makes some highly questionable claims about the nature of what he has tabled.
Examining these first two paragraphs is in fact crucial.
Let me explain why.
Dr O’Malley tries to present his ‘report’ as document free of personal opinion… yet by reading his report it clearly peddles a particular perspective. The reader cannot help but reach the conclusion that Dr O’Malley believes that the proposals have merit…. and in this way his claims of impartiality and of presenting an objective historic view point are exposed as being highly suspect… indeed patently false!
His report clearly favors the interests and opinions of one of the chief parties whom commissioned him to produce it and for this reason alone the report clearly fails to meet the standards of fact and evidence that distinguishes objectivity from partisan opinion.
I say this report is unfit for its expressed and intended purpose for it does not ‘aid the Mayor and council’ to make a sound determination in these matters… but aids the interest of the side of the dispute that has the most to gain from the proposals going ahead.
Despite his claims to the contrary Dr O’Malley has heavily invested his own opinions into the report in which he patently takes a very strong view of the merits of the proposals.
He favours Tainui getting their way!
Let us not forget what part in this history Tainui played!
They were one of the antagonists!
On the other side was Grey, Von Tempsky, Hamilton, and Bryce!
Given we are talking about a war, is it any wonder Tainui maintains some angst against these men to whom their relations suffered ignominious defeat?
Still it saddens me that instead of maintaining a dignified resignation for the sake of unity and moving forward, some within Tainui are stubbornly keeping the wounds open… and sore!
This serves their selfish political ambitions to do so.
My goodness! In half the distance of the passage of time, we as a nation have all moved on from the 2 world wars… we are again on good terms with Germany and Japan… yet despite getting hundreds of millions of dollars, Land, and political advantages via the settlement process that have allowed them to prosper in business, yet still Tainui chooses to harangue us!
Why was Dr O’Malley Selected by Hamilton City Council and Tainui to write the Report?
Questions need to be asked.
I ask myself what transparent process did the city council… in association with the Tainui King arrive at the notion that Dr O’Malley was the right person to produce the report from which they would determine the fate of our city?
Was the Job tendered out?
Was Dr O’Malley selected from a short list of able historians because he displayed an exemplary impartiality?
Or because Tainui already approved of his views because they were fully in line with their own?
The latter is clearly the case.
When I herd about Dr O’Malleys appointment by HCC in association with Tainui to produce his report, I understood certain things about Dr O’Malley that caused me concern.
It was fairly easy to connect the dots given Dr O’Malley has recently published a substantial version of the history of what he calls ‘The Great War for New Zealand. Waikato 1800-2000… excerpts of which were also published in a series in the Waikato Times and elsewhere, giving the Tainui King ample opportunity to gauge what sort of ‘Historian’ Dr O’Malley is and that is he is a man who chooses to view the events and character of the main antagonists of the wars of the 1860s in accord with Tainui! … one of the heavily vested interests in these proceedings.
I contend that this is why Tainui endorsed Hamilton City Council to commission him to produce this report…. and I am sure Tainui are very pleased with what he has had to say.
These facts would be sufficient in themselves to prove his employment has loaded the dice against ‘The defendants’, yet having decided to challenge Dr O’Malley… upon further investigations I discovered an on line biography
On the Website ‘History Works’ Professional historians for hire in Aotearoa
that among other things lists his credentials as having …
“… worked as a professional historian focused mainly on Treaty of Waitangi claims research since 1993 and in that time has prepared and presented many research reports on behalf of iwi around the country.”
(This biography has recently been ‘updated’.)
The implications of this for evaluating the objectivity and impartiality of his report are enormous as they vindicate my many criticisms about the type of Historian Dr O’Malley is and his suitability for the task he was given.
He’s a Man who has made his living for nearly the past thirty years producing reports *On behalf of Iwi around the country*… in support of their grievances and Treaty of Waitangi claims!
He is not simply an impartial historian who objectively searches for the truth. He is a seasoned professional spin doctor for hire, marketing ideas tailored for powerful vested interests.
He has literally been profiteering off the grievance industry for nearly three decades.
The Treaty grievance industry has been very lucrative for the ‘right type’ of ‘historians’… those happy to pedal anti-colonialism.
Given these shocking facts there is simply no way any reasonable person can expect a report from his pen to do justice to the true character and integrity of the ‘accused’!
How can the people of Hamilton have any faith in this document given these heavy slants?
Quite simply… they cannot.
His report must be read with a wary eye, and ultimately rejected as a basis for making any determination as to removing the names of Hamilton, Grey, Von Tempsky and Bryce from the places of honor they hold in our city… because it fails on the most fundamental standard that this situation necessitates… and that his report cannot be construed to be an impartial document from a dis-interested objective pen.
Clearly the report his heavily skewed in favour of the Tainui activists.
He has made a career of it.
To avoid hypocrisy on my part, it is fitting I make the following disclosure describing the Waka I have been paddling for some time.
I have been a political activist for more than two decades, both as a member and spokesman for the now dis-banded Libertarianz Party and as a Waikato based Libertarian Independent.
I was party spokesperson for the de-regulation of Maori Affairs and argued for the abolition of our apartheid (race based) electoral system.
I will be happy to answer any questions regarding my personal political views and I hope this helps to clarify from whence I have sprung.
There is a deep irony involved in that the motives Dr O’Malley unjustly levels at the colonial government of the day… may in truth be justly leveled at the lobby that is currently trying to desecrate the memorials of great and worthy men who bravely opposed the greed, and lust for power of Tainui’s political class.
Dr O’Malley paints with a large brush the idea that the war was started by the Greedy Pakeha who were prepared to deceive and commit atrocities all for the sake of getting their filthy hands on Tainui land.
I refute these accusations and turn them back upon their accusers, yet having made the above counter-accusation, I must reiterate that I take no pleasure in the business at hand and the task with it behooves me to fulfill.
I find it unpleasant that circumstances brought on by a nasty form of politics means that I must participate in dragging up the past that ought not be a topic of concern today but left at rest.
It is a tiny minority of radical activists and political class interests who are causing all this fuss!
They are not truly representative of the ordinary Tainui person, or the people as a whole.
Let me explain.
I am a Maori of Te Arawa and Ngapuhi discent, and it just so happens that both these Iwi fought on the side of Queen Victoria… and yet to me these wars do not represent the truth about today… here… and now.
I do not speak for Te Arawa or Ngapuhi but as an independent citizen of Hamilton.
Ancient inter-tribal conflicts dont even register on my gauges.
That’s not how things work for individuals living in a free society compared to how things were under tribalism.
I don’t hold any animosity towards Tainui.
It is from a love of the truth I speak… overshadowed with grief that necessitates I stand for the legacy of the great New Zealanders whose memorials are today under threat.
I am forced to discuss painful events of a time of tribal differences, bloodshed, victory and defeat.
Life today ought to have moved on… and most of us have!
I have my home in this city, and I send my son to school with many Tainui children.
I work with many proud Tainui… and the last thing I desire is for any of them to think I harbour ill will towards them… I don’t.
In truth I want the very best for them as I do for all New Zealanders, and so I hope they will appreciate that what I am about today is truth and the defense of some of our nation’s greatest Pakeha personalities and not about attacking or belittling the Mana of Tainui.
I respect Tainui’s cultural preeminence over this district.
I enjoy the many Tainui monuments and memorials that scatter the district and also hold deep reverence for the Pas and battle sites of the war.
The war was brutal and I know that many horrible acts were committed by Tainui… all conveniently omitted by Dr O’Malley… their love of the tomahawk, the non-combatants they murdered… yet I also know the great bravery with which their warriors fought during the major engagements earning the respect of Von Tempsky and General Cameron.
That is how I choose to contemplate these momentous events that make the history of our nation as epic as any other.
Yet still I will defend Hamilton from capitulation to their activists unreasonable and disrespectful demands.
Its like we street level Maori have truly been able to let the past rest and are getting on with our lives… coexisting in peace together… working side by side…trying to give our children a happy and secure life… yet there remains a political class that have no intentions of allowing peace to prevail… They harbour malevolent feelings… they are greedy for more, and more, and more.
Just like the war of the 1860s, it is this political class that wants to ensnare their fellow tribesmen by teaching them to look upon their neighbours as somehow being guilty of causing their people grievous wrongs… thereby undoing the peace and harmony between us as a united people… one nation.
This animosity is endemic to the Maori sovereignty movement as a whole and how it functions.
It cultivates a victim mentality by which Maori radicals teach the gullible they ought to carry outrage in their hearts against Pakeha.
This is fostering a very real racial prejudice among Maori against their fellow Pakeha Kiwi. This radical movement is not representative of all Maori.
Many like myself are not even on the Maori Electoral roll. We dislike the separatism and all the whining and victimism, and just want New Zealand to truly be united… one law for all.
Woke Anti Colonialism demands of Pakeha to abandon any sense of pride in their own heritage and instead assume upon themselves a collective guilt!
We live in such politically skewed times in which it is only permissible for Maori to take pride in their cultural heritage!
Over the past 50 years Radical Maori Separatist slander against colonialism has managed to take root in our Education system and today a large portion of Non-Maori New Zealanders have imbibed a toxic ‘self-loathing’ and undeserved shame for their own pioneering origins for which not too long ago our nation took great pride.
Bad faith over Treaty settlements on the part of radical separatist.
Having now made commentary on the many seriously compromising issues involved in the choice and employment of Dr O’Malley as historical adviser to our council, I want to present specific points demonstrating how Dr O Malleys bias permeates his report, some obvious, others far more subtil… hallmarks of an experience storyteller seeking to invest the Jury in acceptance of his conclusions.
This is a skill he has honed, and I assert gives us insights into the sort of ‘reports’ and ‘advice’ ‘experts’ like himself have tabled at Waitangi Tribunal hearings over the last few decades exposing the travesty of the treaty settlement process… the issuing of apologies to tribes by representatives of the government for events that are supposed to have happened well over a century ago and despite billions of dollars being paid in compensation and decades of pandering to their grievances … no end appears in sight!
Council has no guarantee that should they bend the knee and change its name to ‘Kirikiriroa City council’ that this will sate Tainui’s relentless demands.
I fear such farcical attempts at conciliation have proven to have the exact opposite effect.
Instead of bringing peace and putting an end to the disputes… They only serve to strengthen activist resolve to carry on ‘claiming offence and grief!’
Take the recent example of the outcry at Ihumatao by a bunch of activists when Fletchers started building a subdivision there and had negotiated an amicable deal with the local Hupu elders who were happy for the project to go ahead.
Treaty settlements for the area had also already been completed.
‘Full and Final’ were the words used by former Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Chris Finlayson
Despite all this… in walked a bunch of professional Maori grievance activists who began the usual anti-colonial haka.
Despite the ‘Full and Final settlement’ the Tainui King himself did not hesitate to go to Ihumatao and lend his mana to their cause… effectively breaking the settlement… and proving the grievances will never be settled in the minds of Tainui hierarchy.
The policy of contrition and appeasement shows weakness and only serves to entrench Radical activism and grievance… never satisfied.
If there is ever going to be an end to this madness it will only come when the people of New Zealand say *No More!*
Will this stand be made before the Treaty separatists have managed to absolutely desecrate all our nations colonial pride and heritage?
I have written an online article about the issues at Ihumatao that may be found here: http://eternalvigilance.nz/2019/08/apologetic-ihumatao-protester-lives-in-fantasy-and-self-denial/
“He Iwi Tahi Tatou”. “We are now one people” This is what Governor Hobson said as he shook the hand of each chief who signed the Treaty of Waitangi.
Dr O’Malley would do well to remember this historical fact.
The Treaty united Maori with the rest of New Zealand under British sovereignty.
From evidence within, I describe Dr O’Malley’s report as embodying the partisan bias of such recent ideas of Treaty partnership which contravene the first clause of the Treaty of Waitangi whereby sovereignty was ceded to the British Crown
Instead his school claims sovereignty was supposed to be shared.
I will provide historical validation for what I am saying from Sir Apirana Ngata shortly.
From this fundamental fallacy of ‘Treaty partnership’ he insists that the Kingitanga movement was not a breach of the Treaty… despite this being exactly how it was seen by the British government and settlers at the time, and from his false determination he then proceeds to make a case that the cause of the wars were fundamentally that of colonialist greed for Land, rather than what History proper records… That the Kingitanga movement was a Rebellion against the Treaty and that it was Tainui who began the war preparations, and instigated the dispute.
The war in the Waikato with the Kingites was about sovereignty not greed on the part of the settlers… not lust for land.
Despite these facts, revisionist historians like Dr O’Malley for the last 50 years have eroded our nations pioneering pride and sense of unity to the degree that Treaty partnership concepts, and the notion that colonisation as a whole was one gigantic racist crime… have become ‘official doctrine’ via a shameful process of successive political parties and governments retreating and pandering to radical separatist Maori activism… for the sake of gaining the support of the radicals occupying the Maori seats in parliament.
All this politics makes for very poor history.
New Zealand historian Paul Moon talks about this very thing in an article he wrote ( Stuff Sep 13, 2019)
“Given this importance, the Government’s decision to ensure all school students will be taught our country’s history is to be applauded.
Perhaps the most common response to emerge from the announcement is “which history?” or the more prejudicial “whose history?”. And there’s the rub. History is no mere list of dates and facts. It is often a contest between sometimes different ways of seeing the past, and what particular events in that past ought to be more pronounced. Many of these interpretations tend to chafe on contact with each other, resulting in history being a discipline that has to accommodate a wide range of views. Maybe this is why successive politicians have been reluctant to support compulsory New Zealand history in schools – it seems too contentious. Of course, there are risks that, if done poorly, compulsory history in our schools could veer into the realm of indoctrination. It is no coincidence that one of the first functions authoritarian regimes undertake on assuming power is to produce new history books in order to emphasise the “correct” version of history that is passed on to students. “
The truth is New Zealand has been in the throes of just such a scheme of systematic indoctrination for the past 50 years, and this is why today the legacy of these great men, and others like Captain Cook are under relentless attack.
I will supply sound arguments and citations to back up my assertions.
For the truth to prevail We must put the origins of the war in the Waikato into it’s correct historical context because this will help dissolve the false narrative that underpins the New Zealand species of Anti-colonialism and the false and divisive doctrines like ‘Treaty partnership’.
It must be understood that Communists have been attacking ‘British Imperialism’ since their age of revolution and a chief means of carrying on their ideological war has been the strategy of ‘divide and conquer’ … looking to recruit disgruntled minorities and activists in Western nations and fermenting angst and division.
Angst has been easy to find in many places, some of which may well express valid claims of large scale injustice yet was the colonisation of New Zealand an invasion of greedy villains hungry to rob Maori blind?
In this portion I want to rebut Dr O’Malleys argument that the war was all about Pakeha lust for Tainui land.
Ironically this modern doctrine peddled by treaty separatist is all about wealth and power… but not for Pakeha.
It’s all about getting massive ‘treaty settlements’ for Iwi via a dodgy process and the inherent bias of the Waitangi Tribunal.
The Waikato war was driven from a lust for wealth and power too but not on the part of the Settlers but was driven by Tainui jealousy at the progress of our industrious pioneering settlers.
It indeed was a struggle for domination… as Tainui decided to rebel against the Treaty… crown their own King… raise an army… and attempt to force the Pakeha out of New Zealand.
This argument I am presenting is the historically *Conservative view*, while Dr O’Malley is peddling radical Maori sovereignty propaganda dressed up as history.
Dr O’Malley’s report preaches the truly *novel and radical doctrines* … and not at all what far less partisan historians who lived nearer the events have recorded.
Dr O’Malley himself on page 10 of his report admits Captain Hamilton’s’ final Naval service record notes that he was ‘killed after great heroism and devotion’, and adds that ‘He was one of 10800 British Officers and men who served in the New Zealand Wars of 1845-72′ … and here’s the kicker… Dr O’Malley injects his own bias by saying their actions as being …’no longer widely seen in the straightforwardly heroic terms they once were among some groups’.
By ‘among some groups’ who considered the deeds of Hamilton, Grey, Bryce and Von Tempsky as being heroic…the men who today stand on trial most certainly were considered national heroes by virtually the entire population of the country…. Maori and Pakeha, save the rebel tribes themselves who were defeated!
I have already mentioned that Dr O’Malley has done his best to try and get the council to view matters from a perspective amiable to Tainui interests that attempts to absolve their recent ancestors of any and all guilt.
If we grant his observation that these matters are today seen in a ‘different light’ it is only because with the process of time we have forgotten what these men did to secure the life we now enjoy, and so in the vacuum modern revisionist like himself have made a living writing narratives for Iwi treaty claims, and for our Lefty Liberal dominated education system.
Can you find a single comment within Dr O’Malleys report where he indicates any wrongdoing by Tainui whatsoever?
I cant… and this type of omission is very indicative of a heavily slanted work.
Yet now I want to begin reminding people of the facts, and to do this properly requires at least a cursory overview of the colonisation process beginning in the early 1800s.
The true history of the British colonisation of New Zealand.
The Treaty of Waitangi is one of the great documents of history, esp in relations to the progress of civilisation and the age in which it was penned.
It is a document of enlightened ideals.
It established the framework for the foundation of the Nation of New Zealand.
Maori may have been here before the Pakeha, yet they were not *a nation*… but a were primitive tribes engaged in a constant state of war one with another.
Christian England was going through an age of Enlightenment whereby they had recoignised the ideal that all men are created equal under God and it was at the time of the foundations of our nation that the British Empire had Abolished Slavery (1833).
Contrast this with what was going on here at the same time in New Zealand.
Maori at this time were not only enslaving one another, but were cannibals… as a slave you were very likely to be eaten.
The practice of cannibalism was not an infrequent anomaly but deeply embedded in Maori custom and enjoyed… and dreaded.
Maori were very cruel to those they captured.
For reference I suggest reading Paul Moons ‘This Horrid Practice’.
In an article published on line by the NZ Herald 16 June, written by Peter Jackson talking about what is going on here in Hamilton.
Ngapuhi Leader David Rankin is quoted as having… ‘turned the whole Black Lives Matter trend on its head as he called for Tainui’s Turangawaewae Marae to be torn down’.
“Black Lives Matter-inspired demonstrations against symbols of history, in New Zealand and around the world, have focused on monuments to Europeans, but Ngapuhi leader, David Rankin, has called on Tainui to take down Turangawaewae Marae, which, he said, his iwi had long regarded as a symbol of enslavement and oppression.
The marae, he said, represented a dark period in the iwi’s history, when Tainui slavers abused his people to build their marae and grow crops for them.
“For us in the North, Turangawaewae Marae is a symbol of that slavery, murder and cannibalism, and so needs to be pulled down,” he said.
“The wealth that Tainui generated was made on the backs of Ngapuhi slaves.”
He had the support of his Te Matarahurahu hapu, whose ancestors were among those captured by Tainui, and used as slaves. Sometimes slaves had become part of the communities of their captors, but in this case they were eventually killed and eaten.
“Tainui famously acquired corn by disembowelling my ancestor and removing the kernels in his stomach for seed,” he said.
“Tainui has a moral obligation to pull down that marae, which for us is a symbol of cultural hatred, and if they don’t pull it down, then we will come down and do the job for them.”
These excerpts can be found on line here
So with this being the inconvenient truth about Tainui’s own history and doings, how duplicitous of them to be now complaining about ill treatment and pointing the finger at *everyone* but themselves?
By what double standard are we expected to hold a microscope to our colonial heritage and yet grant Tainui a free pass on their own checkered past?
Ought it not be clear that the council is being led down a rabbit hole by duplicitous activists?
How can it really be construed that the establishment of British law and order here in New Zealand that until the rebellions, ended these tribal wars, cannibalism, and slavery as described by David Rankin be today be deemed to have been horribly destructive to the indigenous population?
There are far more Maori alive today, and despite the many things vexing Maori today, they all exist in a far healthier and prosperous state than they once did prior to colonization by Britain.
This is an indisputable fact that is almost completely misunderstood about what conditions were like here for Pre-European colonization Maori.
The issues Maori are facing today have nothing to do with ‘post traumatic stress’ caused by collonisation as activist bureaucrats and academics shamelessly assert.
To believe so is yet another way in which the radical activists have been able to smoke the gullible and to misdiagnose the real causes of Maori plight.
The dire social problems facing Maori today have far more to do with personal choices and ethics than is permitted to be laid at their feet, because the fashion of our day is to see them as victims of colonialism rather than as authors of their own plight.
These matters fall outside the scope of today’s concerns and yet these notions still off-colour the way people think about the colonization of New Zealand.
Edward Gibbon Wakefield.
Lets get back on track. The colonisation of New Zealand was far different from European colonization of other places like the penal colony of Australia, The USA, or South Africa.
So it was that during an enlightened era of humanitarianism in Britain and the recognition of the equality of races, and having been invited, and after much lobbying and deliberations, William Hobson was commissioned to treat with Maori for the cession of sovereignty to the British Crown in exchange for protection from France and the establishment of British law and order.
This good will is all reflected in the composition of the Treaty… its various articles, in particular the 2nd article which was expressly concerned with ensuring a transparent and well scrutenised process whereby Land transactions could be facilitated in a way that protected Maori from being ripped off.
Land was to be surveyed, and first offered directly to the Crown who would purchase the land, then on sell it using profits for defraying the costs of governance and the construction of national infrastructure.
Not only does this clause reflect the care and concerns that colonisation proceed on fair terms for Maori, but also was following Edward Gibbon Wakefield’s definitive work ‘The Art of Colonisation’ which sought to take all the hard lessons learned from the less systematic colonisation of other nations like America, and Australia, and is notable for it’s concerns for the wellbeing of Native populations and explained how their interests could be catered for, and importantly how systematic colonisation would solve so many ‘evils’ that such undertakings had inadvertently caused elsewhere when done without foresight… such as how to finance the governance and construction of Infrastructure that is so vital for the common wheal.
In the early years the one thing New Zealand had an over-abundance of was un utilised land.
The idea that land sales should be controlled by the government was to prevent natural oversupply from rendering land values as paltry, thus ensuring Maori got a fair price.
This is not a heritage for which New Zealanders of colonial descent should feel any shame whatsoever!
In fact, it is a story of benevolence and enlightenment, and cooperation that few other nations can equal!
Thus at the very time slavery was abolished in the British empire, in the Christian spirit of the brotherhood of man, missionaries from the Church Missionary Society left the comforts of civilisation and risked everything to bring the gospel. and the benefits of civilisation to the primitive Maori people who lived here in backwards darkness slavery, and superstition.
When it became known that the French had ambitions for this country, by the hand of the missionaries the Maori chiefs formed a confederation asking for the protection of the British Empire.
“In 1831 a petition signed by 13 northern Māori chiefs was sent to King William IV. They asked for recognition of their trading and missionary contacts with Britain, expressed fear of intervention by other nations and requested protection from lawless British subjects”
From here https://nzhistory.govt.nz/james-busby-arrives-as-first-official-british-resident#:~:text=5%20May%201833&text=In%201831%20a%20petition%20signed,protection%20from%20lawless%20British%20subjects.
Putting all this in true and verifiable historical context and the spirit of those times…. The colonisation of New Zealand by the British empire was not ‘an invasion’ but was by invitation.
Ceding sovereignty to the British Crown was a stroke of genius for Maori as not only did they secure for themselves the rights of British subjects and begin in earnest the process by which they would be raised out of primitive poverty and darkness, ending their otherwise endless tribal wars, and they also avoided the very real prospects of having been invaded *For Real*, and subjugated by the French… who still practiced slavery in their colonies.
From the very beginning therefore history records not only the justness by which British sovereignty was established here, but also the peaceable and respectful means by which colonistation was carried out with careful regard for the interests of the Maori people.
The accusations made by Maori radicals like Tariana Turia who called colonisation ‘a holocaust’ claiming it to be one gigantic Lawless stampede to deprive Maori of their lands simply cannot withstand scrutiny.
Such wild accusations are the constructs of heavily prejudiced Political agitators for nefarious political ends… people who seek to set the narrative as a contest between ‘brown’ and ‘white’… when in truth there have always been more ‘browns’ fighting on the side of the ‘whites’ than on the side of the radicals of the Maori Party.
Post 1840 there were contentions raised about the second article of the Treaty whereby pre-emption on land purchases to the Crown was stipulated as a means to systematically control the process of land sales by Maori. It was being argued that in reality the pre-emption on land sales was not consistent with the rights of British subjects confered by the same article.
This argument prevailed and for a period pre-emption was suspended by Fitzroy, and yet it was restored again by Governor Grey in 1846 from a desire to protect Maori from Land sharks and restore a much needed revenue stream for the government.
A reference for these events can be found on line here
Having now laid down the *Real historical* spirit of the times that underpinned colonisation of New Zealand as an enterprise undertaken with very strong ethical concerns and legal protections for the interests of Maori we are better position to look at events in the Waikato in the 1860s.
“Awaiting the order to advance” (for the battle of Gate Pa). Taken at sunrise on 29 April 1864. General Duncan Cameron is leaning on the wheel of the gun carriage, (fifth from right).
The Causes of the War (Part 2)
In the time line of Gordon McLauchlan’s ‘Short history of the New Zealand Wars, on Pg 15 says for 1858 ” Tainui Leader Te Wherowhero is chosen as the Maori king and takes the name of Potatau 1. This is seen by many settlers as a challenge to the sovereignty of Queen Victoria”.
Before hostilities commenced, when Tainui was plotting to attack Auckland and ferment a unified Maori onslaught to drive the Pakeha back into the Sea, they sent emissaries to other tribes in the hope they would align themselves into an overwhelming force, and yet these emissaries met with blunt refusals.
Ngapuhi said they would rather have a white woman as their queen than a Tainui King.
Ref: Maori History of the War pg 510,511 Defenders of New Zealand
Many tribes had confidence in Sir George Grey.
Their confidence would prove well placed.
Nonetheless Tainui rallied sufficient allies to embolden them to continue with their rebellious intent.
This was the true nature of the threat Tainui presented to Governor Grey and why he deployed his army against them in the name of The British Crown, the Treaty, and the people of New Zealand whom were under the protection of the British Crown.
I wish to impress upon you how dire the situation was from the settlers perspective, who were witnessing Maori uprisings and faced the very real prospects of having their lives and property brutally destroyed.
I hope you can transport yourselves back to appreciate the magnitude of the crisis the rebel tribes threw upon the shoulders of men like Sir George Grey, and that the fate of the entire colony hung in the balance and that only by a strong hand and great sacrifice could order and peace be restored.
Was the war about Land? No!
Even from reading O Malley’s report we can see that like Governor Browne before him, Sir George Grey clearly saw the Kingite movement as rebellious and a contrary to the Treaty… thus exploding any notion that the Treaty was supposed to be ‘a partnership’.
(Read pg 19 of his report)
And this was not merely a prejudiced groundless opinion but was a materializing realty via Kingite aggression, murders, and war preparation… admitted in O Malley’s report.pg 21.
When Dr O’Malley portrays the war as really being a massive land grab, he clearly seeks to paint Sir George Grey as dishonest and conniving… yet why should we accept such a clearly prejudicial view?
With respect to the actual historic record as to why Governor Grey himself stated he decided to engage the Kingites… and other actions , O’Malley tries to discredit Grey’s honesty by using such phrases as ‘Historians have been highly dismissive of these claims’ (pg 21)
And finishing his chapter on Grey on pg 27 he says “Long remembered (By Pakeha at least) as Good Governor Grey’, his reputation has undergone something of a battering in recent decades as his role in ordering the invasion of Waikato, among other actions, have been the subjected to more critical investigation and analysis”
In insinuating here on page 27 that Grey’s historic reputation as good hinged upon ‘white prejudice’ Dr O’Malley hopes you forget that far more Iwi chose to fight on Governor Grey’s side than with the rebels!
It would seem reasonable to assume all such Maori who fought on the side of the British, and shared in the victory of suppressing the rebellions, restoring the peace under British sovereignty would also hold Grey as being ‘the good Governor’ too!
So his reputation of being ‘good’ is not simply a matter of racial prejudice as Dr O’Malley maliciously insinuates!
Many Maori were glad to see Tainui and all the other rebellious tribes humbled and British sovereignty prevail.
Portrait of Sir George Grey and Te Riwai Ropiha
Invasion or rightful enforcement of British sovereignty?
Dr O Malley’s repetitious assertion that Grey ‘Invaded’ the Waikato has been corrected in the Tross Publishing submission. Grey sent in the troops only after having warned the Kingites to desist from their hostilities, and return to peaceful co existence, and made it clear that if they disregarded his warnings, He would enforce the Treaty, and their violence and rebellion would be punished forthwith. The enforcement of the Law cannot be described as ‘an invasion’ as if Governor Grey had no legal basis to enforce the Treaty, defend the sovereignty of Victoria, and defend the Settlers lives and property from Tainui aggression that was patently a repudiation of the Treaty.
It was his duty to do so.
‘In a proclamation to the Maori Chiefs of the Waikato, dated 11 July 1863′ Governor Grey asked them to stop their evil acts against the peaceable settlers.’
‘Grey asked for the free passage of Europeans in the Waikato district, in particular for movement on the Waikato river.
He also stated: “…Those who remain peaceably at their own villages in [the] Waikato, or move into such districts as may be pointed out by the Government, will be protected in their person, property, and land.
Those who wage war against her Majesty, or remain in arms, threatening the lives of peaceable subjects, must take the consequences of their acts and they must understand that they forfeit the right to the possession of their lands guaranteed to them by the treaty of Waitangi; which lands will be occupied by a population capable of protecting for the future the quiet and un-offending from the violence with which they are now so constantly threatened.”
Excerpts from Richard Stowers’s ‘Forest Rangers’ pg 6
There you have it from Governor Grey what was the cause of the war, and why after having defeated the Kingite rebels, and the sovereignty of the queen being firmly settled, that land was confiscated as just punishment.
It’s important to grasp the sequence of events from Dr O’Malleys own report on pg 21 O’Malley shows that Grey gave the order to his troops to enter the Waikato district after extreme provocation.
Dr O’Malley admits British troops had been ambushed at Oakura and 9 killed, yet omits the fact that in the Waikato also the Kingites had also begun hostilities against the settlers that forced Grey’s hand.
Grey fears about the intents of the Kingitanga movement were materialising with murderous troubles in defiance of the Queens authority.
General Duncan Cameron.
Grey’s Disputes with General Cameron.
It is a recorded fact that I won’t avoid that, as stated by Dr O’Malley that Sir George Grey had a contentious relationship with the man he had in charge of putting down the rebellion, General Cameron. It is not uncommon for there to be differences of opinion about how military campaigns should be run, and that tempers and arguments happen. It is obvious that General Cameron did not see eye to eye with Grey. He was a man of his own opinions, and one whose heart was not committed to fulfilling Grey’s strategies or rationale.
In the heat of disagreement Cameron did express his own suspicions and cast dispersion upon Grey accusing him of being greedy for land.
This dispute may have heavily influenced Dr O’Malley’s views.
Grey himself did not countenance such besmirchment of his character but vigorously denied the accusation.
Without doubt General Cameron was a man of empathy for the plight of his enemy… a fact that itself is incongruous with Dr O’Malleys assertions that atrocities were sanctioned under Cameron’s command such as the account he gives of events at Rangiaowhia and clearly he desired as early settlement for peace as he believed possible.
Alternatively, and as stated by Dr O’Malley having had his ultimatums to stand down rejected, and now having been forced to make good on his warnings, Grey was far more determined than Cameron to ensure the Tainui rebels were sufficiently subdued.
This does not make Grey evil. He was determined to crush the Kingite rebellion and punish them. He not only wanted to strongly enforce the Treaty by which the lawful authority of the British Crown was established but also make it clear that any future rebellions would also face heavy penalties!
This exercise of power was the only means by which rebellious chiefs could be persuaded from causing future troubles and disturbing the peace.
The land confiscations were just punishment.
Grey’s use of power in this way is a lesson in statesmanship and resolve against murderous elements that had to be subdued, and it was from these wise and determined policies our nation enjoyed peace for 100 years… that is until the Early 1970s and the rise of the Communist left radical Maori separatist movement.
Conspicuous by it’s absence is any hint of acceptance from Dr O’Malley that Grey’s expressed views were valid or justified.
Basically, Dr O’Malley chooses to side with the rebels at all points.
That the war was never about plundering land can been easily proven by what actually transpired after the war.
Over time much of the confiscated land was returned, and in fact more was offered to be returned if only Tainui would publicly acknowledge the sovereignty of the British Crown… yet this fundamental point was rejected by Tainui, and is admitted by Dr O’Malley on pg 46 of his report on John Bryce, then Native Minister of the Colony.
It’s important to apprehend the significance of what is said in this section as we can see that the only stumbling block in the return of confiscated land to Tainui was the stubborn refusal of their King to accept Bryce’s only condition… that they acknowledge the English queens sovereignty over this Island from one end to the other.
The war was never about greed for land… it was a battle over sovereignty … and Tainui acted in bad faith against the first article of the Treaty of Waitangi.
They were in rebellion, and they were defeated in battle by British forces with colonial auxiliaries like Von Tempsky and The Forrest Rangers, and many ‘friendly natives’ who distinguished themselves in being fervent in their participation to defend their own lands from Rebel aggression and ensure the ongoing sovereignty of the English Crown.
Sir Apirana Ngata
The confiscations were punishment for rebellion and a clear demonstration of British authority over New Zealand in accord with the Treaty of Waitangi.
Punishment for wrongdoing is never pleasant.
Dr O’Malley states at the top of page 22 of his report that the intervention of the British troops against the Rebel Kingites quote ‘was devastating for the Waikato’ and yet does not indicate to you that the truth is the rebel Maori brought this calamity upon themselves.
They thought they would ‘push the Pakeha back into the sea…. they were horribly wrong… and would have to pay dearly for their crimes.
Many lives were lost as a direct consequence of their rebellion against the Treaty.
An article appeared in the Daily Southern Cross (Auckland daily newspaper) on October 1863, stated
“If lands are now taken from the Maori, through the fortune of war, it is a result for which the Maoris alone are responsible. They have had to choose between British citizenship and independence; and they have made their decision. they have rejected the conditions which might have incorporated them with the European colonists into one British community; and they can no longer plead the treaties made in their favour. they cannot be allowed to enjoy all the romantic part of the bargain, and escape from the legal obligations. They are either British subjects in rebellion, or they are an independent nation making war against England. In either character, they must take all the responsibilities.”
Found on pg7 of R Stowers Forest Rangers.
It is essential to appreciate that the confiscations *were an essential factor* to teach the rebellious and militant Maori chiefs that if they remain peaceful, they would enjoy their lands, yet if they decided to rise up in rebellion they would pay the price… thus the confiscations were not only just, but also a stimulus to future peace.
No less an authority than Sir Apirana Ngata stated that… “Let me issue a word of warning to those who are in the habit of bandying the name of the Treaty around to be very careful lest it be made the means of incurring certain liabilities under the law which we do not know now and which are being borne only by the Pakeha.”
“Some have said that the land confiscations were wrong and they contravened the articles of the Treaty of Waitangi, but the chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority. War arose and blood was spilled. The Law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This in itself is Maori custom-revenge-plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty ”
Extracts from “The Treaty of Waitangi, An Explanation.” by Sir Apirana Ngata
Dr O’Malley’s ill-treatment of the great Major Gustav Von Tempsky who gave his life for the sake of reestablishing law and order in our nation.
Due to the fact that I have already written many thousands of words in general defense of all four names, I must refrain from any attempts to fully vindicate the worthiness of Each independently.
It pains me that I cannot do full justice in defense of their good names however I could not live with my own conscience were I not to say a few extra things for Von Tempsky.
On June 27 this year the Waikato Times published an article called ‘living in Von Tempsky’s shadow’ in which having read O’Malley’s report Hamilton Major Paula Southgate remarks “Von Tempsky was a pretty nasty gentleman and I hadn’t understood quite how much he had done” …
This is the view Dr O’Malley’s report impressed upon the Mayor, and yet in reality Von Tempsky was an absolute Legend! A national hero who gave his life for the sake of establishing peace and order.
The Mayor would appreciate this if she better informed herself rather than simply taking Dr O’Malley’s report as the gospel truth.
I hope my submission is helpful in this regard.
Let me provide a quotation from an absolutely impartial quarter ‘Bowie Knife Fighter: Gustavus Von Tempsky’
It sources its information about Von Tempsky from ‘An Encyclopedia of New Zealand 1966’
It is an interesting report on the good character of Von Tempsky…. certainly shows he was no murdering ‘Maori hater’… a complete contrast to what the historical revisionists have invented about him…
He was obviously a dangerous man to the enemy,
Quote: “Von Tempsky took part in the actions at Hairini, Waiari, Rangiaowhia, Kihikihi and Orakau, establishing a reputation as an intrepid leader. He was a strong disciplinarian who was popular with his men. When the defenders broke out of the Orakau Pa, he led his men in a ruthless pursuit but strongly disapproved when the British troops killed some of the wounded and women. He encouraged his men to intervene in order to prevent these atrocities.”
This is not the picture of Von Tempsky Dr O’Malley presents.
So much is said in Dr O’Malley’s report, and yet so much also is missing.
His use of citations.
In the introduction to my submission I made commentary on the fact that Dr O’Malley says his report is not exhaustive.
Reading his report, I find carefully avoidance on his part… serious omissions of fact, context, and also purposeful ambiguity on his use of citations that imbue his narrative with an air of objective validity and support it does not justly deserve.
It disturbs me the manner in which Dr O’Malley interweaves personal commentary in with the appearance of having an objective basis in historic citations… without providing the texts from which he claims support what he is saying but references only.
I assert had he done so this would seriously detract from the view point he seeks to portray *as history*.
Rarely does his report contain substantial quotations in their rightful place… his excuse may be for the sake of brevity… yet I see this as a device for him to reinterpret everything to suit his ‘story’.
Often his citations are for a phrase ‘here and there’ yet some might assume the citation vindicates an entire paragraph in which he has made many bold and misleading claims.
It is not that such behavior is abnormal for historians to do who write history like a novel… or presenting a ‘thesis’… which is clearly what Dr O’Malley has done with this report.
They are selective with what they chose to quote verbatim and what they merely seek to allude to… esp when they are selling their own hypothesis rather than rigorously maintaining journalistic integrity.
Under normal circumstances it is up to the reader of history to appreciate this… and to search out other opinions for balance… if they care for such… almost no casual reader does… only those who have a personal interest tend to immerse themselves more thoroughly.
In this sense history is a specialist subject requiring more than just a summer read under an umbrella.
Such deeper interest and study is my passion, thus having searched out multiple sources… I’m giving you the opportunity to consider the other side of the debate … for balance… and I believe that by hearing me a fairer picture will emerge.
Ordinarily modern histories are read for personal amusement and Learning with little at stake, and under such normal conditions the historian may giant themselves much license, yet when we consider the weighty reasons for which the council commissioned his report… and the political nature of Dr O’Malley’s past exploits, such contextual omissions and ambiguous citations simply isn’t good enough!
He ought to have worked to a far higher standard… one that we should expect would be adhered to for Legal proceedings.
How is it that Dr O’Malley expects the council to deem his observations as authoritatively validated without being able to read the citations in the context of which they were originally penned?
Because of this serious failure… intentional or otherwise, is it to be expected that the council will blindly trust his inferences and citations without fact checking or at least corroborating them for themselves from the historic texts he claims as justification for his remarks?
Let me give just one example of many… from the report that concerns me in this regard.
It is in the chapter written to ‘educate’ the city council as to the character of Gustav Von Tempsky on page 30 with the date 13 December 1863 Dr O’Malley introduces what looks to be ‘the first shots fired’ by the Forest Rangers… the Special Forces Units to which Gustav Von Tempsky belonged.
He states that on this date the Forest Rangers ‘Attacked a camp of Maori Men, woman, and children, killing at least 7 of them’.
And that the Newspaper ‘Daily Southern Cross’ accused the Forest Rangers of murder… giving the citation 113.
Dr O’Malley makes no attempt to provide the actual article for councilors to judge, just a reference in the footnotes, yet I have seen the article from which Dr O’Malley has selected his remark.
I wonder how many councilors can say the same thing?
Are Dr O’Malley’s assertions that the actions of the Forrest Rangers he describes as ‘murderous’ the strongest evaluations to be drawn from the text he cites?
Not at all!
Yet he would have you believe they are!
The only way you will discover the contrary is by taking the trouble to fact check.
The article can be found on line here : https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DSC18631217.2.11
The article he cites is very objective in that it does not shy away from telling readers of various perspectives including the uncomfortable reality that some rivals indeed described the event as ‘murder’… yet it goes on to say that such views are ‘almost too absurd to notice’… and carries on *justifying the actions of the Forest Rangers*, painting a very different picture of the hostile Maori Dr O Malley chose to describe as ‘praying men woman and children’!
As the article says… “almost too absurd to notice!”… yet not for Dr O’Malley!
These Maori were enemies… described as plunderers and murderers, and the article commends Captain Jackson for having done his duty.
Von Tempsky was not even present (admitted in the report) nonetheless Dr O’Malley intentionally picked this particular armed clash on the 13th of December because it served his intended purpose to weave in Von Tempsky as vicious and seeking personal vainglory without regard for humane conduct.
Dr O’Malley mentions Von Tempsky’s ‘strong pang of jealousy’ giving the citation 114
How Dr O’Malley’s narrative reads is that The Forest Rangers under their Commander Jackson had committed an act of villainy and that out of envy… wishing he could have participated in this supposed ‘crime’ Von Tempsky expressed his jealousy… when in truth Von Tempsky was not jealous that he had missed out on ‘committing atrocities’, but that Captain Jackson with whom Von Tempsky had chosen to compete for Military honours had gained a noble and glorious victory.
Do you appreciate the subtle distinction from what Von Tempsky himself meant from what Dr O’Malley seeks to portray?
Von Tempsky admitted his own feelings about this… yet what Dr O’Malley omits from his ‘reference’ was that Von Tempsky gained control of his pride and expressed gratitude that his side had scored a victory over the enemy.
Should council undertake similar investigations of the rest of Dr O’Malley’s citations, erudite minds will have no trouble spotting many more factual discrepancies contained within his report at variance with the very citations he uses that ought to vindicate him!
On pages 41-42, Dr O’Malley treats John Bryce in the same manor of attempted guilt by mere association when some Maori children were killed by the Kai Iwi Calvary… a deed he did not participate in and had even been to court and had his name cleared of wrong doing.
In both these cases… neither Von Tempsky nor Bryce committed any atrocities and yet Dr O’Malley has done his best to implicate them and sway this councils views to do the same.
For a better account of the event that what has been given them by Dr O’Malley councilors should read ‘Defenders of New Zealand,’ pg 307-308.
We see that ‘ the group of children’ described by Dr O’Malley were in fact a Rebel raiding party caught in the very act.
Before moving on, I must raise a particularly peculiar and disturbing aspect of the report that seriously calls its objectivity into question.
And that is the very odd way Dr O’Malley does not shy away from using his own published opinions as authoritative references… many times… a ruse that is patently dubious!
Are we supposed to accept Dr O’Malley’s opinions in the report on the cited authority of Dr O’Malley’s own personally published opinions?
What contrivance is this?
We must assert that all such portions of his report that rely on his own authority in this way are portions for which he could find no valid corroborating impartial historical authority.
Today is seems only Black Lives Matter.
Victimism is the new trump card.
We read earlier about the article in which Napuhi Leader David Raken was said to have ‘turned the Black Lives Matter’ argument on its head.
The article was relating the parallels between the defacement and removal of Captain Hamilton’s statue for the town square with recent events in America regarding the destruction and removal of American civil war monuments and others such as memorials to Columbus.
These similarities are not accidental.
Though oceans apart, Radical leftists with heavily racist views in both the US and New Zealand have developed this strategy to win support for their extremist causes, and in the US the openly Marxist group Black Lives Matter have in conjunction with other radical Leftist organisations such as Antifa have organised violent protests and riots.
The defacement of the statue of Hamilton, and demands to remove monuments to Captain Cook, and the business we are discussing here and now about the Name of our city are all related to this left wing political ‘spirit of our times’.
It is a dangerous and destructive and hateful radical ideological movement.
Today, with alarming eagerness myriads of white leftist Liberals gleefully embrace the notion that their own heritage is just one great long trail of oppression and greed.
Remember slavery was ended in US in the latter half of the 19th century so virtually the same period of time has passed as for the wars in New Zealand.
Despite this long passage of time. Black Lives Matter organisation desires to keep angst for Slavery raw and sore… pretending that Black Americans today are still oppressed… not just historically from slavery… but also by what they have coined as ‘White privilege’.
This phenomena has become a full blown hysteria, and being carried away in this frenzy many politicians have been keen to ‘virtue signal’ by pandering to the very skewed opinions of this radical group.
Trends in leftist dominated academic circles, Hollywood, Left leaning media and social media has exported this craze around the globe and it now has roots here in our own city.
That our council is today considering such extreme undertakings as changing the name of our city demonstrates just how intoxicating this Left wing cool aid is!
No doubt some Hamilton City Councilors hold personal political leanings which though not representative of the majority of Hamiltonians, predisposes them to the same sort of bias about ‘white privilege ‘and harbour desires to virtue signal and promote what they believe to be positive discrimination as we witness happening in the US.
This is not equality before the law or blind (impartial) justice.
This is Identity politics and stacking the deck!
Many Hamiltonians were alarmed with the haste with which Hamilton City Council crumbled in the face of the radical Maori activist demands and removed the statue of Captain Hamilton!
This was done without democratic process and signals a foreboding omen that there is every probability that the city council will capitulate further… without a true mandate from the people of Hamilton. In truth I know there will be some left leaning city councilors who relish the opportunity to autocratically make these Radical decisions in total contempt for Democracy.
The removal of the statue is a text book example of how Western values and civilisation are currently under bombardment by politically correct totalitarianism whereby Radical leftists have politicised virtually every aspect of our lives and who display a fanatical hatred and intolerance for any opinions that do not fully align with their own.
Freedom of speech is under attack, and it is true to say that many people, and politicians are today scared to express their true feelings and views out of fear they will be denounced as hateful bigots simply because they do not endorse the Leftist narratives.
All it took for Maori radicals to get the mighty city of Hamilton to prostrate ourselves before them was to claim the statue of Hamilton cause them ‘offence’.
The arguments they proffered were baseless and weak, and held by only a tiny minority!
By far the majority of Hamiltonians enjoyed the statue, and were not at all offended by it, and yet their sentiments and values were held in contempt by a city council without spine and too eager to retreat under the pitiable onslaught of the Leftist political ideology that “white men are evil” and should be ashamed of themselves, and their heritage.
New Zealanders of european ancestry are expected to assume a massive burden of collective guilt all because of supposed ancient crimes they themselves never committed, and pay reparations for oppression to people who were never oppressed… all simply by virtue of the skin colour of each demographic!
It is not without Irony that it ought to be understood that it was such primitive notions of ‘collective guilt’ and exacting ‘utu’ from the relatives for past wrongs committed by individual members of a tribe that fueled the endless cycle of tribal wars of old.
It was the establishment of British sovereignty, and the vastly superior system of law and justice that ended such notions of ‘collective, and that true justice cannot be exacted from innocent others who are merely blood relations.
The Leftist notions sown by ‘Black Lives Matter’ and the treaty grievance industry seek to overthrow the advances made by British rule here in New Zealand and return us backwards to a far less enlightened and divided age… back into tribalism.
This is what Identity politics is all about… dividing everyone into separate groups so that one group can be labeled ‘Oppressors’ and the other ‘Victims’.
That is how Socialism works.
Yet in truth not a single person white person alive today is guilty of the slavery of the past, nor was any black American or Maori a slave of Pakeha.
Ideological slander afoot.
This is a Leftist political revolution that is going on around the globe is involved in a complete rewriting of the history of British empire as one great series of horrendous crimes, one after another….
This is not only ironic, but also an intellectual crime of the highest order given that it can be easily proven that it has been through the enlightened progress of ideals of equality and freedom of which Britain has been the chief teacher and benefactor, that has raised up justice for the common man and the standards of living for the entire western world!
While these facts may be ignored… they cannot be refuted.
Am I the only one in the room who can see that all this political ideology is the very incarnation of racism against white people?
It is the Left that has made race the focal point of all social statistics.
It is the Left that try and absolve the so-called ‘oppressed races’ of any personal responsibility for their lot in life both in the past and in the present, and instead heap all blame upon the focus of their hatred… the so-called heartless, selfish, and greedy white person!
Revisionist histories like the O’Malley report have been written with this as their guiding themes.
White New Zealanders and others have a right to exist here in New Zealand. This is as much their country as it is that of the Maori people.
They too have as much right as Maori to have their heritage respected and for their memorials to stand for posterity… just as we respectfully allow Maori monuments and memorials to stand.
That is what defines an enlightened and tolerant and free society.
New Zealand currently has a very healthy and happy mix of both Maori place names and Pakeha place names.
We have Whangarei and Auckland
We have Tauranga and Wellington.
We have Christchurch and Hokitika… etc etc.
We have Whakatane and Thames.
We have Ngaruwahia and Hamilton.
In no way can it be construed that Maori place names have been systematically obliterated via colonisation.
The opposite is true!
To a very large extent Maori names have been respectfully preserved.
The same can be said of street names.
Far from vindicating the Left-wing narrative about Pakeha trampling underfoot all things Maori this happy balance between English and Maori place names clearly evidences a completely different truth!
It demonstrates a very great mutual respect by most Maori and Pakeha.
This healthy balance is complimentary one with the other.
Yet this is what the Radical Activists are attempting to destroy via their toxic ideas and endless complaints.
The activists calling to demolish our memorials don’t represent the New Zealand people, they are a tiny disgruntled bunch of agitators backed by a powerful vested interest.
Kiwis of all descents have embraced Maori culture as an essential aspect of our national identity and it is outrageously contemptible to assume otherwise.
Yet this respect must be mutual… not just Maori Pa and Maori warriors need to be honoured, but also Pakeha Pa…and Pakeha warriors like the military settlement that was named ‘Hamilton’ after a fallen hero and the streets that were named Grey, Von Tempsky, and Bryce.
It is of little wonder or consequence that some few Tainui chose to keep a chip on their shoulder about these matters.
I do not deny them their right to do so yet I am very concerned that they are trying to manipulate our city council into a state of contrition!
Were these men on trial faultless angels? Obviously not.
But on the whole, they were great figures who served our country to the best of their ability… making both friends and enemies in the process.
There will always be controversies and disputes about men of action and historical figures.
No one escapes
Intolerance and offence ought not to be a trump cards that negates everyone else’s values and opinions.
A society cannot stand under such petty terms.
It inevitably self immolates.
Let’s allow our historic monuments to stand up for future generations to ponder.
It is my very strong petition to the Council today that they respectfully preserve the names of Hamilton, Grey, Von Tempsky, and Bryce Street.
Author: Tim Wikiriwhi
So must end my critique of Dr O’Malley’s so-called historical report.
I do not have time to full expound on the injustice, financial burden, and chaos that would be unfairly borne by Hamilton clubs, businesses, etc should the council make such a rash decision to change the name of our city. I will only mention it in passing because this is a significant and unnecessary evil that would result from such a foolish council determination.
In closing my final argument is possibly the most important because it has to do with democratic due process.
This council must not pretend it has any mandate from the people of Hamilton to make such radical changes!
None of you ran for office with the express policy saying you believed Hamilton to be a despicable name associated with oppression.
Such momentous and highly ideologically driven proposals ought to be reserved as an election issue of the highest order and opened to rigorous public debate.
If upon the conclusion of these proceedings the proposals to change the names of our city and streets are not immediately dismissed as they ought to be, then they should be made a referendum!
Then the people of Hamilton will let you know their will on this matter… yet devious leftist political operators do not want this to be decided by the people… because they know what the answer will be!
Such a shameful deed was recently committed by the New Plymouth District Council behaving in total contempt for democracy by autonomously establishing a Maori ward against the will of the people who have overwhelmingly rejected the proposal in the past.
Under not conditions ought the shameful activities of NPDC be emulated here in Hamilton.
May the guilty councilors be thrown out on their activist butts next election!
There is a gross duplicity at work!
We live in a shameful PC world where it appears that the only people allowed to take pride in their heritage are non-Europeans.
A double standard by which the ‘Great Maori chiefs’ are not today being held to anything near the same politically correct standards that are used to posthumously character assassinate their contemporary great Pakeha chiefs!
Maori murderers, slavers, cannibals, get a free pass!
If we are to re-name Hamilton and Grey St, Von Tempsky Steet, and Bryce st… on the basis that they are accused of participating in atrocities and oppression ought not we also apply the same standards and outrage to the monuments of Te Rauparaha, Te Kooti, etc etc????
In truth it is a travesty to compare the doings of Grey, Von Tempsky, Bryce, and Hamilton with such villains!
Wisdom dictates we entirely abandon this destructive witch hunt and travesty of dragging up the past in this way!
Leave *all* monuments… whether Maori or Pakeha to stand!
Let them be there for future generations to contemplate and appreciate our rich heritage of *both* Maori and Pakeha… and of course the monuments of every other ethnicity of New Zealanders that have played their part in building and enriching our nation.
Let us cease pandering to the divisive activism of radicals!
The greatness, and goodness of the founders of our nation ought to be well known by every Kiwi boy and girl!
The richness of our heritage as the source of our culture and national character must be defended from those who seek to trample it underfoot.
The crisis posed by the various Maori uprisings required men of both principle and determination as Grey, Hamilton, Von Tempsky and Bryce undoubtedly were, willing to risk personal danger for the sake of defeating the murderous and lawless rebels.
It was not a time for effeminate weaklings, or policies of appeasement of the sort that Richard Chamberlain would become infamous for as he acquiesced in the face of aggression of Germany
The Tross Publishing Submission…
The first disturbing thing to be said about the one-sided “Historical Report on Hamilton Street and City Names” is that it was commissioned by two parties, one of them being the Waikato Tainui tribe and it appears that O’Malley has tailored his report to suit their obvious purpose of progressively removing European names from Hamilton city and streets. It is unbelievable that the Council, which is supposed to represent all the citizens of Hamilton, should join together with the prime advocate for a change of names.
For this reason the Report should be treated with a certain amount of wariness. Furthermore, O’Malley cannot be regarded as an impartial historian when it comes to any historical matter affecting British forces for he has told at least one public gathering that he hates the British for what they allegedly did to his Irish ancestors some 200 or so years ago.
His report is not impartial; it is character assassination by carefully selected half truths of four historical figures whose names have been recognised in Hamilton for a century and a half without any problems. O’Malley’s narrative is backed by bold assertions that are often untrue but widely accepted, being part of the new “conventional wisdom” of revisionist “historians” and others.
In his Introduction he makes the rather trivial point that Captain Hamilton never visited the place to be named after him. So what?
Nor did Lord Auckland ever visit Auckland, or the Duke of Wellington visit the capital of New Zealand, or Sir Charles Napier visit Napier. Nor did the hero of Trafalgar ever visit Nelson, or General Picton visit Picton, or Lord Palmerston visit Palmerston or Warren Hastings visit Hastings.
As early as the Introduction O’Malley shows his bias by referring to the “invasion” of the Waikato by Governor Grey and this word “invasion” (or its verb) is used throughout the book (13 times) in an emotive and brainwashing manner. It is untrue as the word “invasion” suggests an invasion of another country or territory such as Hitler’s invasion of Poland or Argentina’s invasion of the British colony of the Falkland Islands in 1982. Since Waikato, like all of New Zealand, was sovereign British territory under the rule of the Governor of New Zealand it was not legally possible for Grey to “invade” part of his colony. “Militarily occupy” – yes; but not “invade”.
On Page 4 he states that the military settlement of Hamilton was established on the site of a Maori “kainga” known as Kirikiriroa. That may be so but the Hamilton of to-day was built almost entirely by the enterprise and labour of people of European ancestry (mainly British) and there is no reason 150 years down the track to change the name of this lively and largely non-Maori city. In fact, it would be disrespectful to the memory of all those who helped build Hamilton over the years to do so.
Captain Hamilton died in the battle of Gate Pa in defence of the sovereignty and unity of New Zealand, as established by the Treaty of Waitangi and subsequent events, against a rebellion that was trying to destroy such sovereignty.
The statement on page 14 of the Report that Governor Grey “captured and kidnapped the elderly Ngati Toa rangatira,” Te Rauparaha, is highly emotive but incorrect. The true story is as follows:
Richard Deighton, a government interpreter, discovered a letter written by Te Rauparaha calling on the disaffected Upper Wanganui and inland tribes to join with chiefs Mamaku and Rangihaeta to raid Hutt Valley frontier posts. Deighton took the letter to Governor Grey in Wellington and it was decided to arrest Te Rauparaha for treason (plotting rebellion). This is not “kidnapping”. Thomas Lambert, author of “Pioneering Reminiscences of Old Wairoa” (New Plymouth, 1936) wrote on Page 293 of his book that, had Deighton not alerted Grey to Te Rauparaha’s intentions, the forces of Te Rauparaha, Rangihaeata, Mamaku and Maketu could have united to massacre occupants of the fledgling colony of Wellington and the Hutt Valley.
Furthermore, to describe Te Rauparaha merely as “the elderly Ngati Toa rangatira” is to tell only a fraction of the story for this “rangatira” was the most notorious cannibal in pre-1840 New Zealand.
On Page 16 O’Malley writes “Iwi such as Ngai Tahu were rendered virtually landless”. If that were true, then it would be by their own actions. By 1840 this group of a mere 2,000 people had sold two thirds of the four fifths of the South Island which was nominally theirs. However, most of these sales were overturned by Hobson’s Land Commission which looked into pre-1840 sales to see that they were fair. The tribe did not return the purchase price to the original buyers.
The chiefs then later sold their land again to the government in ten sales covering 37.366 million acres. The Kaiapoi natives thanked Governor Grey for the “fair payment” that they had received. (“One Treaty, One Nation, Wellington, 2015, Page 226) The 1896 census showed that Ngai Tahu were cultivating only 857.5 acres of their 45,000 acres – less than 2%. (Ibid, P. 231) Thus they were not using even the land that remained to them.
On Page 18 O’Malley makes the utterly false statement that the Maoris “had been explicitly promised the right to manage their own lands and affairs in the Treaty of Waitangi”. This was not explicitly promised and anyway it would be in violation of Article 1 of the Treaty which ceded sovereignty to the British Crown.
On Page 21 O’Malley writes, “Grey claimed he had been left with no choice but to launch such an invasion (that word again!), pointing to supposed evidence of an imminent Kingitanga attack on Auckland. Historians have been highly dismissive of these claims.” Not true.
The leading historian of the Maori wars, James Cowan, wrote in Volume I of his “The New Zealand Wars” that the half-caste government interpreter, James Fulloon, reported to the Government that the Kingite rebels planned to “execute a grand coup by attacking Auckland by night-time or early in the morning. The Hunua bush was to be the rendezvous of the main body, and a portion of the Kingite army was to cross the Manukau in canoes and approach Auckland by way of the Whau, on the west, while the Ngati-Paoa and other Hauraki coast tribes were to gather at Taupo, on the shore east of the Wairoa.
The date fixed for the attack was 1st September, 1861, when the town of Auckland was to be set on fire in various places by natives living there for that purpose; in the confusion the war-parties lying in wait were to rush into the capital by land and sea. Certain houses and persons were to be saved; th(os)e dwellings would be recognised by a white cross marked on the doors on the night for which the attack was fixed. With the exception of those selected in this latter-day Passover, the citizens of Auckland were to be slaughtered.” (pages 239-40)
Also on Page 21 Rewi Maniapoto is introduced as “a senior Ngati Maniapoto rangatira” What is missing is Rewi’s part in joining the 1860 rebellion in Taranaki against the wishes of the first Maori “king”, Te Wherowhero and the role of Ngati Maniapoto in driving the British out of the Waikato in 1863 against the wishes of Te Wherowhero’s successor, Tawhiao.
On Page 23 O’Malley continues his mischief by stating that at Rangiaowhia there occurred “the deliberate torching of a whare whose inhabitants were killed in the blaze”. The evidence for the burning of this whare is most uncertain and it appears that it accidentally caught on fore from another burning structure. The occupation of Rangiaowhia was for the purpose of capturing the rebels’ food supply, thus avoiding a direct attack on their fort at Paterangi which would have caused many deaths on both sides.
However, at one whare Sergeant McHale was shot dead at point blank range when he invited the inhabitants to surrender. Apart from the deaths of two Maoris, all subsequent deaths at Rangiaowhia arose from this shooting of McHale. In the words of Captain Wilson, who, unlike O’Malley, was present at the scene, “Our man (Sergeant McHale) was dead inside the hut [killed by a Maori] before the attack commenced” (One Who Was There, Brett’s Historical Series, from P. 3 of New Zealand – the Fair Colony, by Bruce Moon, P. 3)
Further down Page 23 O’Malley tries to establish that a large proportion of those killed in the battle of Orakau, which effectively ended the Kingite rebellion in the Waikato, were non-combatants (women and children). If they were “non-combatants”, what on earth were they doing in a fighting pa that had been specially constructed for making a last-ditch stand against very superior forces?
On Page 24 O’Malley describes the Pai Marire (Hau Hau) movement as “good and peaceful” when, in fact, it was a terrorist movement that carried out random murders and beheadings of such grotesqueness that other tribes quickly came round to fight on the side of the Crown in order to defeat these barbarous savages. The Pai Marire people beheaded Captain Lloyd and carried his head around the country, claiming that it could talk, and they murdered Rev. Volkner at his church at Opotiki on 2nd March, 1865, stripping him, hanging him and then spreading his corpse out on the ground and chopping off his head. “The natives then formed themselves into a line and prepared to taste the blood as it ran out of the head and body,” wrote Captain Levy of the “Eclipse” who was present. (GB Parliamentary Papers 1866 (3601) Colonial Secretary’s Office, Wellington, 21 March, 1865)
In the words of historian, James Cowan, this scene of horror “was of a character revolting beyond measure. It was as if a devil had entered into the people. Assuredly there was a demon before them in human form, at once terrifying and fascinating them by his sheer savagery. Kereopa, dressed in his victim’s long, black coat, stood in Volkner’s pulpit and placed the dripping head on the reading-desk in front of him; by its side he set the communion cup of blood….Gripping the head, he gouged out both eyes…he swallowed them one after the other. …Then the cannibal priest took up the communion chalice and drank its contents. He passed it to one of his flock, who put it to his lips and took a sip, and then it was passed from hand to hand among the congregation.” (The New Zealand Wars, Vol. II, Page76) To describe this violent and bloodthirsty movement as “good and peaceful” is deceitful on O’Malley’s part and suggests that he is unable to distinguish between right and wrong – a serious problem for a so-called “historian”.
Also on Page 24 in the last paragraph O’Malley states that over 3 million acres were confiscated under the New Zealand Settlements Act. What he fails to mention is that the government gave back to the tribes around half of the confiscated land, making an eventual confiscation of 1,610,618 acres. In failing to point this out O’Malley is guilty of either deception or shoddy research.
On Page 26 O’Malley writes “But a stumbling block remained the Crown’s unwillingness or inability to return the confiscated lands in full, rather than the small fraction of them that formed part of Grey’s offer.” The key issue was not land but sovereignty – whether a separate state should exist within a newly united nation. That was why the chiefs signed to Treaty of Waitangi – to obtain a single sovereignty over and above the ever squabbling and fighting tribes. Sovereignty had to be settled before confiscated lands could be handed back and this Tawhiao, the second Maori “king”, always refused, thus preventing the return of lands to the Waikato tribes. O’Malley ignores this key issue. This distorted story of the events leading up to the fighting, being the rebellion of some Maoris only, has become common in recent historical commentary. The false insistence that there was no rebellion flavours the whole narrative.
Many Waikato Maori refused a “king” and several great meetings in 1857 and 1858 failed to reach a consensus. Furthermore a majority of Maori across the country supported the peace and opposed the king movement. At the Kohimarama conference in 1860, the largest gathering of chiefs in New Zealand history, the more than 100 chiefs present unanimously affirmed their loyalty to Queen Victoria, their Sovereign.
Page 33 of this increasingly unreliable Report states further misinformation re Rangiaowhia that women, children and elderly men were sent there “as a place of safety and sanctuary for non-combatants”. Oh, really? Then why did the troops find “substantial quantities of arms” (NZ – the Fair Colony, Page 31) when they later searched the whares? In the words of Bruce Moon in his book, New Zealand – the Fair Colony (P. 24) “Far from being the haven of peace which these people [e.g. O’Malley] would have us believe, Rangiaowhia was the principal source of food for the rebels in their strong fort at Paterangi and therefore fully involved in the rebellion.”
O’Malley ends Page 33 by throwing in something that is in violation of all the historical records of the time; “And other unconfirmed estimates put the death toll at more than 100”. His reference for this? His own book. Nothing more. This appears to be nothing more than wishful thinking on his part and has no place in any half credible historical report that is being paid for partly by the ratepayers of Hamilton. It is at variance with all reports by all sides at the time – military, newspaper correspondents, missionaries, etc.
On Page 35 O’Malley returns to the battle of Orakau and calls this purpose built fighting pa a “sanctuary”.
At the top of Page 45 the Report gives a laudatory description of the village of Parihaka. However, another report (from the Taranaki Herald, 12 September, 1881) stated “The natives of Parihaka are in a deplorable state…..They are fearfully affected with vermin, which has been induced by the crowded state of the whares and the want of cleanliness. Parihaka is absolutely filthy for want of sanitary precautions”.
On this same page the Report again enters into the territory of speculation (as opposed to history) when it states that “Oral histories also record that multiple women were raped” [at Parihaka]. These unfounded allegations (and that is all they were) first appeared during the hearings of the 1927 Sim Commission, which looked into the Parihaka incident – 46 years after the event. The two who made the allegations were Te Whiti’s son, Noho Mairangi Te Whiti, who was only fourteen at the time of the Parihaka incident, plus a certain Rangi Matatoro Watene. They referred to the alleged perpetrators as “the soldiers” (no names, rank or further description) and were unable to state the number of alleged victims, their names, their ages, the dates on which the supposed acts occurred, the location(s), or the number of such offences.
In June, 2017, 136 years after the event, the Minister of Treaty Settlements, Christopher Finlayson, resurrected this unproven and unlikely allegation and used :”rapes committed by Crown troops” as a ground for paying $9 million to the descendants of the people of Parihaka. A concerned taxpayer, Mike Butler, sent Finlayson a request under the Official Information Act asking:
date(s) on which the alleged offences occurred
the specific location(s) where the alleged offences occurred – at Parihaka or elsewhere?
the number of such offences
names and descriptions of the alleged offenders
names and numbers of the alleged victims
ages of the alleged victims
the date(s) when the alleged offences were first reported.
Finlayson failed to answer any of these questions. There were reporters from the newspapers at Parihaka when the occupation occurred, there were strict orders to the soldiers not to consort with the inhabitants, and no such allegations were made at the time. Therefore, unproven rape allegations against both the weight of evidence and the traditions of the armed forces can best be regarded as untrue. So why did O’Malley include this in his Report? It seems to be nothing more than a further indication of his bias against British and colonial troops of the nineteenth century.
The smell of bias continues further down page 45 when the Report talks of Te Whiti and Tohu being “imprisoned without trial”. Technically correct but nevertheless misleading. On Page 124 of his book, Kinds of Peace; the Maori People After the Wars, 1870-85, Professor Keith Sinclair wrote of Te Whiti and Tohu’s confinement in the South Island as “being treated as gentlemen and not as convicts” while the New Zealand Mail wrote on 24 March, 1883, “Te Whiti states that he has no cause to complain of the treatment he received when he was in the South Island but on the contrary he was very hospitably entertained. He certainly does not look upon his forced residence in Nelson as an imprisonment or even as a banishment.”
In conclusion one has to wonder at the point of this Report. It seems to be part of an undemocratic process to impose on the people of Hamilton certain name changes that appear to have no other purpose than to further advance the domination of the area by the tribal elite of Tainui, a relatively small tribal grouping that represents a small percentage of the people of Hamilton. And not even all of these would support a name change as many part-Maoris seem to want to just get on with their lives like other New Zealanders and not to be tools of the tribal elite. To change the name of a major city, built largely by the sweat, toil and initiative of non-Maoris, as well as three of its main streets is a serious matter and SHOULD ONLY BE DONE BY REFERENDUM OF THE PEOPLE OF HAMILTON.
Why should Hamiltonians have the name of their city taken away from them by a passing council after several generations of building Hamilton into what it is to-day? This biased report by a biased historian is not an appropriate tool for anyone to use in trying to reach a decision re the name of Hamilton; it appears to be part of some underhand and undemocratic process for changing the name of the city and some of its streets by going behind the backs of the people of Hamilton.
The O’Malley Report.
Historical Report on Hamilton Street
and City Names
Dr Vincent O’Malley
Table of Contents
John Fane Charles Hamilton (1820-1864)……………………………………………………..4
Origins of the Name………………………………………………………………………………4
Biographical Information ………………………………………………………………………..5
Sir George Grey (1812-1898)…………………………………………………………………… 11
Origins of the Name……………………………………………………………………………. 11
Biographical Information ……………………………………………………………………… 11
Gustavus Ferdinand von Tempsky (1828-1868) …………………………………………… 28
Origins of the Name……………………………………………………………………………. 28
Biographical Information ……………………………………………………………………… 28
John Bryce (1833-1913)…………………………………………………………………………. 39
Origins of the Name……………………………………………………………………………. 39
Biographical Information ……………………………………………………………………… 39
This historical report has been commissioned by Hamilton City Council, in association
with Waikato Tainui, to assist the Mayor and council members to consider proposals
with regard to the renaming of Hamilton to Kirikiriroa and for Von Tempsky, Bryce and
Grey streets to also be renamed.
It does not discuss these proposals or take any view on the merits of them but instead
briefly examines the historical evidence concerning the naming of these streets and
the settlement, before providing historical portraits of the individuals after whom these
streets (and the city of Hamilton) are named, i.e. Gustavus Ferdinand von Tempsky,
John Bryce, Sir George Grey, and Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton.
These portraits draw upon a range of historical sources, primary and secondary,
including where available existing biographical information about the lives of these
individuals. It is not intended to provide an exhaustive account of their life stories. In
the case of George Grey, for example, multiple full-length biographies, each running
to hundreds of pages, have been published and his life and career extended over
multiple countries and continents. By contrast, John Fane Charles Hamilton was a
relatively minor historical figure and there remain gaps in what is known about his
story, even after locating his naval service records in Britain’s National Archives.
For the purposes of this report, connections with Hamilton and the broader Waikato
region are highlighted where possible, but not exclusively. Captain Hamilton famously
never visited the settlement that would come to be named after him, while John Bryce
was best known for his actions elsewhere. As governor, Grey ordered the invasion of
Waikato in 1863. But his life story is much bigger than that, as is that of von Tempsky,
one of the colonial soldiers who took part in the invasion.
John Fane Charles Hamilton (1820-1864)
Origins of the Name
The military settlement of Hamilton, established in August 1864 on the site of a Māori
kainga known as Kirikiriroa, was named in honour of Captain John Fane Charles
Hamilton, recently killed during the battle of Pukehinahina (Gate Pā) on 29 April of
that year. Evidence for this naming comes from an 1870 farewell dinner to LieutenantColonel William Moule, commander of the 4th Waikato Regiment at the time the new
settlement was established. Responding to a toast in his honour, Moule told the
it is now more than six years since he cleared a spot ‘mid the brown fern at
Kirikiriroa, upon which to pitch his tent. He had the honor of naming the
settlement after the late Captain Hamilton, of H.M.S. Esk, who died while
gallantly fighting for his country and the colonists of New Zealand, at the Gate
Moule’s statement was highlighted decades later, when claims were put forth that the
settlement had been named after Colonel Hamilton of the 12th Regiment (East
Suffolks).2 Historian P.J. Gibbon’s statement that Moule ‘[c]onsciously or
unconsciously’ must also have had in mind other Hamiltons is impossible to verify.3
What we do know is that Moule himself clearly stated that he had named the
settlement after Captain Hamilton and that other evidence confirms this fact.
1 New Zealand Herald, 15 April 1870, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH18700415.2.30
2 Waikato Times, 24 July 1923, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19230724.2.89
3 P.J. Gibbons, Astride the River: A History of Hamilton, Hamilton: Hamilton City Council, 1977, p.35.
4 Waikato Times, 2 June 1922, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19220602.2.72.1
John Fane Charles Hamilton was born in Hildersham, Cambridgeshire, on 28
September 1820.5 His father was Colonel John Potter Hamilton and his mother
Charlotte Hamilton (nee Fane), the daughter of a long serving Oxford MP.6
John joined the navy at the age of 14 in August 1835. He saw active service in the
First Opium War (also known as the Anglo-Chinese War) of 1839-42, a series of
military engagements intended to force China to allow the importation of opium in
payment for tea and other Chinese goods exported to Britain. The war ended with the
signing of the Treaty of Nanking in 1842, the first of what are known as the Unequal
Treaties, which opened China up to further British trade and influence. Hamilton was
present at and took part in a number of actions during the war prior to the signing of
After serving for a time in the Lisbon and Portsmouth naval stations, in 1844 Hamilton
was promoted to the rank of lieutenant and posted to the South American station.8
However, he was court martialled for disobedience and contempt of orders in 1846
while serving on the sloop HMS Racer, and not restored to original seniority until
1848.9 The circumstances behind this court martial are not clear.
Between 1848 and 1851 he served on HMS Prince Regent, and between 1851 and
1854 on HMS Bellerophon. In 1854 he was further promoted to commander and took
part in the Crimean War of 1853-56 on HMS Leander.
‘John Fane Charles Hamilton (1820-1864)’, Tauranga Memories: Battles of Gate Pa and Te Ranga (1864),
‘A Naval Biographical Dictionary: Hamilton, John Fane Charles’,
‘A Naval Biographical Dictionary: Hamilton, John Fane Charles’,
8 Daily Southern Cross, 3 May 1864, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DSC18640503.2.12
9 Admiralty: Officers’ Service Records: Hamilton, John F C, Captain, ADM 1961/543, National Archives,
10 Admiralty: Officers’ Service Records: Hamilton, John F C, Captain, ADM 1961/543, National Archives,
London; Admiralty: Officers’ Service Records: Hamilton, John F C, Captain, ADM 196/36/1422, National
In 1855 Hamilton married Laura Parry in Bicester, Oxfordshire. They had three
In 1856 Hamilton became commander of HMS Elk, which served at the East Indies
and China station, taking part in the Second Opium War against China (1856-60). In
December 1857 HMS Elk took part in the capture of Canton. In 1858 HMS Elk was
relocated to the Australia station.12 Hamilton was promoted to captain in February
1858 following his recent services in China and left the vessel at this time.
his movements between 1858 and 1863 are unclear, he probably returned to England.
On 22 May 1863 Hamilton was appointed captain of HMS Esk.
14 HMS Esk sailed from
Portsmouth on 20 May 1863 and docked in Auckland on 4 November 1863.15 Between
the ship’s departure from England and its arrival in New Zealand, war had broken out
when Crown forces, led by Lieutenant-General Duncan Cameron, the commander of
British forces in New Zealand, crossed the Mangatāwhiri River on 12 July 1863,
commencing the invasion of Waikato.
HMS Esk joined a Squadron of Royal Navy vessels deployed to New Zealand and was
soon after its arrival deployed as part of the Thames Expedition under Colonel George
Carey, the expeditionary force consisting of 44 officers, 922 men and other vessels,
including HMS Miranda, and the Sandfly.
16 Carey had received orders to construct a
line of fortifications between Hauraki and Waikato and sailed from Auckland on 16
November 1863. The expedition reached the Firth of Thames just under a week later
and commenced constructing a series of redoubts.17
11 11 ‘John Fane Charles Hamilton (1820-1864)’, Tauranga Memories: Battles of Gate Pa and Te Ranga (1864),
12 ‘Naval Database’, http://www.pbenyon.plus.com/18-1900/E/01585.html
13 Daily Southern Cross, 10 November 1863,
14 Admiralty: Officers’ Service Records: Hamilton, John F C, Captain, ADM 1961/543, National Archives,
15 Gerald J. Elliot, ‘The Royal Navy in New Zealand: HMS Esk, 1863-1866’, http://ellottpostalhistorian.com/articles/HMS-ESK-In-NZ.pdf
16 Gerald J. Elliot, ‘The Royal Navy in New Zealand: HMS Esk, 1863-1866’, http://ellottpostalhistorian.com/articles/HMS-ESK-In-NZ.pdf
17 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
However, HMS Esk returned to Auckland on 25 November and on 8 December
Hamilton and a number of other officers and men left the vessel in order to participate
as naval brigade in the Waikato Flotilla, a naval force that took part in the Waikato
War and had recently (20-21 November 1863) played a prominent role in the attack
on Rangiriri.18 During his time in Auckland Hamilton attended the military funerals of
a number of officers killed in the Rangiriri action.19
Hamilton probably took part in the occupation of Ngāruawāhia soon after this, a royal
salute in recognition of the Queen’s flag flying over the settlement being performed
on 9 December 1863, before re-joining HMS Esk early in January 1864 (although his
service records do not describe his movements in any detail at this time).
newspaper report noted that a naval brigade led by Captain Hamilton had reached the
military camp at Drury on 8 December, marching that same day from Auckland. They
were to travel on to the Mangatāwhiri River the next day before shipping on the
colonial vessels the Pioneer and Avon for service in the Waikato.21 Waikato Māori had
been informed that Governor George Grey would come and talk peace terms with
them only after British troops were allowed to enter Ngāruawāhia unopposed and fly
the Union Jack there. These terms were complied with in full, Kīngitanga supporters
abandoning their settlement and taking down the Māori King’s flag. But Grey never
came to talk peace.22
A report late in January 1864 recorded that HMS Esk under Captain Hamilton was
about to set out for Tauranga from Auckland.
23 Instead, it travelled to the Firth of
Thames. By February 1864 Hamilton was described in HMS Esk’s log as taking an
18 ‘The Royal Navy in the Waikato Campaign 1863’, National Museum of the Royal New Zealand Navy,
19 Daily Southern Cross, 30 November 1863,
20 Gerald J. Elliot, ‘The Royal Navy in New Zealand: HMS Esk, 1863-1866’, http://ellottpostalhistorian.com/articles/HMS-ESK-In-NZ.pdf
21 New Zealand Herald, 9 December 1863,
22 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
23 New Zealand Herald, 27 January 1864,
active part in Hauraki operations.24 Since the construction of the various forts in
December, a naval blockade had been imposed over the Hauraki district and Hamilton
was reported in April 1864 to have confiscated Māori goods for trade from one vessel
found to be carrying items worth more than the £100 maximum value that had been
stipulated.25 In the same month large numbers of Hauraki Māori agreed to take an
oath of allegiance to the Crown, citing the ‘uncompromising nature of the blockade’
against them as a factor in their decision.26
Back in Auckland, on 20 April 1864 HMS Esk and Captain Hamilton welcomed on board
a special passenger, Lieutenant-General Duncan Cameron. They sailed the same day,
reaching their destination at Tauranga the following day. In January 1864 Carey and
600 men had been landed at Tauranga, taking possession of the Te Papa peninsula
with the intention of cutting off a supply route for Kīngitanga fighters in the Waikato.27
Some Tauranga Māori began constructing pā in anticipation of an impending clash
with Crown forces in their area, convinced that the landing of Carey’s men signalled
hostile intentions. The arrival of Cameron, who took charge of a force of 1650 men,
moved matters closer to open conflict.
In this context, Tauranga Māori had begun fortifying a ridge about five kilometres
inland from the Te Papa mission station that Cameron and his officers had
commandeered as their headquarters. On 27 April 1864 Cameron reconnoitred the
position, known as Gate Pa (Pukehinahina) from a position about 1200 yards away.
He was unimpressed by what he saw and gave orders to direct a massive artillery
barrage against the pā from first light on 29 April 1864.28 With little sign of activity
from inside the pā, and convinced all inside might well be dead, by late afternoon that
same day he sent forth a storming party consisting of 150 soldiers from the 43rd
24 Gerald J. Elliot, ‘The Royal Navy in New Zealand: HMS Esk, 1863-1866’,
25 Daily Southern Cross, 20 April 1864,
26 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
27 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
28 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
Regiment and 150 sailors and marines from the Naval Brigade. Another 300-strong
party, consisting of members of the 43rd Regiment and Naval Brigade, including
Captain Hamilton, were to act as a reserve.
The British entered the pā with ease, encountering minimal resistance. Suddenly, a
tremendous but invisible fire was let loose upon them. The Gate Pā defenders were
firing from concealed positions beneath the feet of the storming party, inflicting
significant casualties. Panicked survivors turned and attempted to flee but were soon
mixed up with further reinforcements sent forward by Cameron. Matters quickly
became chaotic. In all, over one-third of the storming party ended up as casualties,
31 killed (10 of them officers) and 80 wounded. Māori losses are harder to gauge but
might have been between 19 and 32 killed and 25 wounded.30
Among the dead was Captain John Hamilton. A report published a few days later
described the circumstances of his death:
The General, who was in the advanced trench of his position, ordered up the
supports almost immediately after the storming party rushed the breach; and
the second division of blue-jackets and the gallant 43rd, led by Captain
Hamilton, of the ‘Esk’, advanced with a ringing cheer to the support of the
forlorn hope. They arrived at a critical moment; the storming party exposed to
a murderous fire on all sides, and from hidden assailants beneath, and without
an officer left to lead them, were wavering; part were outside the pa. Captain
Hamilton sprung upon the parapet, and shouting ‘follow me, men!’ dashed into
the fight. The moment was his last. He fell dead, pierced through the brain by
a bullet, and many of his officers shared the same fate.31
29 Buddy Mikaere and Cliff Simons, Victory at Gate Pā? The Battle of Pukehinahina-Gate Pa 1864, Auckland:
New Holland, 2018, p.100.
30 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
31 Daily Southern Cross, 3 May 1864,
Hamilton was subsequently buried at the Mission Cemetery in Tauranga. The final
entry in his naval service record notes that he was ‘killed after great heroism and
Captain John Hamilton is a minor figure in New Zealand history – to the extent that
he does not appear in either major New Zealand biographical dictionary (one edited
by G.H. Scholefield in 1940 and another multi-volume work published in the 1990s)
and he is chiefly remembered today for the city named after him. He was one of more
than 18,000 British officers and men who served in the New Zealand Wars of 1845-
72, actions that are no long widely seen in the straightforwardly heroic terms they
once were among some groups.
32 Admiralty: Officers’ Service Records: Hamilton, John F C, Captain, ADM 196/36/1422, National Archives,
Sir George Grey (1812-1898)
Origins of the Name
Grey Street, located in Hamilton East, was named in 1895 after former New Zealand
governor and politician Sir George Grey.33 It originally referred to the southern end of
the main street in Hamilton East, with the remainder, including what is now the main
commercial area, known as Heaphy Terrace.34 In 1910 both were named Grey Street,
with Heaphy Terrace confined to the area north of the railway line.35
George Grey was born in Lisbon, Portugal on 14 April 1812. His father, LieutenantColonel George Grey, had been killed in battle against Napoleon’s forces just eight
days earlier and it was said that overhearing news of his death had shocked his AngloIrish mother, Elizabeth Ann Vignoles, into premature labour.36 The young George
received his education in England and at the age of 14 enrolled as an officer cadet at
Sandhurst military college.37 Upon graduating in 1830, he was commissioned as an
ensign in the 83rd Regiment of Foot, serving for six years in Ireland.38
Grey returned to Sandhurst for further training and was promoted to lieutenant. But
conditions in Ireland appalled him and army life did not appeal. He proposed an
expedition to Western Australian in 1836, travelling there twice between 1837 and
33 ‘Kete Hamilton: Hamilton Streets: Grey Street’,
34 P.J. Gibbons, Astride the River: A History of Hamilton, Hamilton: Hamilton City Council, 1977, p.348.
35 ‘Kete Hamilton: Hamilton Streets: Grey Street’,
36 J. Rutherford, Sir George Grey, K.C. B., 1812-1898: A Study in Colonial Government, London: Cassell, 1961,
37 Edmund Bohan, To Be a Hero: A Biography of Sir George Grey, AucklandL HarperCollins, 1998, p.18.
38 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
1839. The expeditions were poorly planned and achieved little. During the first
expedition, Grey was speared by an Indigenous Australian, who he shot and killed.
In 1839 he was appointed as the temporary Resident Magistrate at Albany, in Western
Australia. He married Eliza Lucy Spencer in the same year. She was 16 years old and
more than 10 years younger than George at the time of their marriage.40 Their sole
child, a son born in 1841, died in infancy.41 George was said to have blamed Eliza and
the pair grew more distant.42
Grey forged his reputation as a dynamic and progressive young administrator with an
1840 memorandum for the British Colonial Office concerning the amalgamation of
indigenous peoples into settler society through education and the rapid extension of
the rule of law into their communities.
43 He returned to England in the same year but
was soon offered the governorship of South Australia, resigning from the army in order
to take up the post the following year. The South Australian colony was struggling
financially and Grey oversaw sweeping cuts in public expenditure. He became deeply
unpopular as the results of these retrenchments began to be felt, but by the end of
his governorship in 1845 South Australia was in a more prosperous situation. However,
his efforts to prevent settler attacks on indigenous communities, and to promote his
assimilationist policies, met with limited success.44
In 1845 Grey was appointed governor of New Zealand, arriving in Auckland in
November of that year to take up the position. At the time of his arrival, the colony
was in a state of financial crisis, war had broken out in the north of the country and
unresolved tensions in central New Zealand stemming from disputes over New Zealand
Company land purchases were threatening to also spill over into open conflict. Grey
39 J. Rutherford, Sir George Grey, K.C. B., 1812-1898: A Study in Colonial Government, London: Cassell, 1961,
40 Edmund Bohan, To Be A Hero: A Biography of Sir George Grey, Auckland: HarperCollins, 1998, p.42.
41 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
42 James Belich, ‘Sir George Grey’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
43 Enclosure in Grey to Lord John Russell, 4 June 1840, Great Britain Parliamentary Papers, 1841 (311), p.44.
44 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
was provided with substantially more military and financial resources than his
predecessor, Robert FitzRoy, and immediately set out to impose Crown authority over
The new governor’s first objective was to bring the Northern War to a rapid and
decisive end. To this end, the rangatira Hone Heke and Kawiti were given just five
days to comply with a Crown ultimatum previously issued by his predecessor or suffer
the consequences. Following expiry of the deadline on 5 December 1845, Grey issued
orders for Kawiti’s new pā at Ruapekapeka to be attacked and its defenders crushed.46
The subsequent attack on Ruapekapeka in January 1846, for which Grey was
personally present, claimed the lives of 12 British soldiers and sailors and an unknown
but probably greater number of Māori defenders.47 Only a small number of Māori had
been inside the pā at the time of its capture, but Grey nevertheless proclaimed the
battle as a ‘brilliant success’ that had resulted in ‘severe defeat and punishment’ for
Kawiti’s forces.48 The Northern War and its aftermath would have severe
consequences for Ngāpuhi, whose previous trade and commerce was badly damaged
and never returned to pre-war levels.49
Grey next turned his attention to central New Zealand. There, at Wairau in June 1843,
Ngāti Toa rangatira Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata had sought to resist the illegal
survey and occupation by the New Zealand Company of lands to which Māori laid
claim. The resulting clash left 22 Pākehā and 4 Māori dead. Following the incident,
incoming governor, Robert FitzRoy, concluded after investigation that the settlers had
been responsible for what happened, as a result of their efforts to claim lands to which
45 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
46 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aoteaoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
47 ‘The Northern War – Ruapekapeka’, https://nzhistory.govt.nz/war/northern-war/ruapekapeka
48 Vincent O’Malley, ‘“The Natives Here Rule” – Northland After 1846’, in Brad Patterson, Richard S. Hill and
Kathryn Patterson (eds), After the Treaty: The Settler State, Race Relations and the Exercise of Power in Colonial
New Zealand, Wellington: Steele Roberts, 2016, p.205.
49 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aoteaoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
they had no legal title.50 Grey, though, later reversed this finding, at the same time
vowing to impose Crown authority over the Cook Strait region.51
In the Wellington region, a similar scenario was unfolding, with the Company claiming
lands in the Hutt Valley that their Māori owners and occupiers insisted had never been
sold. Grey arrived in Wellington in February 1846 and ordered troops to take
possession of the disputed area. Māori offered to leave provided they received
compensation for their property. Grey refused to negotiate, instead declaring martial
law over the Wellington region on 3 March.52 Fighting followed at Boulcott’s Farm on
16 May 1846 and at Battle Hill (Horokiri) between 6-13 August. But Te Rangihaeata
evaded capture, eventually making his way to the Manawatū.
Meanwhile, Te Rauparaha, who had taken no part in the fighting, was accused by
Grey of secretly aiding his kin. In June 1846 Grey captured and kidnapped the elderly
Ngāti Toa rangatira, taking him to Auckland and holding him without trial until Te
Rauparaha was eventually permitted to return home in 1848. Grey’s actions, intended
to eliminate or neutralise perceived threats to his own authority in the Cook Strait
region, were widely applauded by settlers. But his actions against one of the most
senior rangatira in the land shocked many Māori. Exploiting Te Rauparaha’s absence,
in 1847 Grey pushed through the purchase of lands at Wairau and Porirua, demanding
these in part as utu for the Pākehā slain at Wairau in 1843.53
Grey revealed a ruthless streak in other ways during the Wellington campaign. A group
of Whanganui Māori captured at Pāuatahanui in August 1846 were transported to Van
Diemen’s Land (Tasmania), where one of their number, Hohepa Te Umuroa,
contracted tuberculosis and died in captivity in July 1847. Another man, Te Whareaitu,
was hanged for ‘rebellion’ at Paremata barracks in September 1846. There was no
50 Minutes of the Proceedings at Waikanae, 12 February 1844, GBPP, 1845 (131), p.32.
51 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka a Maui: Report on Northern South Island Claims, Wellington:
Legislation Direct, 2008, vol. 1, chapter 5.
52 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aoteaoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
53 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka a Maui: Report on Northern South Island Claims, Wellington:
Legislation Direct, 2008, vol. 1, chapter 5.
evidence he had killed anyone but Grey was determined to stamp his authority by
making an example of the unfortunate Te Whareaitu.54
Many of the Māori who had taken up arms against the Crown at Wellington came from
Whanganui, and in July 1846 Grey extended martial law over the district, presaging
the spread of fighting to the region. Troops were stationed at Whanganui in December
and the following April a young naval officer accidentally shot and wounded a local
rangatira. In response, a group of young Māori males attacked and killed several
members of a settler family chosen at random. Five of the six perpetrators of this act
(all aged between 12 and 18) were quickly captured, and all but the youngest executed
soon after. Crown forces clashed with Whanganui Māori at St John’s Wood in July
1847, and some other skirmishing took place, but the fighting soon ended.55
A long period of peace and prosperity followed, not just at Whanganui, but across the
country. It was aided in large part by Grey’s efforts to cultivate relationships with
important rangatira and their communities – what critics dubbed his ‘flour and sugar’
policy – that involved annuities to prominent chiefs, the construction of schools and
hospitals (open to all but specifically targeted at Māori), loans to Māori for the
purchase of flour mills, agricultural equipment and other items.56
Grey also refused to implement instructions received from the British government that
effectively required him to confiscate all areas deemed to be ‘wastelands’ owned by
Māori. Any attempt to implement such a policy would be fiercely resisted, Grey warned
the Colonial Office, whereas many Māori communities would ‘cheerfully’ agree to sell
any lands not required for their own subsistence at ‘trifling’ prices provided the Crown
monopoly on land purchases was strictly enforced. They would do so, Grey explained,
convinced that the ‘real payment’ for their lands came through all of the benefits they
received from entering into such a deal: the enhanced value of their reserves and new
54 Ian Wards, The Shadow of the Land: A Study of British Policy and Racial Conflict in New Zealand, 1832-1852,
Wellington: Government Printer, 1968, pp.296-297.
55 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aoteaoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
56 Alan Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in Nineteenth Century New Zealand, Auckland:
Auckland University Press/Oxford Univeristy Press, 1974, pp.86-87.
markets for their produce because of the influx of settlers; the provision of
infrastructure such as roads; and more specific benefits such as schools and hospitals
that were regularly promised as part of Crown negotiations.57
These policies heralded the start of a period of large-scale Crown purchasing that saw
more than 99% of the South Island and around 20% of the North Island acquired by
1865, typically at a fraction of the price at which these lands were then resold to
Pākehā and often with only the barest of reserves.58 Iwi such as Ngāi Tahu were
rendered virtually landless as settlers took up occupation of the purchased lands and
the promised ‘real payment’ failed to materialise. They and other iwi would spend the
next 150 years seeking redress for the very real harm incurred by their people as a
result of the Crown’s failure to uphold its end of the bargain.
Grey departed New Zealand at the end of 1853 with the colony’s finances back in the
black and peace restored across the country. In Britain, he had developed a reputation
as a progressive, dynamic and humanitarian young colonial administrator. But
problems loomed on the horizon. Pākehā had lobbied strongly for self-government –
the right to manage their own affairs – and in 1846 the British Parliament passed a
new constitution that provided for an elected House of Representatives in New
Zealand. But because the right to vote was based on an English-language literacy test
at a time when most Māori could read and write only in their own language, the effect
of the new constitution was to deny all but a very small number of Māori men the
right to participate in this new forum. Grey warned that any attempt to impose this
new constitution over the colony would be resisted ‘to the utmost’ by Māori and
successfully argued for the measure to be shelved.60
57 Grey to Earl Grey, 15 May 1848, GBPP, 1849 , pp.22-26; Vincent O’Malley, Beyond the Imperial
Frontier: The Contest for Colonial New Zealand, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2014, p.51.
58 Vincent O’Malley, Beyond the Imperial Frontier: The Contest for Colonial New Zealand, Wellington: Bridget
Williams Books, 2014, pp.51-52.
59 Waitangi Tribunal, The Ngai Tahu Report 1991, 3 vols, Wellington: Brooker & Friend, 1991.
60 Grey to Earl Grey, 3 May 1847, GBPP, 1847-48 , p.42; Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New
Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2016, p.62.
In 1852 the British Parliament passed a further New Zealand Constitution Act providing
for elected general and provincial assemblies. This time there was no English literacy
test. Instead, the right to vote (restricted to men over the age of 21) was based on
property ownership determined according to European forms of land tenure. Since
most Māori held their lands under customary title, the effect was the same: most Māori
men were excluded from participating. A safeguard was included in the new measure
known as section 71. It provided for self-governing ‘native districts’ to be declared
under the mantle of the governor, in effect giving legal status to the existing situation
in many districts outside the European townships, where iwi continued to manage
their own affairs much as they always had.61
The problem was that successive governors, including Grey, refused to implement
section 71, considering (in Grey’s words) that it would be ‘better not to require our
Courts in any way to recognize the barbarous customs of the native race’ and to
instead work towards extending the reach of English laws within Māori districts.62 And
so when the General Assembly met for the first time in Auckland in 1854 it was
composed solely of Pākehā men, and its members had been elected almost entirely
by the same group: when a few dozen Māori managed to meet the property
qualification a few years later, there was an outcry among settlers.63 The new
Parliament became a vocal lobby group for Pākehā interests, and overwhelmingly
hostile towards Māori, at a time when the latter still constituted a majority of the
population (at least until 1858).
Grey had been instructed to stay in New Zealand long enough to oversee the
introduction of the new constitution. But he could see what lay ahead and left before
doing so.64 When he returned more than eight years later, the state of things had
changed considerably. Rangatira who felt keenly their exclusion from the mechanisms
61 Alan Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in Nineteenth Century New Zealand, Auckland:
Auckland University Press/Oxford Univeristy Press, 1974, pp.90-91.
62 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
63 B.J. Dalton, War and Politics in New Zealand, 1855-1870, Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1967, p.80.
64 W.P. Morrell, British Colonial Policy on the Mid-Victorian Age: South Africa, New Zealand, The West Indies,
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969, pp.202-203.
of governance established under the 1852 constitution looked to form their own bodies
in an effort to better manage their own affairs but found themselves accused of
defying Queen Victoria’s authority as a result. Given they had been explicitly promised
the right to mange their own lands and affairs in the Treaty of Waitangi, many Māori
found such a response baffling.
Grey had meanwhile been appointed governor of Cape Colony in what is now part of
modern South Africa. There Grey pursued an uncompromising military approach
towards the Xhosa people, backed by land confiscations, a scheme of military
settlements that he later claimed was the basis for the New Zealand Settlements Act,
and various attempts to extend British rule over them. A cattle-killing cult that resulted
in more than 40,000 Xhosa dying of starvation was viewed by Grey as a timely
opportunity to extend his authority over them. But his plan to attract as many as 8000
German military settlers and their families to the region failed disastrously, generating
huge financial losses for the British.65
Meanwhile, Grey kept a keen eye on events in New Zealand, where his successor,
Thomas Gore Browne, had forced through the purchase of lands at Waitara with only
minority support from the owners, precipitating the outbreak of the first Taranaki War
in March 1860. Grey privately condemned the Waitara purchase as unjust and offered
to return to New Zealand to resolve the crisis. Dissatisfied with Browne’s handling of
the situation, the Colonial Office eventually agreed. Grey arrived in Auckland in
September 1861 for his second term as New Zealand governor. One historian has
suggested that Grey was ‘not the best, but the worst possible Governor to have sent
back to New Zealand in 1861’.66 Grey was a natural autocrat, unaccustomed to sharing
power with anyone and matters in New Zealand had changed considerably since his
first governorship ended.
65 Vincent O’Malley, Beyond the Imperial Frontier: The Contest for Colonial New Zealand, Wellington: Bridget
Williams Books, 2014, pp.139-141.
66 Alan Ward, ‘The Origins of the Anglo-Maori Wars: A Reconsideration’, New Zealand Journal of History, 1, 2
For one thing, the Kīngitanga (Māori King movement) had been established, with
Potatau Te Wherowhero raised up as the first king in 1858. Browne viewed the
Kīngitanga as a threat to the Crown’s authority and began preparations to invade its
heartland in the Waikato district in 1861, deeming the assistance large numbers of
Waikato and Ngāti Maniapoto fighters had rendered Te Ātiawa during the first Taranaki
War to be acts of ‘rebellion’.67
It was only news of Browne’s imminent replacement by Grey that saw an invasion of
Waikato timed for September 1861 called off. Grey quickly concluded that ‘no
adequate preparation’ had been made for a military confrontation with the
Kīngitanga.68 One of his earliest decisions was to order the construction of the Great
South Road between Auckland and Waikato. Work on the road began in December
1861 and was completed in March 1863, enabling troops to march overland to
Waikato. At the same time, he successfully lobbied for further military reinforcements
to be sent to New Zealand and oversaw the construction of armed steamers that could
be used to patrol and control the Waikato River.69
Waikato Māori expressed alarm at these developments; but far from offering
reassurance, Grey was threatening and aggressive, telling Waikato Māori in a
December 1861 meeting that the Kīngitanga should be stopped and would be as a
result of his planned scheme of ‘New Institutions’.70 The governor’s planned rūnanga
system was in this way immediately framed as something that had been devised with
a view to undermining the Kīngitanga and that was further reinforced when he later
refused to contemplate proposals that would have allowed the Māori King a role in
approving measures passed by the official rūnanga to be established. Grey’s approach
appeared to confirm the worst fears of Kīngitanga supporters and the rūnanga scheme
67 Vincent O’Malley, Beyond the Imperial Frontier: The Contest for Colonial New Zealand, Wellington: Bridget
Williams Books, 2014, p.112.
68 Grey to Newcastle, 30 November 1861, AJHR, 1862, E-1, Sec.II, pp.33-34.
69 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
70 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
was dismissed as little more than a ruse intended to undermine support for the King
Grey’s marriage was an unhappy one and during a voyage to South Africa in 1860 he
accused Eliza of infidelity. The pair separated and did not see one another again for
decades. By 1862 observers were worried about Grey’s mental and physical health.
The hectoring and aggressive tone of many of his official communications also came
to greatly frustrate the British government, which often found his reports on the state
of affairs in New Zealand contradicted by separate despatches from LieutenantGeneral Duncan Cameron forwarded to the War Office in London.72
Shortly after his arrival in New Zealand in September 1861, Grey privately told his
outgoing predecessor, Thomas Gore Browne, that he wanted ‘an excuse to take the
Waikato’.73 Harriet Browne later wrote of Grey that ‘I heard him with my own ears tell
Col Browne he hoped the natives would not submit as it would be much better for
both races that they should be conquered’.74 Observing the Crown’s military
preparations, some Waikato Māori also became convinced that an invasion was being
In January 1863 Grey made an unscheduled and unannounced visit to the Māori King’s
headquarters at Ngāruawāhia. Grey himself later claimed to have made generous
offers to those assembled that would have secured peace if agreed to, but historians
have noted the absence of any credible evidence to support the governor’s claims.75
Waikato Māori remembered the encounter differently. Grey, it was said, had declared
that he would not fight against the Māori King with the sword, ‘but I shall dig round
71 Alan Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in Nineteenth Century New Zealand, Auckland:
Auckland University Press/Oxford Univeristy Press, 1974, pp.132-133.
72 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
73 John Gorst, The Maori King or The Story of Our Quarrel with the Natives of New Zealand, London: Macmillan,
1864, p.203 [annotated by Thomas Gore Browne], MS-0860, Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington; Vincent
O’Malley, Beyond the Imperial Frontier: The Contest for Colonial New Zealand, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2014, p.116.
74 H.G. Browne to C.W. Richmond, 10 January 1862, in Guy H. Scholefield (ed.), The Richmond-Atkinson
Papers, Wellington: Government Printer, 1960, vol. 1, p.741.
75 Alan Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in Nineteenth Century New Zealand, Auckland:
Auckland University Press/Oxford Univeristy Press, 1974, p.157.
him till he falls of his own accord’.76 That statement was said to have left a profound
impression on the tribes, now aware of the governor’s overriding obsession with
toppling the Māori King.
Fighting resumed in Taranaki in 1863. In April of that year British troops took forcible
possession of lands at Tataraimaka that had been held by Māori as an equivalent for
the disputed Waitara block. Following an investigation, the following month Grey
announced that Waitara would be returned to its customary owners. But in the interim
a party of British troops had been ambushed at Ōakura and nine of their number killed.
Meanwhile, in the Waikato, Civil Commissioner John Gorst had been evicted from his
post at Te Awamutu after a series of inflammatory articles directed against the
Kīngitanga. A planned government courthouse at Te Kohekohe, inside the King’s
boundary, that was secretly intended to double as a military post, was also a flashpoint
At a meeting with ministers on 24 June 1863 Grey formalised plans for an imminent
invasion of Waikato that involved clearing out all ‘hostile Natives’, confiscating their
lands and establishing military posts on them stretching across the island. Any
remaining lands would be sold to defray the costs of the war.78 Grey claimed he had
been left with no choice but to launch such an invasion, pointing to supposed evidence
of an imminent Kīngitanga attack on Auckland. Historians have been highly dismissive
of these claims.79 Rewi Maniapoto, a senior Ngāti Maniapoto rangatira and the
supposed ringleader of the assault on Auckland (the main market for Waikato Māori
produce) was returning from a tangi at Taupō when he learned that British troops had
76 John Gorst, The Maori King, or The Story of Our Quarrel with the Natives of New Zealand, London: Macmillan
and co., 1864, p.324.
77 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
78 Domett to Grey, 24 June 1863, AJHR, 1863, E-7, pp.8-9.
79 B.J. Dalton, War and Politics in New Zealand, 1855-1870, Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1967, p.176.
80 Renata Tamakihikurangi and others to Featherston, 19 October 1863, AJHR, E-11, p.4.
The war that followed was to have devastating consequences for Waikato Māori and
it was Grey who bore direct responsibility for the decision to invade.81 In November
1863 Rangiriri pā was taken by Crown forces in highly controversial circumstances
after a white flag of truce was flown from inside the pā. The Kīngitanga defenders
insisted they had not intended to surrender; but after heavy losses suffered by both
sides, Cameron took the opportunity to enter the pā and take more than 180 men
prisoner. Following the battle, Kīngitanga representatives reiterated their desire for
peace. Cameron informed them in response that he was not authorised to bring the
war to an end. They would have to await the arrival of Governor Grey, who would
only come to talk peace provided British forces were allowed to enter the Māori King’s
headquarters at Ngāruawāhia unopposed.82
Cameron and his troops entered the deserted settlement of Ngāruawāhia on 8
December 1863, hoisting a Union Jack on a flagstaff that had until days before flown
the King’s flag. Peace was within grasp. Except that Grey never came. He had not yet
achieved the kind of crushing and decisive victory that was thought necessary in order
to destroy the Kīngitanga. And meanwhile ministers had their eyes on the rich and
fertile lands south of Ngāruawāhia. The war was to be pushed further south.83
The main body of troops advanced up the Waipā Valley towards Rangiaowhia and Te
Awamutu early in 1864. But a considerable obstacle remained in their way at
Pāterangi, where perhaps the most impressive chain of Māori fortifications ever
constructed blocked their further passage south. Cameron decided against attempting
to storm Pāterangi. Instead, at 11pm on 20 February 1864 a column of 1230 British
troops and their colonial allies marched silently and in single file around the perimeter
of the Pāterangi defences. Shortly before dawn the following morning, the troops
81 B.J. Dalton, War and Politics in New Zealand, 1855-1870, Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1967, p.178.
82 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
83 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
reached the near deserted settlement of Te Awamutu. Cameron decided to
immediately push on to Rangiaowhia.
What followed at Rangiaowhia in the early hours of Sunday 21 February 1864 –
including the deliberate torching of a whare whose inhabitants were killed in the blaze
– proved a source of great and enduring pain and bitterness for many Māori.
Rangiaowhia was not a fighting pā but an open village that was intended as a place
of sanctuary for women, children and elderly men. Following Rangiriri in November,
the Kīngitanga had been criticised for bringing women and children into a fighting pā
and advised to send them away to a place of safety. Bishop George Selwyn,
accompanying the Crown forces as official chaplain, was told nine days before the
February attack that Rangiaowhia had been designated such a place and was asked
to consult with Cameron and ensure that the people there would not be harmed.
Instead, Crown forces targeted the settlement.85
Grey was not present for the attack on Rangiaowhia or the final battle of the Waikato
War at Ōrākau between 31 March and 2 April 1864, when as many as half of the 300
Māori inside the pā were killed, most during a bloody pursuit when attempting to flee
for their lives on foot on the final day. Among those killed were many women, including
at least one wounded female prisoner. Another women, Ahumai Te Paerata, was shot
and wounded four times but managed to survive. An unknown number of children
were also killed. Following the attack on Rangiaowhia, women and children had likely
been brought into the pā for their own protection. The Waitangi Tribunal concluded
that ‘non-combatants were massacred by Crown forces’ at both Rangiaowhia and
Ōrākau.86 Historian James Belich also concluded that the disproportionately large
number of Māori killed at Ōrākau compared with those wounded, ‘suggests that the
Orakau pursuit involved a large-scale massacre of wounded non-combatants’.87
84 James Belich, The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict, Auckland: Auckland
University Press, 1986, p.163.
85 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
86 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Mana Whatu Ahuru: Report on Te Rohe Pōtae Claims (Pre-Publication Version),
Wellington: Waitangi Tribunal, 2018, p.528.
87 James Belich, The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict, Auckland: Auckland
University Press, 1986, p.173.
Notwithstanding that Grey was not personally present during these attacks, given his
decisive role in ordering the invasion of Waikato he bore a large share of responsibility
for what occurred.
And Ōrākau did not mark the end of fighting. There was renewed warfare at Taranaki
and further conflicts in the Bay of Plenty, the East Coast and elsewhere across the
central North Island, much of it targeted against supporters of the Pai Mārire (good
and peaceful) religion founded by Taranaki prophet Te Ua Haumene, and later (after
Grey’s governorship had ended) against Titokowaru in the west and Te Kooti in the
east. Grey had been present for the engagement at Ruapekapeka in January 1846
and took to the field again in July 1865 when he personally led a group of colonial
soldiers and their Māori allies in storming a near empty pā at Weraroa in Taranaki.
Grey had become embroiled in a bitter dispute with Duncan Cameron, the commander
of British forces in New Zealand, who had become increasingly disillusioned with the
war, viewing it as an inglorious land grab fought for the exclusive benefit of New
Zealand settlers and they clashed again after Weraroa, with Grey falsely claiming that
Cameron had refused to make any troops available for the attack.88
After 1866 Imperial troops took no further part in the fighting and colonial ministers
assumed greater responsibility for the conduct of the war. However, Grey dragged out
and delayed sending British troops back, prolonging their stay in New Zealand.89 Prior
to then, Grey had also sparred with ministers over the extent of lands to be
confiscated, eventually agreeing to measures that saw over 3 million acres taken at
Waikato, Taranaki, the Bay of Plenty and elsewhere, under the New Zealand
Settlements Act and related legislation. Grey had originally claimed to be the architect
of the confiscation policy, but later sought to distance himself from it, seeking to
preserve some of his earlier reputation as a progressive and enlightened administrator
in the face of stern opposition to the policy from the Aborigines Protection Society and
88 B.J. Dalton, War and Politics in New Zealand, 1855-1870, Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1967, pp.231-
89 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
other missionary and humanitarian groups.90 However, his protestations of innocence
A related dispute between Grey and his ministers concerned the fate of the Rangiriri
prisoners. Initially taken to Auckland and held captive on a hulk moored in the Hauraki
Gulf, before being transferred to Grey’s personal estate on Kawau Island, the prisoners
escaped from the island in September 1864 and eventually made their way back to
Waikato. However, others had died during their captivity.91
In 1866 the Colonial Office was alerted to allegations of atrocities committed by British
troops and their allies during General Trevor Chute’s January 1866 Taranaki campaign.
Confronted with the allegations (including, among other things, that Chute –
Cameron’s replacement as commanding officer – had issued orders for no prisoners
to be taken), Grey reacted indignantly, describing the statements as a ‘base and
wicked calumny’ and leaking the confidential despatch to his ministers.92 The British
government was fast losing patience with Grey and in 1868 his tenure as governor
was terminated. Although still relatively young, he would never again be offered a
Grey instead returned to Britain where he tried but failed to get elected as a Liberal
member of the House of Commons. In 1870 he returned to his home on Kawau Island
and an early retirement, before being drawn into colonial politics in 1874 at the head
of a movement opposing the abolition of provincial government. In 1875 he was
elected Auckland Provincial Superintendent and in the same year entered the General
Assembly as MP for Auckland City West.93 Although the provincial government system
was abolished in 1877, Grey’s own political fortunes were on the rise and in October
90 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
91 ‘Memoranda and Reports Relative to the Maori Prisoners’, AJHR, 1864, E-1, Part II.
92 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aoteaoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
93 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
of the same year he became Premier (now called Prime Minister) of an administration
that included a mix of liberals, radicals and some conservatives.94
During his time as Premier, hopes were high that Grey would be able to broker a peace
settlement with the Kīngitanga. He attended a number of important hui and at times
it appeared that an agreement might be close. But a stumbling block remained the
Crown’s unwillingness or inability to return the confiscated lands in full, rather than
the small fraction of them that formed part of Grey’s offer.95
In October 1879 Grey’s administration fell when several MPs defected. During his time
as Premier he had championed a number of radical causes, including universal
manhood suffrage. He remained in Parliament until 1895, continuing to advocate for
a number of sweeping changes to the status quo, including an elected rather than
appointed upper chamber and governors, and was ‘seen by some as the grand old
man of New Zealand politics, by others as a dangerous eccentric staying long beyond
Elected to Parliament again in 1893, he left New Zealand for the final time the
following year. Back in England he was granted an audience with Queen Victoria and
reconciled with Eliza. He died in London on 19 September 1898 and was buried in St
Besides his political life, Grey was also an avid collector, amateur ethnographer and
botanist. He donated a substantial collection of rare manuscripts and books to the
Auckland Public Library and his lavish mansion, along with some of the exotic flora
and fauna he introduced, can still be seen on Kawau Island today.
94 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
95 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
96 James Belich, ‘Sir George Grey’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
97 Keith Sinclair, ‘Grey, George’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1g21/grey-george
98 James Belich, ‘Sir George Grey’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
Sir George Grey was a dominant and domineering figure in New Zealand history. A
‘brilliant and effective servant of British imperialism’,99 Grey was also frequently
ruthless, manipulative and deceitful. Long remembered (by Pākehā at least) as ‘Good
Governor Grey’, his reputation has undergone something of a battering in recent
decades as his role in ordering the invasion of Waikato, among other actions, have
been subjected to more critical investigation and analysis.
99 James Belich, ‘Sir George Grey’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
Gustavus Ferdinand von Tempsky (1828-1868)
Origins of the Name
Von Tempsky Street, located in Hamilton East, was named after the Prussian-born
soldier adventurer and artist Gustavus Ferdinand von Tempsky.100 Hamilton Borough
Council resolved in 1906 to name the street that ran between Hamilton East school
and Bridge Street ‘in honour of the hero of the Waikato War’, according to an account
published in the Waikato Times.
Gustavus Ferdinand von Tempsky was born in East Prussia on 15 February 1828.102
He came from a prominent military family and attended cadet school in Berlin in
preparation for his own expected career as a military officer. On graduating, von
Tempsky joined his father’s regiment in 1845. He lasted only nine months in the
Prussian Army, travelling to Mosquito Coast, in Central America, where a Prussian
settlement was planned.103
There, von Tempsky had his first experience of military action, when the settlement
came under attack from Nicaraguan forces, serving as an officer in the local militia. It
was in the Mosquito Kingdom also that he first met Emilia Ross Bell, his future wife.104
100 ‘Kete Hamilton: Hamilton Streets: Von Tempsky Street’,
101 Waikato Times, 22 September 1906,
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19060922.2.20 ; Hamilton Borough Council minutes, 21
102 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
103 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
104 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
After hearing of the Californian goldrush, von Tempsky travelled there in 1850,
spending his next three years trying and failing to make a fortune. He returned to
central America, marrying Emilia Bell at the British Bluefields settlement in 1855. They
had three children together. After returning to Europe briefly, von Tempsky and his
family moved to Australia in 1858, where he tried digging gold in Victoria and dabbled
in other jobs.105
In 1862 von Tempsky crossed the Tasman, spending the next year attempting to work
the Coromandel goldfields. Although that again proved unprofitable, he did secure a
position as the local correspondent for the Daily Southern Cross newspaper.106 When
the Waikato War began in July 1863, von Tempsky sought to put together a volunteer
unit from among the goldminers. But his efforts were rebuffed, partly it seems because
of his German nationality. Von Tempsky instead reported on the early phases of the
war and befriended William Jackson, a member of the Papakura Valley Rifle
In August 1863 Jackson was appointed as the commander of a new and elite volunteer
unit, known as the Forest Rangers, which was intended to specialise in irregular
warfare such as bush fighting.108 Von Tempsky was invited to join the Forest Rangers
on an early expedition into the Hunua Range. Impressed by von Tempsky’s skills,
Jackson suggested that he apply for a commission in the unit. Von Tempsky was
appointed ensign in the Forest Rangers, conditional on becoming a naturalised British
subject, which was granted on 24 August 1863.109
105 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
106 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
107 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.9.
108 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.10.
109 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
Von Tempsky, along with Thomas McDonnell, later volunteered to scout the area
around Paparata in October 1863.110 Both men were able to supply valuable
information to the commander of the British forces in New Zealand, LieutenantGeneral Duncan Cameron, about the strength of Māori defences.111
In recognition of their efforts, both men were promoted. Von Tempsky was made
captain, effective from 10 November 1863, and the Forest Rangers were reconstituted
at the same time into two separate companies. Von Tempsky took control of the No.
2 Company, but with Jackson (still in command of the No.1 Company) having overall
command by dint of his seniority.112
On Sunday 13 December 1863, Jackson’s company attacked a camp of Māori men,
women and children at Paparata, killing at least seven of them. The Māori party were
reportedly at prayer at the time and Jackson’s men were soon accused of ‘cold-blooded
murder’ in the Daily Southern Cross newspaper.113 Von Tempsky and his men did not
take part in the attack and he recorded that on hearing of what had taken place ‘my
first emotion was a strong pang of jealousy’.114
Four days later both of the Forest Rangers companies embarked on another three-day
expedition into the Hunua Range in pursuit of Māori.115 Although the invading Crown
forces had pushed south as far as Ngāruawāhia by December 1863, the Forest
Rangers remained based further north at Papakura, securing the Great South Road
and Auckland from potential attack from the direction of the Hunua Range.116 Because
110 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, pp.31-32.
111 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
112 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.34.
113 Daily Southern Cross, 17 December 1863,
114 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.40.
115 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.41.
116 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.42.
of this, von Tempsky did not take part in the actions at Meremere and Rangiriri through
October and November.
That changed in January 1864 when von Tempsky and the Forest Rangers No. 2
Company received orders to advance south into Waikato, leaving Papakura on 23
January for Tuhikaramea.117 Shortly after arriving, along with Cameron and his troops,
von Tempsky and his men advanced up the banks of the Waipā River to Te Rore. From
their Te Rore camp, Cameron contemplated his next move, reconnoitring an
impressive line of Māori fortifications less than five kilometres away at Pāterangi.118
On 11 February 1864 von Tempsky and his men took part in a significant engagement
at Waiari, a bend on the south bank of the Mangapiko River. It was there that a party
of about 50 British soldiers bathing in the river found themselves ambushed by a Māori
party. While a small covering party of 20 men held the Kīngitanga force at bay,
reinforcements were called for, among them von Tempsky and about 30 of his men.119
Von Tempsky recorded of the battle that:
A ditch of the breastwork of an ancient pa slopped down to the river. It was
densely covered with scrub, as well as the bank of the river. My men bounded
down into it like tigers. On our hands and knees we had to creep, revolver in
hand, looking for our visible foes. The thumping of double-barrel guns around
us announced soon that we were in the midst of the nest. I had in all about
thirty men. Some were stationed on the top of the bank, others in the very
river, and the rest crawling through the scrub. There were strange meetings in
that scrub. Muzzle to muzzle, the shot of despair, the repeating cracks of
revolvers and carbine thuds, and the brown bodies of Maoris made their
117 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.47.
118 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.285.
119 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.59.
appearance gradually, either rolling down the hill or being dragged out of the
Although the exact figures are unknown, the Māori force at Waiari suffered heavy
losses, with a likely figure of around 35 killed, compared with 6 dead on the Crown
side.121 Von Tempsky’s official report of the engagement stated that his own men had
personally killed seven Māori.122
Rather than attempt to storm the formidable Pāterangi defences, Cameron decided to
try and bypass them altogether. Late on the evening of 20 February 1864 a column
of 1230 troops marched silently and in single column around the pā. They marched
along the banks of the Mangapiko River, over an old cattle track, before reaching a
dray road that took them to the settlement of Te Awamutu.123 Among the advance
party was von Tempsky and his men.
The first troops reached Te Awamutu towards dawn on 21 February. The settlement
was nearly deserted, save for a few Māori who had stayed back to protect St John’s
Anglican Church. And so Cameron issued orders for the attacking party to immediately
press on to Rangiaowhia a few kilometres away. Cavalry were the first to enter the
settlement, receiving orders to charge as they came within sight of it.124 Von Tempsky
recorded that he and his men had heard the ‘rapid crack-crack of revolvers and
carbines’ as they followed behind, realising that ‘the conflict had commenced’.125
What followed was completely different from other pā battles of the Waikato War
because Rangiaowhia was not a fortified settlement. It was not a pā at all but rather
120 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.59.
121 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.288.
122 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.64.
123 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.291.
124 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.70.
125 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, p.104, qMS-2008, Alexander
Turnbull Library, Wellington.
an open village without fortifications of its own. The main body of Kīngitanga fighters
were at Pāterangi awaiting a British attack that never came. Following the Rangiriri
battle in November 1863 the presence of women and children inside the fighting pā
was condemned by various figures, including Governor George Grey, and the
Kīngitanga urged to remove both to a place of safety.126 Nine days before the attack
on Rangiaowhia Bishop George Selwyn, then serving as chaplain to the Crown forces,
was informed that the settlement had been designated such a place and asked ‘to
confer with General Cameron and make sure that the people there were left
Most of the residents of Rangiaowhia were women, children and elderly men, sent
there in the belief that the British forces would respect its status as a place of safety
and sanctuary for non-combatants. Instead, in the early hours of Sunday morning, 21
February 1864, they found themselves under attack, at first by cavalry, followed by
foot soldiers, including von Tempsky and his men. Von Tempsky recorded that ‘our
blood was up’, as a result of which his men reached the settlement considerably in
advance of many of the other foot soldiers.128
There are multiple first-hand accounts of what followed and some of these disagree
on crucial points. But the official British return noted that 33 prisoners were captured:
21 women and children and 12 (probably elderly) men.129 These returns also noted
that 12 Māori had been killed in the attack on Rangiaowhia but made no reference to
their ages or gender. That was perhaps hardly surprising given the make-up of most
of the residents. And other unconfirmed estimates put the death toll at more than
126 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.295.
127 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.297.
128 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, p.104, qMS-2008, Alexander
Turnbull Library, Wellington.
129 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, pp.299-300.
130 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.303.
Von Tempsky recorded that he had set out to seize a group of Māori huddled in the
Catholic church at one end of the settlement before receiving orders from Cameron to
stand down. Obeying reluctantly, von Tempsky and his men marched towards the
centre of the settlement, from where firing was still to be heard.131 There a circle of
soldiers had surrounded a whare with a sunken floor and a narrow entranceway. The
body of one soldier shot while attempting to enter lay in the doorway. Inside were a
group of Māori. Von Tempsky recorded that ‘Some neighbouring whares had been set
fire to, with a view of communicating the fire to the all-dreaded one’. That seemed,
he wrote, ‘unfair’ and so he decided to rush the whare, retrieving the body of the
By this point the flames were lapping over from a neighbouring whare and von
Tempsky and his men withdrew. Von Tempsky then described an ‘old looking man’
coming out of the now burning whare with his hands in the air in a gesture of surrender
and cries of ‘Spare him!’ ringing around. He noted that some of the men, ‘blinded by
rage, at the loss of comrades perhaps’, ignored these pleas, firing at and killing the
man. None of the other occupants of the whare dared come out after this incident.
All, including a young boy, were torched to death. In all seven people died in the
Hearing of the attack on their families, the Kīngitanga men of fighting age abandoned
their position at Pāterangi and rushed back to come to their aid. Prised out of their
formidable fortifications, they found themselves under attack the following day at
nearby Hairini, suffering heavy losses (at least 30 killed) in the engagement.134 Von
Tempsky and his men were again present, von Tempsky subsequently permitting the
Forest Rangers to loot nearby Māori dwellings.135
131 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, p.105, qMS-2008, Alexander
Turnbull Library, Wellington.
132 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, p.108, qMS-2008, Alexander
Turnbull Library, Wellington.
133 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, pp.301-02.
134 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.293.
135 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, p.115, qMS-2008, Alexander
Turnbull Library, Wellington.
They were also present on 23 February 1864, when Crown forces raided and looted
the Ngāti Paretekawa settlement of Kihikihi, previously home to Rewi Maniapoto and
his people. In the space of a few hours the entire settlement was destroyed before
the soldiers returned to camp at Te Awamutu with their spoils.136
Von Tempsky and the Forest Rangers were also present at the final battle of the
Waikato War, which took place at Ōrākau, a few kilometres from Kihikihi, between 31
March and 2 April 1864. Around 300 Māori from multiple iwi, including women and
children, were gathered in the still incomplete pā when it was attacked by Crown
forces on 31 March 1864. Women and children had likely been brought into the pā
after what took place at Rangiaowhia, when what was understood as their sanctuary
had been attacked. The British commander, George Carey, dispersed his men around
the pā, believing it was surrounded and bombarding it with heavy artillery. Von
Tempsky and his men took up a position to the east of the pā.137 That followed initial
but unsuccessful efforts to storm the defences.
Inside the pā, matters quickly became critical, the Māori defenders soon running out
of food, water and ammunition. Crown forces commencing sapping towards the pā
and had nearly reached its outer perimeter on 2 April, when William Mair was sent
forth to invite the pā’s occupants to surrender. Declining to do so, they instead later
fled the pā on foot, attempting to break through British lines and make their way
towards the Pūniu River several kilometres to the south. Large numbers were killed in
the subsequent pursuit, around 150 in total. Those killed included a number of women,
including in at least one case a wounded woman who a number of soldiers gathered
around to kill.138 Describing the scene afterwards, von Tempsky noted that he was
136 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, pp.117-18, qMS-2008,
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington.
137 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.97.
138 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, p.332.
‘sorry to see’ women amongst both those killed and the wounded prisoners. However,
he declared that nearly all of these cases, apart from one, had been ‘accidents’.139
Von Tempsky and his men remained in the Waikato district for nearly twelve months
after the Ōrākau battle, awaiting the allocation of confiscated lands promised them in
return for their services. As a senior officer, von Tempsky received an allocation of
400 acres of rural lands in the Pirongia district.140 In April 1865 von Tempsky and 50
Forest Rangers were sent to the Whanganui district. He led an attack on a party of
about 80 Pai Mārire supporters at Kakakaramea near the Pātea River on 13 May 1865,
killing six to eight of their number and earning praise from the Premier, Frederick
Weld, for his actions.141
Later in the year von Tempsky was ordered to serve on the East Coast under James
Fraser, a more junior and less experienced officer. Feeling slighted, von Tempsky
refused and was arrested for disobeying orders but with public opinion strongly on his
side was later cleared by a court of inquiry.142
In December 1865 he returned to Whanganui, joining an expedition by Major-General
Trevor Chute, the new commander of British forces in New Zealand. Chute’s force
travelled north, attacking and destroying a number of pā early the following month,
including Okutuku, Te Pūtahi, Ōtapawa and Ketemarae. A notable feature of the short
but destructive campaign was how few prisoners were taken. One of Chute’s most
senior officers later alleged that orders had been issued that no Māori should be taken
alive.143 An unknown number of Māori were killed during Chute’s five week campaign,
139 G.F. von Tempsky, Memoranda of the New Zealand Campaign in 1863 and 1864, pp.151-52, qMS-2008,
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington.
140 Richard Stowers, Forest Rangers: A History of the Forest Rangers During the New Zealand Wars, Hamilton:
R. Stowers, 1996, p.127.
141 Evening Post, 20 May 1865, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP18650520.2.8 ; N. A. C.
McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990,
updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
142 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
143 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
which involved attacks on an estimated 8 pā and 20 villages, as well as the deliberate
destruction of crops in order to render these settlements uninhabitable.144 Chute’s
uncompromising and ruthless approach was widely applauded by settlers at the time
after his predecessor’s increasing reluctance to fight Māori. Von Tempky was the
unnamed author of a short book on Chute’s campaign but did not go into any details
about his own actions during the course of it.145
Von Tempsky returned to Auckland for a time, where he was a prominent figure in
the social life of the city. Following the disbandment of the Forest Rangers, in January
1868 von Tempsky accepted a commission as Inspector (the equivalent of Major) in
the newly-established Armed Constabulary.
146 After serving for a time in Waikato and
Whanganui, he was sent to Taranaki when the war against Titokowaru broke out.
When the garrison at Turuturumōkai was attacked on 12 July 1868, von Tempsky led
a party of reinforcements who arrived at the redoubt to find ten men dead and another
six wounded, leaving just six of the original guard unscathed.147
On 21 August 1868 von Tempsky took part in an attack on Titokowaru’s stronghold at
Te Ngutu-o-te-Manu. Its occupants were initially taken by surprise but rallied strongly
to drive the Crown force out. Despite initial newspaper reports claiming a crushing
victory, the engagement had been far from decisive.148
On 7 September 1868 Crown forces advanced on Te Ngutu-o-te-Manu for a third time
(there had been an earlier, abortive, effort on 10 August). Advancing through dense
bush with a view to attacking from the rear of the pā, the main body of troops became
144 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
145 A Campaign on the West Coast of New Zealand, Comprising the Western Portion of the Provinces of
Wellington and Taranaki by European and Colonial Forces, under the Command of Major-General Chute, During
the Months of January and February, 1866, Wanganui: The Times, 1866.
146 N. A. C. McMillan. ‘Tempsky, Gustavus Ferdinand von’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published
in 1990, updated March, 2006. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,
147 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
2019, p.194; Daily Southern Cross, 17 July 1868,
148 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
lost and eventually arrived at a clearing in front of Titokowaru’s position. Here they
found themselves exposed to attack from those inside the pā and others hiding in
nearby bush covering, falling in great numbers before orders could be issued for
survivors to retreat. Among the colonial troops killed was von Tempsky, or Manu Rau
(100 birds) as he was said to be known to Māori on account of his ability to rush from
one place to another, doing the work of many soldiers.149 His death caused panic
among other nearby troops and the subsequent retreat was chaotic and confused.
The fact that von Tempsky’s body, along with the other men killed, could not
subsequently be recovered was seen as particularly humiliating. Titokowaru’s party
instead burned them on a funeral pyre.150
Von Tempsky had achieved almost folk
hero status among many Pākehā during his short time in New Zealand and his death
was widely mourned. Although he remains a romantic figure for some, in recent times
his reputation has undergone closer examination and critique.
149 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
150 James Cowan, The New Zealand Wars and the Pioneering Period, Wellington: Government Printer, 1983, vol.
John Bryce (1833-1913)
Origins of the Name
Bryce Street was named by the Hamilton Borough Council in 1910 after John Bryce, a
former Member of Parliament, Minister for Native Affairs, farmer and veteran of the
New Zealand Wars. The street had originally been known as Grey Street but was
renamed when part of Heaphy Terrace was renamed Grey Street East.151 Hamilton
Borough Council had resolved to make this change in 1891.152 In 1905 the same
council’s legal and finance committee recommended that Grey Street West be
renamed Bryce Street.153 It is not clear why there was a delay in making the change.
John Bryce was born in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1833. His parents were Grace McAdam
and John Bryce, a cabinet-maker.154 Grace died from tuberculosis, prompting a
decision that the rest of the family would migrate to New Zealand. In 1840 John junior,
along with an older brother, a sister, and his father landed at Petone on the Bengal
Merchant, the first New Zealand Company ship to sail from Scotland. The family sailed
in steerage class, reflecting their straitened circumstances.155
John’s father took up work as a carpenter, before settling on a bush farm in the Hutt
Valley.156 However, New Zealand Company claims over the Hutt Valley were strongly
contested by local Māori and in 1846 war broke out in the region. A still young John
151 ‘Kete Hamilton: Hamilton Streets: Bryce Street’,
152 Hamilton Borough Council minutes, 8 September 1891; Waikato Times, 10 September 1891,
153 Waikato Argus, 12 August 1905,
154 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
155 G.H. Scholefield (ed.), A Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, Wellington: Department of Internal Affairs,
1940, vol. 1, p.109; Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University,
156 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
junior was said to have been greatly moved by the story of William Allen, a young
bugler in the British Army killed in the fighting that took place at Boulcott’s Farm on
16 May 1846, recalling Bugler Allen’s actions and describing them in heroic terms
It appears that John junior had limited opportunities for formal schooling, and was for
the most part self-taught.158 Later in life he would move freely with men from the
upper echelons of British and settler society, many of whom had received their
educations at elite English public schools and universities such as Oxford and
John Bryce’s fortunes appear to have improved significantly in 1851, when he travelled
to the Victorian goldfields with his brother. Both brothers returned to New Zealand
two years later wealthy enough to buy and develop farm lands in the Rangitikei
district.159 The following year, in September 1854, he married Elizabeth Ann Campbell.
The couple had a large family: eight daughters and six sons.
In 1859 Bryce first entered the world of politics, serving on a number of road boards.
His big breakthrough came in 1862, when he was elected as member for Wanganui
and Rangitikei on the Wellington Provincial Council. In 1866 he was also elected to
represent Wanganui in the General Assembly, before being compelled to resign from
his political positions in February 1867 due to ill health (Bryce was a life-long
In 1868 war returned to Taranaki and the Kai Iwi Cavalry, a volunteer settler unit, was
formed in October and quickly put into action against Ngāti Ruanui prophet and
military commander Riwha Titokowaru, who was leading resistance to the confiscation
of Taranaki Māori lands. John Bryce, then aged in his mid-thirties, had previous
157 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.9.
158 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
159 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.9.
160 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.10.
experience in volunteer cavalry and was chosen by members of the unit as its
The Kai Iwi Cavalry were in action within days of being formed, and soon developed
a reputation for ill-discipline.162 In early November 1868 Bryce’s own commanding
officer, General George Whitmore, wrote of the unit that:
the Kai Iwi Cavalry Volunteers – a motley group of horsemen from 14 to 60
years of age…a perfect pack of devils, and most uncontrollable. If they smell
the natives, they follow Bryce like a pack of hounds, and cut, slay, and destroy
the poor natives before you have time to look around you.163
Whitmore’s comments proved prescient. On 25 November 1868 the Kai Iwi Cavalry
set out on their first major expedition. Two days later, on 27 November, they came
across a group of Māori at Handley’s Woolshed, near Nukumaru. The official report of
what followed noted that the Kai Iwi Cavalry had encountered a party of ‘Hauhaus’,
killing eight of their number with sabre, revolver and carbine. It singled out Sergeant
George Maxwell for praise, noting that he had ‘himself sabred two and shot one of the
The report omitted one critical detail: the Māori party that the Kai Iwi Cavalry had
attacked was not a party of adult Pai Mārire fighters but a group of young children,
between 6 and 12 years of age, who were out hunting pigs. One boy, aged about 10,
was killed by a single stroke from a sword that decapitated him. Another boy, around
12 years old, died as a result of multiple sword attacks.165 Maxwell had played a
prominent role in these killings. But what of his commanding officer, Lieutenant John
161 James Belich, ‘I Shall Not Die’: Titokowaru’s War, New Zealand 1868-1869, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 1989, p.191.
162 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.13.
163 Wanganui Herald, 8 December 1868,
164 W. Newland to Whitmore, 27 November 1868, AJHR, 1869, A-3, p.12, https://atojs.natlib.govt.nz/cgibin/atojs?a=d&d=AJHR1869-I.22.214.171.124&e=
165 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
Bryce? He was said to have been chasing a runaway horse when some of the cavalry
began their advance on the unarmed children and was still chasing it when Maxwell
killed the first boy.166 He later caught up with Maxwell and the other leading men and
issued orders for them to retire. Maxwell initially refused before eventually complying.
Bryce arrived at the scene in time to watch the second gravely wounded boy die.167
He had not participated in the killings but knew that those attacked and killed by his
own men were innocent children.
Years later there would be sequel to this episode when Bryce sued the Australian
journalist and historian George Rusden for libel. Rusden had written in his threevolume history of New Zealand that ‘[s]ome women and young children emerged from
a pah to hunt pigs. Lieutenant Bryce and Sergeant Maxwell of the Kai Iwi Cavalry
dashed upon them and cut them down gleefully and with ease’.168 As there were no
women present – only children – and Bryce had not personally ‘cut down’ anyone,
Bryce’s high-profile libel action was successful in the London courts.169
Bryce and the Kai Iwi Cavalry took part in further actions in the war against
Titokowaru, none nearly as controversial as what had occurred at Handley’s Woolshed,
before the unit was demobilised in August 1869 and officially disbanded in November
of that same year.170 Thus ended his time as a military officer, though not his role in
directing military operations against Taranaki Māori.
In 1871 Bryce returned to the political stage, elected unopposed as the member for
Wanganui in the General Assembly.171 He held the seat until 1881, when he became
the member for Waitotara until 1887. Between 1889 and 1890 he represented Waipa
166 James Belich, ‘I Shall Not Die’: Titokowaru’s War, New Zealand 1868-1869, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 1989, p.201.
167 James Belich, ‘I Shall Not Die’: Titokowaru’s War, New Zealand 1868-1869, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 1989, p.203.
168 G.W. Rusden, History of New Zealand, London: Chapman and Hall, 1883, vol.2, p.504.
169 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/ Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
170 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.22.
171 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
in Parliament, followed by Waikato between 1890 and 1891.172 Between 1876 and
1879 Bryce was chair of Parliament’s Native Affairs Committee, considering a large
number of petitions from Māori seeking relief and redress in respect of various
grievances, as well as draft legislation and other matters. One historian notes that ‘His
views were hopelessly at variance with Maori aspirations’.173
When a new government was installed in 1879 under the leadership of John Hall,
Bryce was sworn in as Native Minister. He remained in office until August 1884, other
than a ten-month period between January and October 1881, following his resignation
after falling out with other ministers (and a similar but briefer interlude in April 1882).
When Bryce came to office, the prophets Te Whiti-o-Rongomai and Tohu Kakaki were
leading a campaign of non-violent resistance to the survey of confiscated lands in
southern Taranaki from their base at Parihaka.174 The people of Parihaka responded
to the survey of lands not previously occupied by Pākehā, by ploughing and later
fencing the areas concerned. Large numbers of Parihaka men had been arrested and
were awaiting trial for their actions.
Bryce quickly signalled his intention to respond in uncompromising fashion, passing
legislation that provided for the Māori prisoners to be imprisoned without trial. He
dismissed objections by declaring Magna Carta and habeas corpus as ‘mere legal
technicalities’ and described the grievances of Taranaki Māori as being entirely without
substance.175 A West Coast Commission was established to investigate any unfulfilled
promises to Taranaki Māori. But Bryce declared they had none. His approach was too
much for many of his fellow Cabinet ministers, and in January 1881 he resigned. Later
that year, with no resolution in sight, Bryce was brought back into the fold.
172 The New Zealand Parliamentary Record, Wellington: Government Printer, 1925, p.81.
173 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
174 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
175 Hazel Riseborough, Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884, Wellington: Allen & Unwin/Port Nicholson Press,
The more conciliatory William Rolleston, who privately believed the people of Parihaka
were genuine in their commitment to non-violent resistance, was prevailed upon to
issue one last proclamation before resigning. On 19 October 1881 he gave the
Parihaka community 14 days to submit to law or lose any lands they still held.176 Bryce
was immediately sworn in as Native Minister to make preparations for the forthcoming
confrontation. All of this took place as the Governor, Sir Arthur Gordon, raced back
from a visit to Fiji, landing just two and a quarter hours after the signing of the
proclamation.177 He believed that Te Whiti’s cause was a just one and was furious that
the government had taken advantage of his absence to rush through the ultimatum.178
With Bryce given a free hand to confront the people of Parihaka, preparations were
quickly put in place. Te Whiti and Tohu continued to urge their followers to act
peacefully, even as speculation as to the forthcoming invasion of their community
reached frenzied levels.179 A force consisting of nearly 1600 Armed Constabulary and
volunteers was hastily assembled, commanded by Colonel J.M. Roberts but under the
direction of Bryce.180 Despite determined efforts by Bryce to prevent detailed press
descriptions of what unfolded at Parihaka, two journalists managed to sneak into the
settlement, witnessing and subsequently reporting on all that unfolded.181
Bryce, riding a white charger and accompanied by Rolleston on foot, advanced on
Parihaka on the morning of 5 November 1881 at the head of the force. They were
greeted by a large party of skipping, singing and dancing children (in some accounts
including boys performing haka).182 Within the settlement itself a crowd of up to 2500
people had assembled to witness proceedings, with Te Whiti and Tohu continuing to
urge calm. Samuel Crombie-Brown, one of the journalists to defy Bryce’s media
176 Hazel Riseborough, Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884, Wellington: Allen & Unwin/Port Nicholson Press,
177 Hazel Riseborough, Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884, Wellington: Allen & Unwin/Port Nicholson Press,
178 Hazel Riseborough, Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884, Wellington: Allen & Unwin/Port Nicholson Press,
179 Hazel Riseborough, Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884, Wellington: Allen & Unwin/Port Nicholson Press,
180 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
181 Star, 7 November 1881, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS18811107.2.20
182 Rachel Buchanan, The Parihaka Album, Wellington: Huia Publishers, 2009, p.48.
blackout, observed that ‘The whole spectacle was saddening in the extreme; it was
an industrious, law-abiding, moral and hospitable community calmly awaiting the
approach of the men sent to rob them of everything dear to them.’
The Riot Act was read and demands issued for Te Whiti, Tohu and others to hand
themselves over for arrest. Te Whiti urged Bryce to come and talk to him instead. But
Bryce refused to dismount from his horse and told Te Whiti that the time for talking
was over.184 As constables stepped forward to arrest Te Whiti and Tohu, both prophets
continued to urge restraint among their followers as they were led away without
resistance. Members of the expeditionary force subsequently looted and pillaged the
settlement.185 The Parihaka community had attracted Māori supporters from all over
the country, and Bryce issued orders for the non-resident population to be forcibly
dispersed. As the people were removed, their houses were pulled down. Oral histories
also record that multiple women were raped.186 Before leaving the scene, Bryce
oversaw the destruction of all crops deemed to belong to outsiders.187
Following the invasion of Parihaka, Bryce helped to steer through further legislation,
indemnifying Crown forces for their actions and providing for Te Whiti and Tohu to be
imprisoned without trial.188 The pair were held for the next 16 months before
eventually being allowed to return to Parihaka. Over the following years they rebuilt
their community, continuing to peacefully resist the confiscation of their lands and
facing further arrests.189
In his role as Native Minister, Bryce also played a prominent part in negotiations
leading to the opening up of the King Country to the North Island main trunk railway
line. As part of his strategy to entice Waikato Māori who had taken refuge in the King
Country following the Waikato War of 1863-64 to return north of the Pūniu River again
183 Star, 7 November 1881, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS18811107.2.20
184 Star, 7 November 1881, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS18811107.2.20
185 Waitangi Tribunal, The Taranaki Report: Kaupapa Tuatahi, Wellington: GP Publications, 1996, p.206.
186 Waitangi Tribunal, The Taranaki Report: Kaupapa Tuatahi, Wellington: GP Publications, 1996, p.237.
187 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.71.
188 Moyra Cooke, ‘John Bryce, 1834-1913: The White Charger’, MA thesis, Massey University, 2015, p.73.
189 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
so that a potential obstacle to the ‘opening up’ of the King Country was removed,
Bryce introduced a Waikato Confiscated Lands Act in 1880 that provided for small
reserves to be set aside for landless ‘surrendered rebels’.190 In 1882 he also introduced
an Amnesty Act providing for offences committed by Māori ‘in insurrection against Her
Majesty’s authority’ to be subject to a general pardon. Following the legislation, there
was speculation as to whether Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki, then taking shelter in the
King Country, would be included in the pardon. At the instance of Ngāti Maniapoto
leader Rewi Maniapoto, Bryce met with Te Kooti in February 1883 and agreed to his
In October 1882 Bryce met with King Tawhiao at Alexandra (now known as Pirongia)
just north of the King Country. Tawhiao repeated his familiar plea for the confiscated
Waikato lands to be returned in full. Bryce rejected this out of hand, offering to return
a small portion of the confiscated lands west of the Waipā River and insisting that ‘the
sovereignty of the Queen must extend over this island from end to end’.192 Bryce’s
uncompromising approach, and his offhand treatment of the Māori King, made it
impossible for the Kīngitanga to accept what had been offered them. King Tawhiao
thereafter looked to the British government and Queen Victoria to intervene, while
Bryce focused on negotiations with Ngāti Maniapoto.193
In March 1883 Bryce reached agreement with a number of Ngāti Maniapoto leaders,
providing for a survey to be commenced for a railway through their territory in return
for various measures designed to protect their lands and authority.194 Ngāti Maniapoto
believed they had entered into a sacred ‘compact’ with the Crown. But they soon found
their lands and authority under threat as the King Country was opened up to the
operations of the Native Land Court and large-scale land purchase operations. The
190 Vincent O’Malley, The Great War for New Zealand: Waikato 1800-2000, Wellington: Bridget Williams
Books, 2016, pp.497-502.
191 Judith Binney. ‘Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1990.
Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/1t45/te-kooti-arikirangi-te-turuki
192 Waikato Times, 31 October 1882, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18821031.2.12
193 Vincent O’Malley, The New Zealand Wars/Ngā Pakanga o Aotearoa, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
194 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Mana Whatu Ahuru: Report on Te Rohe Pōtae Claims [pre-publication version],
Wellington: Waitangi Tribunal, 2018, p.797.
Waitangi Tribunal concluded in its 2018 Te Rohe Pōtae report that Bryce acted in bad
faith and knowingly misled Ngāti Maniapoto rangatira during the course of
negotiations that led to an application in December 1883 for a survey of their external
boundary, which later provided the basis for the Native Land Court to commence
hearings in the district.195
As Native Minister, Bryce did attempt some reform of legislation governing Māori land
purchases and was said to have detested fraudulent land dealings and speculation by
‘land-sharks’.196 But he also described it as an ‘absurdity’ for Māori to believe they
should manage their own affairs and ‘utterly impractical’ for them to think they should
play a greater role in deciding on ownership of their lands.197 Although Bryce had not
personally killed anyone at Handley’s Woolshed in 1868, he turned a blind eye to what
had taken place, and was complicit in the affair as a result. It is said that Māori
thereafter referred to him as Bryce ‘Tangata Kohuru’ (Bryce the murderous man),
perhaps reflecting belief that he bore responsibility for what had happened.198 His
prominent role in the invasion of Parihaka is more clear-cut. It is an incident today
widely remembered as deeply shameful.
Bryce’s subsequent political career was less memorable. And personally, he expressed
no regret for what had happened at Parihaka, observing on the 25th anniversary of
the invasion that he had no misgivings about what had taken place.199 It was, Bryce
said, the event in his life of which he had ‘never ceased to be proud’.200 He died at his
home in Whanganui in January 1913.201
195 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Mana Whatu Ahuru: Report on Te Rohe Pōtae Claims [pre-publication version],
Wellington: Waitangi Tribunal, 2018, pp.908-911.
196 Alan Ward, An Unsettled History: Treaty Claims in New Zealand Today, Wellington: Bridget Williams Books,
197 Bryce to Governor, 11 January 1884, MA 23/1, Archives New Zealand, Wellington; Bryce to Governor, 11
February 1884, G 49/20, Archives New Zealand, Wellington.
198 ‘Te Tangata Kōhuru: The Murderous Man’, https://nzhistory.govt.nz/classroom/conversations/te-tangatakohuru-murderous-man
199 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
200 Hawera and Normanby Star, 3 February 1903,
201 Hazel Riseborough. ‘Bryce, John’, Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, first published in 1993. Te Ara – the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2b44/bryce-john
The people of Venezuela surrendered their Guns and now cant overthrow their tyrannical Socialist government.
This is what the U.S second Amendment was enacted to prevent.
This is the Truth that Ardern and the globalists want to keep you all ignorant of….
They want you to hate the 2nd amendment which is the Peoples right to use arms to defend themselves and bring down a corrupt State.
They even had ‘Article 350’ which states “The people of Venezuela, faithful to their republican tradition, its struggle for independence, peace and freedom, shall disown any regime, legislation or authority that runs counters to democratic values, principles and guarantees, or that undermines human rights.”… and yet because the People foolishly surrendered their arms *They rendered themselves defenseless and had no way to get rid of the evil Dictatorship^… and so now they are victims… and dying by the thousands…. and the so-called benevolent Socialist Regime shows them no mercy… because the socialists care more about maintaining their grip on power than the well being of their own people…. understand that….
Ardern has used the Christchurch terror attack as an excuse to implement her own tyranical ambitions under the guise of making New Zealand safer… and the fools believed her… and allowed her to make us less safe!
Less safe from Terrorism, and certainly less safe from her Tyrannical Police State.
She has not disarmed any criminals… but has disarmed Law abiding New Zealanders.
It is no coincidence that she has attacked New Zealanders Gun Rights and seeks to destroy our rights to Free Speech… which is the right to call her out for imposing her oppressive new Laws.
This pattern of disdain for the rights of their citizens has been repeated all over wherever Socialism has prevailed… think about Tiananmen Square.
Think about Zimbabwe.
The Globalists *are Marxist communists* …. Ardern is a Communist traitor to the globalist cause…. she admitted this at the UN…..
Ardern is Corrupt!
She is putting our National interests second place to her own diabolical political delusions!
She is like so many treasonous Leaders across western civilisation like France’s Macron and Canada’s Trudeau.
Why do you think the whole World’s media and Globalist politicians see Trump as being ‘Evil incarnate’?
Why do you suppose they are all busy trying to get the people of the world to think of trump as being insane, Racist, and greedy?
and why do you think the Globalists have prevented Boris Johnson from implementing the express will of the people with regards to Brexit?
Why do you think they Put Tommy Robinson in Jail and have de-platformed the likes of Milo Yiannopoulos?
Wake up Fools!
Compare Ardern’s treacherous speech to that of Donald Trump!
Trump is far from perfect, yet his speech at the UN was a Truth Bomb!
The fanatical Left seek to shut down *anyone* who dares to challenge their agenda.
Look at Venezuela and realise the same fate of slavery awaits any population who surrenders to socialism and allows them to pass laws against free speech and the right of the people to bear arms… esp Arms like Semi-autos.
The New ‘Gun register’ is not being implemented to make New Zealand safer from criminals or terrorists but to make it easier for the government to take away the rest of New Zealanders means of resisting their tyranical globalist ambitions.
Soon voices like mine will be silenced.
Remember when you and your children are slaves…. that I warned you what was coming… and yet you did nothing.
And free speech is the right for me to expound these Truths that the government does not want the people to contemplate.
The Government wants this sort of political truth to be deemed as ‘Radical and Dangerous’… when it is Our Right to discuss these matters which upholds the fact that the State is *our servant… not our Master… and we may abolish it at any time we deem it to have become tyrannical and corrupt.
These truths are enunciated in the American declaration of independence,
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
These are Historic truths!
This is what the 2nd amendment is all about and why New Zealand needs a new constitution that contains these truths which outlaws the government from passing such Laws as they have just recently done with the Arms Amendment bill.
‘Rapper 50 Cent has used his personal Instagram account to poke fun at a Mongrel Mob member’s face tattoo.
“What the f… is really going on man. I wonder why he can’t get a job?” the rapper wrote.
The image shared was a picture of Mongrel Mob member Puk Kireka, who has the word “Notorious” tattooed in red and black across the lower half of his face.
Kireka’s story was picked up by global media following an interview he did with the NZ Herald last week, where he admitted it would be tough to find employment with the tattoo. ‘
**** **** ****
Who thinks 50 Cent is wrong about his derision of how detrimental Puk Kireka’s Mob Tattoo will affect his future Job prospects????
Even Puk Kireka knows thats a simple fact.
The following blog post is written in disgust… not racism… though it does focus on what is happening to a particular racial demographic… the Maori people… *My People*…
My disgust centers upon the vile lies and socialist politics that subverts the truth and fails to correctly identify the *real causes* for why…despite decades of social engineering and Billions of Tax dollars of special treatment, Maori remain trapped in State dependence, and fill up New Zealand’s Jails.
Its about how our Government falsely and relentlessly attributes Maori Social failings to ‘Oppression and racism’ suffered from ‘Colonisation’ when in reality Maori are victims of the delusions that derive from this very Deceitful and toxic Socialist ideology.
One of my latest blog posts here poured scorn on a recently completed and heavily funded Government inquiry into the question of Maori Criminality that is starkly out of all proportion to their number comparative to all other racial demographics, and the resultant report called ‘‘He Waka Roimata or A Vessel of Tears’ recently tabled for the government to consider.
This report is supposed to give MPs guidance and insights into the root causes of why Maori have such disastrous social statistics. esp in relation to crime and Jail.
The release of this report, and its utterly contemptible conclusions are what have spurred me to blogging on this Current affair, as I utterly reject its main premises as not merely missing the mark by a thousand miles, but because it is a work of Evil political agenda driven propaganda… not an objective inquiry leading to sound conclusions… and it is outrageous that this fraudulent report is going to be used as a guide to Future Government policy!
We can see that the result will be precisely what Socialists intended to do all along *even before the inquiry was undertaken*… like so many of the farcical processes acted out for the sake of pulling the wool over the eyes of the public before Socialist enact their heavy handed and expensive agendas.
Such Inquiries pretend to be ‘sound governance practice’… ‘due diligence’ feigning ‘due process’… with copious helpings of ‘Public consultation’… garnering ‘expert opinion’… etc etc … when we know the result has been pre-determined and will entail Hundreds of Millions of Taxpayer dollars more being spent expanding State interventions and apartheid politics… yet because all this Nonsense does not correctly identify the root causes of Maori criminality and poverty, it is with mathematical certainty doomed to failure just as all the Socialist Apartheid politics of the last 50 years has proven to be.
They are not only continuing to Flog this dead horse… continuing with political ideas that are proven failures, these Socialist Politicians are doing what they always do… *Enabling* and *perpetuating* the misery!
*And this Angers me!* *This incompetence* and dishonesty Disgusts me!
Yet of course because Nanny State Socialists are ‘one trick ponies’… they dont have any other Game to play…
Unfortunately the entire country must pay a heavy price for their ongoing incompetence and delusions… no one paying a higher price than Maori themselves who have been indoctrinated with these toxic lies that corrode their ability to appreciate the fundamental causes of their own predicament.
The solution to the Maori predicament is not more Nanny statism… but less…. and more self responsibility.
The solution to the Maori predicament is not more Apartheid politics and blame… but less… and more self responsibility.
Ie If Maori are ever going to climb out of the gutter it will be *when they do it for themselves* by embracing the ethics of *Self responsibility*
This is the truth that is missing from the report ‘He Waka Roimata or A Vessel of Tears’ that instead tries to blame ‘White Colonialism’for Maori’s plight rather than their own failure to embrace Ethics and values necessary to prosper… and stay out of prison.
The Fundamental truth that Current Socialist Apartheid politics and Welfare dependence are 100 times more destructive to Maori individuals well being than the so-called ‘culture shock’ of 19 century English Colonisation can be proven at all points if only people will open their eyes and ears… and esp their minds to considering *alternative perspectives* to the ones that they have been spoon fed by Socialist politicians and their ‘Education system’.
Today’s blog will consider just one aspect of detrimental choices and behaviour that makes life harder for those people who make this choice… just one reason why many Maori will find themselves welfare dependent… yet it has little to do with their race.
Upon reading the following only the belligerent minded will not already appreciate what I am about to say as being so basic and irrefutable that it barely requires being stated, yet I must do so to demonstrate the dynamics of Falsely labeling *personal individual choices* as ‘systemic racism’.
Failure to Call out Maori for their own poor choices, and instead blaming the Pakeha for their woes virtually guarantees succeeding generations of Maori will continue to wallow in the mire… and continue to cultivate Race hatred for their Pakeha neighbours!
And from hatred comes violence and crime.
So lets talk about the vital issues of Self responsibility, and personal choices… issues Socialists avoid like the plague in favour of an ideology of *Blaming others* .
Socialism thrives on victimism… they envisage an endless struggle between Oppressor and the oppressed.
They Never associate personal outcomes with personal choices and responsibility.
Instead they seek to circumvent personal responsibility via Nanny State interventions, Prohibitions, and compulsions.
Life is Tough!
And yet Good Parents attempt to raise their children to take responsibility for their own actions.
Yet ‘Adulting’ can be very difficult… especially when it comes to self discipline and voluntarily obeying and maintaining morals and values you know in the long term to be wise and beneficial… all the while resisting urges and temptations to indulge in vice, or ‘short cuts’… for immediate short term benefit and gratification… that are gained at the expense of others… and ultimately… ourselves.
There will always be a personal price to pay for Bad choices!
Call it Karma… reaping what you sow…. etc.
Though this is tuff… nonetheless these truths are *vital* for every individual to apprehend… irrespective of Race.
Despite what the Morally bankrupt Academics of our day preach in our institutions of learning about ‘cultural relativism’… in truth the same essential morals, values, and principles apply equally to all… and your success or failure as an individual depends upon how well you grasp these essential truths… and how resolved you are to following Virtue as your guide…and in maintaining them in your personal walk.
I want to apply this theme to the story at the top of this post… 50cent and the Mobster Puk Kireka’s Heavy Gang Facial tattoo…and how this demonstrates the Truth about a lack in self responsibility as being the Primary source of the Maori peoples sorry social conditions… not Colonisation.
50 cent derided Puk because his personal choice to get that tattoo is guaranteed to make his life harder ‘in the big wide world’… esp with respect to future employment… and employment is one of the *most essential factors* in being self reliant and independent human being!
The ability to Earn an honest dollar.
So unless you are Filthy Rich and dont need a Job, obviously getting that sort of Tattoo may therefore be considered to be *a bad personal choice* because is will undoubtedly negatively impact on that persons ability to uprightly take care of themselves.
It is a Bad choice not restricted to Maori, but by people of all races, and yet it is a Bad personal choice made to a much higher degree by young Maori Men… usually to impress their Peers.. or to serve as a type of ‘War paint’… that this person is ‘Staunch’… ‘Bad ass’… etc to intimidate others or cause others to be wary of messing with them… I am of course taking about Tattoos… esp Face, neck, lower arms and hand tattoos that are impossible/ difficult to conceal.
And it is the higher prevalence of such tattoos among Maori men that is but one factor that works to lower Maori Social statistical outcomes… not colonisation.
I will discuss Traditional ‘Moko’ in the postscript.
Many of these Tattoos are purposefully ‘aggressive’, most often of very poor quality, and often associated with fringe subcultures,Gangs, and Jail.
I appreciate that when you are raised in a poor community (not a personal choice children make), and immersed in Gang culture (which is often family related, or Neighborhood related, yet ultimately still a life style choice to participate in) these Tattoos are considered to be ‘positive goods’… emblems of belonging… have urban warfare value… even value when it comes to ‘Hooking up’.
This is what life appears to be ‘all about’ to young people immersed in it, yet they are setting themselves up for a very hard lesson in life that the Greater world… the world in which better quality of life exists, will not be at all impressed.
This whole ‘Culture’ is a study in personal ethics and choices that too easily is talked about by socialists who make excuses for Bad personal choices by their pet demographics they instead frame as ‘helpless victims’ of ‘social failings’ and oppression rather than individual choices.
If only More Youth would have the wisdom and foresight to appreciate how bad a decision to get a facial tattoo can be… unfortunately many youth dont get good parenting or mentor-ship that sets an example worthy to be emulated… unfortunately Young Maori men take their roll models from older siblings, Uncles, etc… Gang Members… heavily tattooed… Hard Drinkers… drug users… and quick to use their fists if they feel ‘disrespected’.
Thus the older generation of Maori have to accept that their own life choices play a very strong part in the choices their youth will make… for better or ill.
What sort of examples did Puk’s Whanau set for him?
None of this has anything to do with ‘Colonisation’ or Pakeha oppression.
It has everything to do with a culture of poor judgement, poor ethics, poor values, and poor exemplars.
Maori have enjoyed decades of Political and legal favoritism and yet Socialists never cease to insist Maori are oppressed.
In reality Maori criminality is a testament to Maori failure to honour the Treaty!
That Racism has little to do with this particular issue can be seen with the well known case of ‘Devast8’… White boy Mark Cropp.
“A man with ‘Devast8’ tattooed across his face, who last year opened up about his job struggles as he tried to turn his life around, is back before the courts.”
The fact is that these types of Tattoos carry definite social stigma and are justly associated with Anti-social behavior, and crime.
And this Sigma has nothing to do with race.. and nothing to do with ‘Bigotry’… A White person with a Facial ‘White Power’ tattoo with find his lot in life just as difficult as any Maori with ‘Black Power’
Its a simple fact that Employers, Landlords will with good reason think twice about employing or renting to a person with heavy tattoos
That this trait is very predominant among young Maori… ie that many Maori men have heavy Facial tattoos,Hands, Neck… and also carry high statistical gang affiliations is why their demographic is proportionally heavily affected, yet in reality New Zealanders are collectively a heavily Tattooed People… New Zealand has a high statistical Tattoo count from all ethnic backgrounds… yet not so much on the face.
The Internet is full of accounts of Non Maori… White Individuals who have a harder time in life because of their facial tattoos.
Its an internationally recognised problem for individuals.
Many people will not even bother to read this post simply because the facts are so obvious!
That the serious negative consequences result from this sort of personal behavior by young people has nothing to do with systemic racism, and everything to do with having made very bad choices that will impact negatively upon your future is something so Obvious that many people will wonder why I bothered to write this?
As I have explained in the very first paragraph… This post is about exposing the Lies of socialism that try and blame ‘Colonialism and White Prejudices’ for the poor social conditions/ High Criminality of Maori, and in the process deny the fact that the *real causes* are the lack of Self responsibility for their personal choices… and that blaming Colonisation and White racism is a disgusting lie for political ends, that not only slanders Pakeha, but attempts to justify *Racist politics* extorting hundreds of millions of dollars all the while failing to address the real Moral crisis that is impoverishing Maori and ensnaring them in Socialist dependency.
Let me finish by saying most of the insights on the importance of personal ethics I have expressed are not things I have learned in school but truths I have lived.
I spent my youth as part of the Fringe subculture in rebellion to ‘conservative society’, in which tattoos were the norm, and in which many foolish values are embraced as being ‘Cool’ ‘Staunch’.
I have many Tattoos. Tattoos I wish I did not have, yet fortunately they are not on my Face, Hands, Neck, or lower arms.
I like Tattoos, yet for religious reasons I regret mine, and discourage anyone from getting them… and if they do implore they do so on discrete areas of the body that can be covered at times of Work, Job interviews, etc… because for most professional interactions with wider society having overt tattoos will be a disadvantage.
It is pointless for the Tattoo community to act as if they are somehow being ‘oppressed’ by ‘bigoted’ outsiders for ‘Judging them’ because of their Tattoos when its a patent fact that Tattoos and criminality… Tattoos and Gangs…, etc are not mythical associations but factual… and that not only are a large percentage of tattoos purposefully intended to send a message of ‘Baddassness’ but that even the Tattooed community judge each other by their tattoos… eg a Tattooed Maori is highly likely to immediately hate a Pakeha with a white power Tattoo… and so when you analyse all this you can easily see that deriving *First impressions about a persons character* from their Tattoos is a universal habit founded upon some very valid associations.
Yet sometimes these first impressions can be wrong… and of course there are many Great people with Facial Tattoos.
People can change… Criminals can reform… First appearances can be very deceiving… People do form judgments by first appearances and may will not bother to investigate further whether or not their first impressions were correct.
It has just been reported that Puk Kireka actually wants to change his ways and is seeking donations from the public to fund his education.
Read ‘Tattooed Mongrel Mob member mocked by 50 Cent seeks donations to fund education.’
“A Givealittle page, started by Kireka’s partner Waiora Tareha, is now seeking donations from the public to help the gang member turn his life around.
Tareha said the page was an attempt to get Kireka a helping hand from others to kickstart a new, positive life.”
I wish Puk Kireka every success in his endevour to step up and create a better life for himself!
It will be very hard with that Heavy Facial Tattoo… Yet not impossible… He will have to find the inner strength to persevere.
Maybe getting it removed would be in his own best interest… these are the sorts of tuff choices he must make for his own future.
I hope he also mentors his younger Whanau into not making the same detrimental life choices that he himself made… in this way he can help them to have a better life… a smoother path… Break out of Poverty and crime… and is not this what we all want for Maori?
They must turn their backs on the lies of Socialism and race hate against the Pakeha… turn away from blaming Colonisation which has brought 1000 times more benefits and opportunities to these shores than the socialist claims of the evils of ‘Land alienation and loss of culture’.
In Freedom and equality before the Law Maori may embrace *all the positive aspects of their Cultural inheritance* while also embracing the advantages of Western Science, technology, and life affirming Values and ethics that are essential for all human beings to escape socialist dependence on the State and prosper by their own efforts.
I wrote this ‘Pamphlet’ ‘Whistle while you Work‘ on work ethics and work culture to help individuals seeking to better themselves via personal effort and self responsibility… Please share it with Job seekers and anyone who is keen to make a better life for themselves… they have the power!
Stop with the self-defeating Victimism and Blame!
There are Political injustices in life, and they can and do make life harder… and as a Libertarian I busy myself exposing them and calling for reforms, yet this blog post has focused on merely *one example* of a *personal choice* that has heavy consequences for individuals irrespective of their race… Yet of course there are countless other matters of personal choice, values, and personal responsibility that when considered in totality are sufficient to explain why some people wallow in poverty, commit crimes, and never rise to their full potential… while others rise above the hurdles and succeed… in spite of all the Political BS.
Be like them!
Without spending too much time talking about the ‘Old World’ tradition of Moko (of which I make no claims of expertise) I just want to make a few passing points.
Firstly I want to say their is a world of difference between ‘Tribal art’ and Gang tattoos.
I also want to point out that Facial Moko even back in Pre-Colonial times was not universal, and that the notion that any contemporary Maori thinking that by getting a Facial Moko today somehow makes them ‘A greater Maori’ or somehow symbolises them as being ‘more passionate’ about Old world Maori culture… I cant help but to consider such motives as being Poor judgement
and actually perpetrating a type of cultural fraud.
Tattoos in Old times may have been associated with high Mana, and imbued *ferocity* to a Warriors presence in war (and on the street… and in jails… all reason why Modern Gangs love Facial Tattoos)… yet that same ferocity will work to defeat you in times of Peace… outside Gang culture…in the modern world where prosperity and Freedom from Crime and jail is to be found… so a person must weigh up the positive personal consequences they perceive of Getting a facial tattoo that they like, from any negative social costs such a Tattoo may carry in affecting their ability to prosper… and this is a personal choice… not a matter of prejudice…
One of the most vile and Machiavellian ploys being used by the left today to discredit their political opponents and critics… esp those whose they cant defeat in open debate … those they seek to silence… those they seek to persecute and disparage the Public from paying them any heed, is to falsely label them ‘Alt Right’… White supremacists…. ‘extremists… etc.
The most common types to suffer this abuse are Conservatives and Libertarians.
This post is my attempt to expose this well known tactic, by presenting an *actual example* of a Real Alt Right Nationalist white supremacist … aka A Nazi… to serve as a template to show just how dishonest the left are when they label likes of Hobson’s Pledge *Don Brash* ‘Alt right’ etc.
That there does exist some genuine Alt Right Neo-Nazi Racists in New Zealand is not in dispute, yet they are *an infinitesimal minority*, yet again it is the desire of our devious agenda driven Left wing Government to greatly exaggerate the scale of this extremist group and the danger they pose to others so as to justify Heavy handed legislation against free speech, voluntary association, and extreme Jack booted behaviour by the Police.
Since the Christchurch Terror attack, all it takes to be raided by Armed Police now in New Zealand is for some radical left Social justice warrior to call a police hot line and finger anyone they disagree with … any critics of Arderns Government as being ‘Alt Right’.
The New Zealand Police have now become Politicized and are now acting as ‘Thought Police’ intimidating Critics of Ardern and themselves.
I want to discuss how and why the Police and government are demonstrating a very *left handed* bias when it comes racism and who they are choosing to focus their heavy handed attention upon , and talk a bit about the concepts of ‘Left, right, center, and Libertarianism yet let me first present to you a poster child exemplar for what a real New Zealand Alt Right Nationalist and White Supremacist looks, acts, and talks like.
Phil Arps (left) with Guns giving the ‘White Power’ Nazi Salute.
I think its important to insert a NewsHub link ‘Opinion:Why we ran the video of the white supremacist and the pig’s head’ here that exposes the sort of dangerous Racist and criminal Phil Arps is.
Without Doubt Phil Arps, who has just been convicted for sharing Brenton Tarant’s Prohibited Live footage of his Murderous Killing spree is a dangerous and Evil Alt Right Nationalist White supremacist… a Criminal who deserves to be behind bars.
Though I dont support the censorship of Tarrant’s manifesto… or the rationale that was given to justify it becoming a criminal offence to possess it or share it, nor do I agree with the extremely heavy penalties that apply to sharing the ‘prohibited’ video footage… and despite the fact that I believe the New zealand Police has been acting in a very Jack booted mannor themselves… post Christchurch… pointing guns in the faces of children, etc… still… despite all that… I congratulate the New Zealand Police for arresting Arps as he clearly represented a danger to Non-whites, Migrants, and Muslims.
I contend that even without the censorship of the Video, … or any New Hate speech legislation that New Zealand already has regulations against Threats of violence that Arps has violated many times, and justify him being Prosecuted and heavily punished.
Even if the Video was not outlawed, there still is probably a sufficient case to prosecute him for his intention to get the video doctored so that it had ‘Cross hairs’ going from victim to victim… so that he and his mates could use it to intimidate others, and watch it with Glee while drinking beer in Tarants honor, Eating Popcorn, and planning what crimes they might perpetrate against the focal point of their vile Racism and Bigotry… the Muslim community of Christchurch.
I believe that an argument may be made that his intent to doctor the video in such a way constitutes yet more threats and intimidation to commit violence against his local and peaceful Islamic community… the very community that lost 50 souls in Tarants cowardly and barbarous attack.
and as it turns out… even if such a case could not be made in that regard… the public has just found out that Arps has made explicit threats *Countless times* that he intends to commit murder against Muslims, and Jews.
All the censorship, and secrecy the Government and Police have shrouded around Tarrant and Arps (and another… including a youth who shared the banned manifesto *Before it was prohibited*)… has meant that the New Zealand public have been left in the dark about these very important cases… and I think this secrecy is outrageous as we the people have *the right* to know what the hell is going on and why… yet after News Hub ran their story ‘Opinion: Why we ran the video of the white supremacist and the pig’s head’ Many New Zealanders including myself got their first glimpse at what sort of person Phil Arps *Really is* and the Crimes that he has been committing against the Islamic community in Christchurch.
This is when We got to see *What a genuine Alt Right Nationalist White Supremacist looks like… how they behave… and how they think… driven by Evil… harboring malevolent intents against Non- whites, Migrants, etc… mimicking attitudes common in Nazi Germany in the 1920-40s.
So Phil Arps *is a genuine Alt right Nationalist White supremacist Hater*… a Loathsome racist… a danger to civil society that upholds Liberty and equality before the law for all.
Promoting Tolerance and peaceful coexistence.
The limits on free speech is not whether or not someone may be offended by what someone else has said, but whether or not incitement to or threats of violence have been made, thus Australian Rugby Legend Israel Folau was completely within his right to quote the bible that says sinners… including homosexuals… are in danger of Gods wrath.
This is nothing new to be said in western nations, nothing to loose your job over… until Left wing radicals who hate Christianity, have managed to totally dominate the political landscape and weaponise ‘Taking offence’ via the pseudo-moral construct of ‘Hate speech’… a construct that attempts to totally destroy the right to free speech in any nation that accepts its legitimacy.
What Ardern and the NZ Police need to remember is that a free and equal society *tolerates Free speech* and dissenting opinions, and the right to hold and expound religious opinions that may be critical of others…. *This is fundamental* to freedom and toleration…. *not a Police state that attempts to outlaw the people from expressing their religious views simply because another group dont like what they are hearing!
This Liberty is founded upon a body of enlightenment truths learned and fought for from centuries of struggle and is what has distinguished western Liberty from Tyranny of all sorts, from Fascim, from Communism, and from Islamic and even Christian forms of tyranny…. and why in most western nations Christians, Muslims, Jews, Atheists , and Hindus, have all been able to peacefully coexist… each group peacefully following their own consciences…under a social compact of equality before the law.
And all this was going just fine here until the foreign terrorist and psychopath Brenton Tarrant brought his murderous hatred to our shores!
yet instead of appreciating how good New Zealand really was in regard to these matters… the Ardern government took opportunity to destroy it all and impose tyrannical restrictions on guns and free speech!
They are manufacturing a crisis that never even existed here.
I’m Glad they have put Arps in jail. they should have done that a long time ago… they had enough laws in place to do so… yet now they are way out of hand and i hope the people of New Zealand put them back in their place!
Neither Arp or Tarrant are representative of any real crisis endemic in New Zealand!
There are Race relations problems here to be sure, yet they stream from a completely *different quarter*… and they too are the result of a politically manufactured crisis.
I want to talk about *Racist Doctrines that come from the far left* that likewise works to destroy yet another foundational principle of Western freedom… the principle of racial equality before the law.
Their divisive doctrines of ‘indigenous rights’… and ‘White privilege’ … ‘Treaty partnership’ etc etc have spawned deep racial divisions and a loathesome horde of racists of Colour… against Pakeha (New Zealanders of white European descent).
These left wing Racists far outnumber their Far right counterparts, and represent a far greater danger to New Zealand society than *real* white supremacists do.
But to talk about this blatant form of racism is to risk being labeled ‘A White Supremacist’.
Because of the failure of our Government to uphold the principle of Racial equality before the Law *Left wing Racist ideology has penetrated our government* and established an apartheid system complete with Race based Laws and institutions and created a two tier society based upon race.
Not only does this Officially endorsed form of Left wing racism now affect government policy, it also affects how they view critics of this institutionalized racism like Don Brash and his Anti-Treaty separatist lobby ‘Hobsons pledge’, and myself who has been a Libertarian activist calling for an end to Waitangi apartheid politics that has sprung up from Racist Radical separatist on the far left.
And yet neither *Don Brash, nor myself*… nor the hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who have had a guts full of the institutionalized racism that has sprung up under the guise of ‘honoring the treaty’… are Alt right Nationalists/ white supremacists… yet it is all too easy for the left wing politicians like Andrew Little and Tariana Turia to label anyone who opposes their Racist politics as being ‘Far right’… and racist.
The truth is that Don Brash’s desire (and mine) to end Race based Laws in New Zealand is as antithetical to Alt Right racism as it is to Alt Left racism.
The Leftwing racist radicals of New Zealand are the Maori separatist movement… yet these radicals have managed to find support within the mainstream political parties mainly because they have taken control of the guaranteed Race based seats in our parliament, and the two big parties have fallen over themselves to bribe the radicals in these seats into coalition deals for the sake of control of the government and country.
Its a well known corruption of our democratic system now know as ‘Brown mail’.(a phrase coined by Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters)
And if we step back we see this same Machiavellian mechanism being used by left wing socialists right across democratic Western societies whereby any critics of Left wing policies that involve matters of Racial or cultural content… eg people who are not happy with the way immigration is being managed… these people are being labeled ‘Far right nationalists’.
An example of a Far left Racist Radical organisation in the US that pretends to be representing oppressed Blacks is *Black lives Matter*.
this organisation is very much like the Maori radical separatist movement in that they are infested with White-haters who advocate radical left wing ideology all the way up to establishing full blown Communism in the US and here in New Zealand.
Another Violent Radical left wing group that was founded in the US that is causing Riots and violence, and is spreading throughout western Democracies … yet is not meeting with Due Police restraint is ANTIFA… with their ‘Punch A Nazi’… most people getting punched are not like Phil Arps… are not supporters of Adolph Hitler… but are often little skinny White Teens wearing MAGA caps!
And by far and large these Violent left wing scum get away with it because the Police forces are soft on left wing violence and racism.
The Media across the Western world is now so infested with Woke left Wing social justice warriors that in both New Zealand and the US the Media routinely paint President Trump and his supporters as *Alt right nationalist racist white supremacists*… Fueling the mindless Zombies of Antifa into frenzied riots and acts of violence… as if a white kid wearing a MAGA hat *Really is a Nazi!*
The irony is it’s ANTIFA who are acting Like NAZIs … they are the Intolerant hateful Barbarians calling for virtually everything to be banned, and attacking anyone who holds a different opinion to their own!
This is a classic demonstration of the absolute ignorance of how the Left have no idea how similar The two extremes of the Left and right are.
The Radical Left-wing Maori Joe Trinder wants Don Brash shut down and ‘Punished’ because Don Brash wants Racial equality before the Law whereas Trinder seeks to maintain and expand Racial separatism of the Treaty industry because of the vast wealth and political advantages it affords to people like himself.
Many Caucasian Vocal Internet personalities who have supported President Trump and been critical of the Lefts mass immigration policies and how Liberal governments have failed to maintain law and order (esp in France) have been systematically labeled ‘Alt right’ and ghosted on the internet.
When ever the Left writes an opinion piece that links Radical Nazis like Phil Arps with moderate conservative ‘center right’ critics they are perpetrating Political Slander of the highest order
An example of this is here … where by the conservative center right Facebook administrator of ‘Right Minds NZ’ Dieuwe De Boer is listed as being a part of the ‘Organised Far Right in Aotearoa/NZ’
At least the author has the honesty to admit De Boer is *a conservative*… not Alt right… yet still it is outrageous to include him in an article labeled ‘An Introduction to the Organised Far Right in Aotearoa/NZ’.
This is how the left opperates.
And governments across Western Civilisation are now sending out the police to harass voices of dissent, treating them as ‘dangerous radicals’ ‘hatemongers’ etc when in reality by far the majority of them are not Radicals at all… but conservatives protesting the rapid growth of the Police state being driven by the Left.
New Zealanders are being intimidated by the police for expressing their political opinions on Social media… exercising their right to fee speech… no threats… no hate… just critisisms of what our government is doing.
This is how dangerous and hateful the left wing has become… and yet how blind to it all the Mainstream Media and mainstream parties have become…. and because of this failure on the part of the media and Mainstream political parties… those who have had a guts full of militant left wing Aggression are far more likely to gravitate to the far right, given they can find no reasonable and determined opposition in the main body of the Center right.
Thus we should not be surprised to see the rise of Far right Groups and parties… though here in New Zealand the numbers have been very low… yet because the heavily slopped activities of Arderns government and the police post Christchurch, and their attempts to suppress free speech… we can expect the numbers of the Alt Right here not to subside… but to grow… all because the likes of the National party are not acting as a Conservative opposition party against all this left wing radicalism.
The truly *conservative center right voice* is no longer the Nz National party that has fallen so far left as to be almost indistinguishable from Labour… the Conservative right are now Epsom Mp’s David Seymour’s Act Party, Hobsons Pledge, and Libertarians like myself who voice our opposition to left wing radicalism and racism, yet also express our opposition to Alt right radicalism and racism…. yet the great propaganda lie is that we are Alt right… that because we want to end racial privilege to Maori that we are therefore Racist white supremacists… etc etc… all absolutely despicable lies… and yet willfully lapped up by the media, and the Left.
This is such a massive subject that I will have to make a second post that goes into detail about the so-called ‘left/ Right’ political spectrum and how cumbersome it is and how it is an insufficient… way too simplistic tool to describe individuals and various party co-ordinates within the whole political paradigm.
I will simply finish here with a photo of my own result having completed a political quiz that shows political positions on a two dimensional graph rather than on the one dimensional linear straight line from left to right that is taught in Zombie school politics class or law.
This tool is called ‘the Political compass’.
There are many different versions of this quiz that have different questions, and get different results.
For people like myself I often dont like the way many of the questions are framed, nor the limited ‘answers’ available to pick from… (like most political polls)… and yet usually I end up just on the left side and in the middle of the Libertarian lower half of the compass… yet in the one I post below I ended up just to the right, and closer to the demarcation line between Libertarian and authoritarian (not happy about that!) … yet most importantly *still in the Libertarian sector of the compass* which is the *very opposite sector to Socialist authoritarianism of both the Left and right!
Liberarianism is one of the Hardest political ideologies to sell because on one hand when we critisise the left we get called fascists, and again when we critisisze the Right we get called communists! Both equally false… both equally despicable slanders
This is a result of me doing a political compass quiz.
I am the red dot on the lower quadrant… just right of center.
Where Phil Arps would register I have represented with the Swastika High up on the Authoritarian scale and to the hard right.
Jacinda Ardern would register near the top (but not at the top) and near the far left (but not at the far left extreme).
The most important thing though is not so much how far to the left or the right a person scores but more how high or low a persons views puts them into authoritarianism… and the use of political power,force, and coercion, as opposed to how Libertarian a person is… those who believe in personal liberty, self reliance, self responsibility,free speech, and volunaty community actions.
Do the political compass yourself here (see sidebar)
So despite everything the left tries to say and assume about my politics because I critisise them so much… I am not an Alt right wing Fascist whatsoever.
Libertarianism *is not Alt right* and such accusations by haters on the left are filthy and disgusting Lies of the highest order.
New Zealand is *not* a nation that treats everyone equally yet this dangerous systemic racism is not Alt Right… but Alt Left!
The toxic *socialist racist doctrine* of treaty separatism and indigenous rights… and Colonialist ‘white guilt’… has grown to such a degree that even the center-right parties now advocate for it.
The Alt Right in New Zealand remains a tiny minority and yet the Way or Prime minister Jacinda Ardern and the Police are behaving anyone would think New Zealand is crawling with Neo Nazis and that New Zealand facebook users are chanting ‘Seig Heil’… and threatening their Muslim neigbours!
This is total Bullshit!
This is a propaganda generated hysteria… for Machiavellian political ends,,, the subjugation of the New Zealand people…. a massive power grab!
And to state something that is almost a crime to mention… The Monster who committed the Atrocities in Christchurch that has been used by Ardern and the Police to trample underfoot the rights and liberties of New Zealanders wrote in his now Prohibited Manifesto ‘The Great replacement’ that it was his intention to accelerate the march towards Civil War between the left and right factions within Western societies…. and the actions of Ardern and the Police are doing precisely that!
Ardern and the Police are playing their part in Brenton Tarrants diabolical plan… and they are doing there best to shut down voices like my own who use free speech on the internet to warn the Public what is going on, and to call the people of New Zealand to rally and protest against this *Police state* that has been foisted upon us in a mere matter of months.
And its not just happening here… but elsewhere also… It started earlier in Australia… its happening in the US, Britain, France, Canada… wherever Woke left wing Governments are selling out their nations to Leviathan seated at the UN.
“OPINION: If you need evidence of why governments should not be trusted with regulating social media companies you only need to flick through the twenty four page advertorial masquerading as a report produced by the freshly minted Helen Clark Foundation last week.
It isn’t a long read, being mostly stock photos and images of Clark and Ardern, but its message is clear: new regulations are needed to prevent online hate speech in order to combat terrorism.
“Hate Speech Laws and Blasphemous Libel: A Tale of Hypocrisy.
A few months ago, the Honourable Andrew Little quite rightly proposed a bill that eventually removed the last blasphemy law (s 123 of the Crimes Act 1961) from our statute books.
Before its removal, the effect of s 123 was to make it an offence to vilify or degrade Christianity with an intent to cause serious offence or by abusing sacred objects or beliefs (Bowman v Secular Society Ltd).
Section 123(3) went on to specify: “It is not an offence against this section to express in good faith and in decent language, or to attempt to establish by arguments used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, any opinion whatever on any religious subject”.
Thus the cumulative effect of s 123 was to make it an offence to vilify or degrade Christianity either in bad faith, or using indecent language.
At any rate, the repeal of s 123 was premised on concerns about the right to free expression. The necessary implication being that speech is *protected* notwithstanding that it is expressed in bad faith or indecent language, and vilifies Christianity.
If free speech grounds a right to vilify Christianity in bad faith or using indecent language, there is similarly a right to vilify any other religion in bad faith or using indecent language.
And yet I’m told that the latter would be legally actionable hate speech…”
The pace with which the current Ardern government is moving towards a police state, and the destruction of freedom is truly frightening!
And there seems to be nobody in parliament standing up in opposition to any of it!
The National Party have been hypnotized by the Ardern Cult of Personality… they pander to her every whim!
How the hell they ever expect this sort of Kowtowing to the Liberal agenda will help them get elected into power again is a mystery.
The Lefty infested New Zealand Press are hard at work lobbying for New Hate speech legislation and has acted like a Lynch mob towards Austrailian sports star Israel Folou quoting the Bible on his own social media page. and the condemnation he has received from our New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern herself, with the press goading her… begging her … to label what he said hate speech…here ‘Jacinda Ardern fires back at Israel Folau and social media comments’… while she was restrained by current legal definitions to label what he said as being a crime, she said she called it ‘Damaging’, yet we also know that her government is determined to push through New ‘hate speech’ legislation… with the same callous disregard for the rights of New Zealanders and due process they displayed with the latest Firearms prohibitions, and when you see what her minion Andrew Little thinks constitutes ‘hate speech’ if New Zealanders are not alarmed, and rise up against this abuse of power they truly deserve the expression of being a bunch of Sheep!
Unless new Zealanders wake up and stand against this sort of agenda driven anti-religious liberty… anti Free speech propaganda… Our country is doomed, and our children will not be taught anything other than what the government wants them to learn… and what they are allowed to believe… and think.
What has been circulated in the NZ media about Folou’s ‘Homophobia’ has been absolutely dishonest!
For the record… I’m too a Christian, I do not hate homosexuals, yet I reserve the right to peacefully and freely preach about my Religion and quote the Bible… precisely as I have done for the last 34 years, and no Law from Parliament will stop me from doing this… They will have to arrest me to stop me!
This is precisely what the Right to free speech entails!
Go study the history of religious oppression and the birth of religious liberty in western civilisation… This is where the right to free speech was born!
Look at What Arderns’ Minion Andrew Little has to say about a political pamphlet that was circulated in Point Chev… this is her main man responsible for framing new Hates speech laws!
The Pamphlet called for ‘One law for all’… thats an *inclusive* Ideal in which all peoples of New Zealand are subject to the same laws… no favoritism… no discrimination… and yet he has called this *Racism*!
Quote: “The pamphlet titled One Treaty One Nation, calls for an end to state partnership with Māori, scrapping the Waitangi Tribunal, Māori electorates and wards and says Māori have benefited from colonisation lifting them out of “a violent stone age existence”.
Andrew Little who is overseeing a review of hate speech in the wake of the terrorist attacks told the Herald his view was the pamphlet is racist.
“It peddles myths about pre-European Maori society that historical scholarship does not bear out. If it demonstrates anything, it is that the author of it is an ignorant fool.”
How Arse-backwards and hypocritical could anyone possibly be???
The Man is worse than an imbecile!
Hes a Dangerous Political snake… and if he thinks by writing legislation that outlaws political opinions that disagree with his own patently wrapped Ideas he has another thing coming!
Little is suggesting this pamphlet calling for one law for all is written by some nutcase when in reality it is expressing a view that is held by a great portion of New Zealanders including many respected politicians more than his equal and many other prominent and intelligent New Zealanders.
The Principle of Racial equality is neither ‘Anti-Maori’ nor Fringe!
It is a legitimate Political position held by thousands of New Zealanders, well reasoned, and has been a foremost topic of elections for the past 50 years!
Does Andrew Little think he can impose his own liberal apartheid views by labeling opposition as hate speech?
As a Libertarian… I reserve my right to propagate the Idea of *One law for all New Zealanders* and to fight for the Principle of Justice… *Racial equality before the law*… just as I have done for the past two decades, and no new ‘hate speech laws’ written under the excuse of the Christchurch atrocity
will silence me from condemning the apartheid state that Ardern and Little are now at the helm!
I dont care if Andrew Little believes that Fighting for Racial equality is somehow ‘Anti-Maori’ and Hate speech!
It is not hate speech! I do not Hate Maori… I am a Maori myself!
I want what is best for them and all the people of New Zealand, and I condemn as unjust and an absolute failure the current Apartheid syatem that has not lifted Maori out of the gutter of our Social statistics, but has been a gigantic extortion racket!
I will not stop… I will never cease from seeking to expose the dishonesty of the Governments False revisionist history that seeks to deceive New Zealanders into accepting the lie that the Treaty of Waitangi created a two tier Racial system rather than uniting *all the peoples of New Zealand as one people under one law and one sovereign with equal rights* The Government will have to arrest me and throw me in jail because I will never stop using my natural right to freely speak the truth!
I declare that the current policies of Waitangi separatism are Evil!
So New Zealanders… will you surrender our country to such evil and tyrannical powers as have manifested themselves under Jacinda Arderns Psychotic Government????
I have Children and Grand children who I want to live free and know the truth!
Id rather die in jail that surrender Political Freedom and My faith to the evil powers that threaten these most precious of values!
Will I have to rot in a dungeon as a political prisoner for New Zealanders rights to free speech and the principle of racial equality before the Law???
That this is even a possibility shows how dangerous to rights and freedom this new proposal for hate speech legislation is!
We can be sure that Little’s new Hate speech laws will result in a wave of censorship and Punishment for Thought Crimes… maybe the will force some of us to drink Hemlock for not worshiping the State Gods and Corrupting the Youth!
Political writer Dr Muriel Newman has written about these things in an article named ‘A totalitarian state’ and I quote…
“Calls for restrictions on free speech by radical Government MPs should raise the alarm about our future. While the Bill of Rights protects our freedom of thought, expression, and association, as we have already seen through the Censor’s bans, these rights are fragile and can easily be taken away.
Laws to protect New Zealanders from ‘hate’ can already be found in the Crimes Act, Harmful Digital Communications Act, Human Rights Act, and the Sentencing Act. If the Government is committed to stronger deterrents, they simply need to enforce the existing laws.
Already the call for action against ‘hate’ since the Christchurch attack has resulted in people losing their jobs for making thoughtless remarks, websites being blocked, and a social media crackdown being implemented. It may also have been responsible for a man losing his life.
New Zealanders who value the freedom and liberty that underpins our society should strongly oppose new laws to ban ‘hate’. Such laws, that would enable the Police to act against anyone expressing ideas contrary to those deemed acceptable by the Government, have proven to be a disaster in countries where they have been introduced, over-criminalising the population and allowing vexatious complainants to destroy lives. “…
I concur with Muriel, and implore the People of New Zealand to rally and protest against this Hitlarian Drive against Freedom in our country!
Do you want your children to grow up free?
Do you reserve the right to teach them your own Values and beliefs?
Or do you surrender these priceless things .. and give your children’s minds to the State to brainwash them with the beliefs and ideals these Political psychopaths running the machine?
Satan laughing spreads his wings.
This is yet another blog post that I have been paralyzed by the shear magnitude of the task involved in doing justice to the subject … and so have again literally left it to the last hours to attempt… as I have no more time to wallow in self-doubt about my writing skills.
The day is literally at hand, and so I am compelled to write this in spite of my fears that I will shortchange the virtuous.
I am of course talking about the Fake day of remembrance that Maori radicals have managed to manipulate our government into officially endorsing and even providing Tax payer money of 1 million dollars annually to fund what will prove to be a gigantic day of propaganda designed to present the wars as an injustice committed by the Colonial government against so-called ‘righteous and peaceful tribes’ for the sake of stealing their lands… as if the aggression was on the side of the Colonial government… driven by greed… and in violation of the Treaty of Waitangi.
We have already seen ‘Waitangi day’ being absolutely hijacked by the Racist radicals and turned from what was supposed to be a day of celebrations for the unification of Maori and European Settlers as one people, under the benevolent sovereignty of the British crown … into a day of Race hate and propagation for Separatism and special privileges for Maori.
Why on earth you may ask has the government set us up to endure more of the same vile opportunism for the lies and hatred from a small but highly politicized section of our society who are hell bent on propigating grievous racial divisions for the sake of their own political agenda of extortion?
The answer is simple… The National party was in Bed with some of New Zealand’s most prominent Racial separatists sitting in the shameful Racist seats of our parliament all members of one of the most racist political parties… the Maori party!
Ie the reason the National government has given this opportunity to ferment even greater racial division was because they have been selling out our country to these racist seats for decades!
A very warped and dishonest account of events and the wars of the 1860s will be rammed down the throats of our entire nation tomorrow.
No good will come of this travesty!
Truth will be the first and greatest victim… followed by ongoing and increasing injustices against the vastly superior numbers of New Zelander’s many of whom are completely oblivious to the fact that they are being taken for a ride!
These are the fools who are the ‘enablers’ … those whose accent empowers the Racists to achieve their vile ambitions.
Yet many of us Kiwi will immediately realise this day is just a big Charade… the familiar pantomime is again being acted out by the same old troupe of actors…with a sprinkling of new zealots… yet with the same old plot… like some badly written sitcom.
Que the Wailing Wahine!
Due to decades of False revisionist history being spoon fed to the sheeple in our Education system by radicals… some who have risen into political prominence by peddling their lies… such as Auckland University Radical Pita Sharples… later to be Co-leader of The Maori Party… sufficient numbers of Non-Maori New Zealanders have swallowed the separatist narrative of Pakeha Greed and have taken on a collective guilt trip… and are supporting their own political oppression!
Though they undoubtedly know that they themselves have not acted in a racist manor towards Maori… yet in their eagerness to deny any hint that they themselves support the ill treatment of Maori have assumed they are guilty by simply being a descendant of the colonials… whom have been painted as being Greedy Bastards… or because they will perceive that because they have benefited from the colonial system (as everyone… including Maori has)… that because of the claims of the Maori radicals… that somehow they themselves have wrongly profited… so they assume they owe Maori ‘Reparations’.
This is why so many Pakeha do not balk at the Billions of Tax dollars getting handed over to racists instead of being spent on Hospitals, schools, Medicines, etc.
They believe the hype that *They are responsible* for the present low condition and terrible social statistics that are wielded like a Mere by the radicals as evidence of Pakeha oppression when in reality it is the shocking lack of Personal ethics, and lack self responsibility why Maori are responsible for their own misery…themselves!
They are the ones who stuff their faces with unhealthy food.
They are the ones who Drink themselves stupid rather than saving their money to better themselves.
They are the ones who commit violence and thefts and end up in jail.
All the while refusing to take ownership of their own problems… all the while listening to the lies and agitations of their political elites who profit from the ongoing misery of their people… and who blame the Pakeha for everything!
This is what Waitangi day has come to represent, and is the vile mentality that will be prominent tomorrow and will underpin ‘the remberance day ‘ of the wars of the 1860s.
Now that was the easy part of this post… the part that is most familiar to most New Zealanders, the harder part that I can now only lightly touch upon is the actual history of the wars themselves and what they really were all about.
This is difficult because to do it with justice would require massive volumes.
It would require a monumental amount references to historic events and records, all the while having to counter-argue against the Tidal wave of Political propaganda and revisionist lies that have twisted history to suit the narrative of Maori as victims of Colonial oppression.
None the less I must give at least a brief commentary on the over-all principles and motives that were in play at those times…
I cannot here engage in dealing with specific accusations leveled at various battles against the Colonial troops by those that have a political vested interest to sully the reputations of some of our countries greatest heroes… like Major Von Tempsky…. a man of Outstanding Heroism and exploits… An Enlightened thinker of High Character and Art… a true Renaissance Man… and who gave his life for Law and order , Peace in this country and good will between Maori and Pakeha that lasted 100 years… and who also until recent times was honored as one of our greatest historic figures.
He was revered by friend and foe alike!
It is the rightful legacy of such Great heroes and the honor they are due that is being robbed by despicable liars for their own financial and political gain.
Even his enemies worshiped his mana as a mighty and fearless warrior.
Today he has suffered Post humorous Political character assassination by the vested interests who seek to hide the rightful guilt that belongs to the rebellious tribes who caused war against the Colonial government by open rebellion to the treaty for the sake of pushing the Pakeha into the sea and re-establishing Maori sovereignty under the Tainui King.
They thought they would easily win…and slaughter the Pakeha… ‘Like cutting grass’.
These wars were not about land at all!
They were about Sovereignty!
Just one on-line reference to VonTempky’s good character can be found here
“Von Tempsky took part in the actions at Hairini, Waiari, Rangiaowhia, Kihikihi and Orakau, establishing a reputation as an intrepid leader. He was a strong disciplinarian who was popular with his men. When the defenders broke out of the Orakau Pa, he led his men in a ruthless pursuit but strongly disapproved when the British troops killed some of the wounded and women. He encouraged his men to intervene in order to prevent these atrocities.”
After 20 years of British rule via the colonial government and the growing settlement of the Nation the Chiefs and Maori Aristocracy became jealous of the growing powers of the government and were watching an inevitable reduction in their own powers and ‘mana’ over their own tribes as their people voluntarily embraced Pakeha ways, manors, beliefs that were not conducive to maintaining faith and submission to the old Hierarchy… and just as is typical for humanity the world over… when powerful vest interests feel threatened… they plot.
And so a few of the Tribes decided they would rebel and try and overthrow the Government and become masters of the country themselves… and they tried to convince many of the other tribes to join their rebellion yet were unsuccessful.
There are records of all this and one famous account that when Kingitanga Tainui emissaries approach Ngapuhi to join the rebellion that they were mocked!
Ngapuhi said they would rather be governed by an English woman than any Tainui King!
So perhaps one of the greatest proofs of the lies of today’s Radicals and their historic revisionism is the undeniable fat that the wars were not Maori verses Pakeha… But Maori and Pakeha vs a handful of murderous tribes in rebellion of the treaty!
On the left is my copy of ‘The Defenders of New Zealand and Maori history of the war’ in which both sides of the conflict are presented.
And what is also not taught in our schools is that the rebellious tribes were murdering people and making war preparations to attack Auckland, and that they were duly warned by Govenor Grey to desist their rebellious activities… if they desired to keep their rights as enunciated by the treaty!
What is not being taught in our schools or spoken of in our media is that troops were only deployed after Governor Greys warnings were spurned and war preparations and attacks on setters continued.
He fore-warned them that if war broke out they would loose land as punishment for violating the treaty
And when the rebellions were suppressed, Land was confiscated as punishment for their murderous rebellion and as a deterrent against future rebellions… ie The treaty was not backed by a toothless lion and that there was to be a heavy price to be paid by any chief or tribe that rebelled.
And so it was the confiscations that were the chief reasons that quelled any ideas about rebellion for the next 100 years!
“Some have said that these conviscations were wrong and they have contravened the articles of the treaty of Waitangi, but the chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled. The Law came into opperation and land was taken in payment. This itself is Maori custom – revenge- plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the queen. The conviscations can not therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty”.
Extracts from ‘The Treaty of Waitangi, an explanation’ by Sir Apirana Ngata.
Furthermore the suppression of the rebellion was committed to General Cameron… a man famous for his compassion towards the Maori rebels… a man who respected their bravery… a man who was reluctant to use excessive force to the degree that he was derided for being too weak in his execution of the war… yet you will struggle to find any honest accounts of his humanitarianism on modern biographies written by prejudiced academics who purposefully downplay the virtues of those on the colonial side yet exacerbate their vises, while whitewashing the crimes and motives of the rebels.
This is an entire industry these Days…. the falsification of history by academics and the Monumental extortion of manufactured grievance.
And this is what will be on full display tomorrow.
Now in finishing and having presented my contentions as to why the wars happened and how it was the Rebellious Maori tribes who violated the treaty… not the colonial government who acted lawfully in full accord with the Treaty let me put in this caveat: Though I assert that the Radicals claims that the wars were started by the government out of lust for land and Greed to be fraudulent this should never be construed to say that there were never any individual instances of greed on the part of some settlers… nor any instances of ‘war crimes’ committed during any of the battles… of course there would have been some… yet these were not endemic or evidences of systemic corruption… and of course these sorts of things would have been committed intermittently by both sides… and it is telling that you will never ever hear any admissions of … even of the possibility that the Rebels committed atrocities even though they have been fully documented!
This shows just how absolutely un-objective the Radical separatists are and how their entire arguments are the very definition of extreme prejudice…falsehoods… the pure fabrication of vested interests with vile agendas
A classic example of this is how the radicals have managed to get our corrupt government to accepting a sanitized revisionist account of the historic murder and cannibalization of a christian Minister C S Volkner by the rebels. Read about that here
The colonization of New Zealand was not an invasion against the will of the Natives.
The truth is that Maori themselves petitioned the throne of England to establish their Rule here to maintain peace between the settlers and themselves and to protect them from France who were planning to take New Zealand for themselves. And the reluctant British parliament moved to save them in the nick of time!
The Treaty itself is a document of the highest humanitarian Ideas that stands like a shining light in the history of the world having been formulated by benevolent Men with genuine concern for the Maori people in an age of enlightenment in the British empire… have only a few years before abolished slavery!
Weakness and complicity has allowed the 100 year peace that was established via the suppression of the rebellion by the colonial forces to be shattered… and another Cold war of rebellion to be taking place… not with arms… but via political subversion and lies!
it is actually part of a Global socialist agenda against what they call ‘British/ European imperialism’ and it was the socialist who invented the evil doctrines of ‘indigenous rights’… that overturn the principle of justice as being Equal and colourblind and instead insists so-called indigenous people have more rights than so-called ‘invaders’.
We are witnessing a politically manufactured Race relations crisis, and tomorrows events will only serve to make things worse.
The National Government and their allies… Act and The Maori Party have committed another political crime against the people of New Zealand by endorsing and funding, and enabling the radical extremists to yet again peddle their lies and hate on an annual basis.
This blogpost is part of my ongoing efforts for nearly 20 years to speak for the truth and for the principles of Freedom and Equality before the law.
Dont be fooled by all the lies that will be spoken about tomorrow!
Go study the history of our Nation… not from modern revisionist sources… but buy up Old books written in the early 2oth century… or earlier.
P.S… So many things I have had to leave unsaid here yet I will add one final comment.
All of this business hinges upon the idea of ‘State sovereignty’ I have not had opportunity to present any arguments to why this is whole concept is flawed and that enlightened minds do not endorse Sovereign states but instead argue for the Sovereignty of the individual and how this does away with Factions fighting over political power and advantage.
That will have to wait for future expositions.
An Old picture of me with my Grandfather Autiti at Whakarewarewa.
The 28th came and went almost as if it never happened!
Apart from a few Newspaper articles and small amounts of TV coverage we may even say the Big event was a complete wash out!
I am yet to find out exactly what/why all the hype never transpired as this was supposed to be… politically Speaking in the Radical separtist movement… A Big Deal!
Was it because of the recent collapse of the Mana and Maori Parties?
What happened to the $400 000.00 of Tax payer money that was granted … of a total of 1 million on offer for this year… and 3 million more over the next 3 years?
There were supposed to be big events at various parts of the country such as Rangariri here in the Waikato yet it appears that they all failed to transpire.
I have no clue as to what happened, why, or what this all means.
I will update this blog when I get more info.
“The government allocated $4 million across four years in last year’s budget to fund the commemorations, and nearly $400,000 dollars has been handed out for 16 applications received since.”
Group Event Region Event Location Event Start Date Event End Date Amount Requested
Tihi Consultants Limited The proposal is to deliver a series of events over the two weeks, leading up to a commemorative service at Te Ngutu o te Manu Reserve on 28 October 2017. Te Tai Hauāuru Hāwera Monday, 16 October 2017 Friday, 27 October 2017 $9,000.00
Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi Two-day symposia titled ‘Te Pūtake o te Riri’ with a number of outcomes. Waikato-Waiariki Whakatāne Wednesday, 18 October 2017 Thursday, 19 October 2017 $95,200.00
Ngāti Awa Community Development Trust Commemoration of the 1865 Battle of Te Kupenga a Taramainuku Pā Waikato-Waiariki Te Teko – Te Kupenga Pā Friday, 20 October 2017 $67,863.00
Te Reo Irirangi o Te Mānuka Tūtahi Trust Broadcasting and Online Video Streaming of the 2017 commemoration service of the Battle of Te Kupenga a Taramainuku Pā Waikato-Waiariki Whakatāne Friday, 20 October 2017 $6,000.00
Māori Land Charitable Trust Public screening of the New Zealand Wars series Te Tai Hauāuru Ōtaki Saturday, 28 October 2017 Sunday, 12 November 2017 $12,000.00
Kuranui College – Greytown Theatre based on one of the East Coast Wars affecting Ngāti Porou and Ngāti Kahungunu Te Tai Hauāuru Greytown – Wairarapa Late October $2,500.00
Bridget Williams Publishing Trust To support the Vincent O’Malley giving talks to schools about the significance of the New Zealand Land Wars Te Tai Hauāuru 20 School Visits Early 2018 Early 2018 $30,000.00
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Ruanui Trust (TRONRT) To organise a hīkoi to the South Island to pay respect, wānanga the historical account of, and acknowledge the lives, achievement and resting place of our Ngāti Ruanui & Pakakohe Tūpuna who were imprisoned in Dunedin in 1869. Te Tai Hauāuru South Island Thursday, 1 March 2018 $61,500.00
Raukawa Charitable Trust Tour to four significant New Zealand war sites where Raukawa had significant involvement. Waikato-Waiariki Tour to four significant New Zealand war sites where Raukawa had significant involvement. Friday, 6 April 2018 Sunday, 8 April 2018 $71,200.00
Waiokura Marae and Reserves Trust Commemorate Ōrangituāpeka and the significance of the Rāhui Whenua Te Tai Hauāuru Manaia, South Taranaki Wednesday 25 April 2018 $30,000.00