Category Archives: Treaty of Waitangi

Smoothing the pillow of a dying institution

It’s all very well for the government to redefine marriage, but what then becomes of the heterosexual institution formerly known as marriage?

Clearly, marriage as it is now—the union of a man and a woman—is a subset of marriage as it will be—the union of a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. Traditional marriage will be assimilated and its cultural identity lost.

Apologists for Louisa Wall’s Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill are now smoothing the pillow of a dying institution.

But rest assured, traditionalists! Traditional marriage will rebound. And a hundred years or so from now, we’ll have our very own, government mandated and government funded traditional marriage television channel!

Kia kaha!

 

Why a new Constitution for New Zealand must protect the Individual from Mobocracy.

16681_10152406180440515_1332293287_n

Because I have failed in the attempt to organise an association of ‘Heavy hitting’ Libertarian minds to directly challenge the governments appointed Committee which is currently running a Mickey Mouse commission looking to entrench Waitangi Racism and Socialist Democratic tyranny, I am attempting to put together a ‘condensed’ submission advocating the institution of a New constitution embodying Libertarian principles for New Zealand to be submitted to Muriel Newman’s the independent Constitutional review panel.
Go Here: http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/independent-constitution-group-invites-submissions/5/148407

This panel is primarily concerned with insuring any new Constitution guarantees Racial equality before the Law, and does not entrench the current Apartheid doctrines and institutions of Radical Indigenous racism and treaty separatism.
This independent Panel is to be highly praised for this work.
It is absolutely essential that the Government be prevented from establishing an Apartheid constitution, yet I fear the scope of this Independent lobby is not broad enough to challenge the many other injustices and usurpations perpetrated against the people of New Zealand in the name of ‘Social Democracy’ which is the prevailing ideology of 99% of MPs and their parties whom populate our parliament.

The difficulty for me is not only that I despair having to sit out and watch everything unfold from the sideline as a spectator rather than a participant in this process.
I despair of being able to do justice to this ‘Mother of all Political Institutions’ in a brief submission.

482315_313655552096008_1763279491_n

One of the most important jobs of a Constitution is to protect the Rights and liberties of Minorities and individuals from Mob Rule.
Living in an age in which Atheist Materialism and Moral relativism dominate the thinking in academic circles it is difficult to speak of ‘Higher Law’… Moral absolutes which trump the mere whims or Legislators in large numbers.
It is difficult to get support for Ideals which set limits to the pseudo-moral justification of Legislation founded upon the mandate of the majority.
In Today’s world I cannot make appeals to Individual rights as being inalienable because they are ‘God given’… which was in times past a perfectly acceptable and rational position to take for the simple reason that so many intellectuals have tragically abandoned belief in God.
Thus I must make appeals to other arguments, in secular terms which embody arguments which such mentalities will not dismiss because of personal bias against theistic Ideas.
And most essentially these arguments must be powerful enough to expose the evil delusion that Humanitarian sentiments can justify tyrannical and oppressive political means.

The Little video below was posted on Face book by a friend (Hat tip Mark Casey) and I share it with you here because it does a very good Job or presenting the distinction between real charity and Socialism/ forced welfare…. and the travesty of that pseudo-moral justification… ‘the democratic mandate of the Majority’…
In so doing this video embodies one of the important attributes my submission to the Independent Panel must encompass.

Watch and enjoy.

This video also makes me wonder if my submission could somehow included such streaming Media?
Tim Wikiriwhi.
Libertarian Independent.

New Book. Twisting the Treaty.

536955_524830414228835_786527955_n

Six notable authors, have just published a challenging new book about the way the Treaty of Waitangi has been twisted to be greatly in favour of Maori tribes in the last 30 years. These twistings include the rewriting o…f our history by political “historians”, the never-ending so called Treaty claim process, and privatising and giving away our foreshore and seabed, as well as our native flora and fauna, and the rorts that apply to our sea fishery.

If you are interested in these matters, then this book, “Twi$ting the Treaty – A tribal Grab for Wealth and Power” provides readily readable discussion on these topics. The Cover below.

Warning – the book is factual and is non-PC, one of its charms in my view.
The book is available at a retail cost of $40. It has 414 pages and 16 photo pages.
But with 16 self-contained chapters it does not have to be read all at once.

Where to obtain it:
1 Good bookstores throughout NZ or
2 Write to Tross Publishing, P O Box 22 143, Khandallah, Wellington, 6441 with your order and cheque
3 Also see our website, www.trosspublishing.co.nz for info and to order.

Enjoy your reading.

^^^^ Hat Tip: Tom Henry via Facebook.

SAMSUNG DIGIMAX 360
Libertarians Tim Wikiriwhi and Guest Peter Cresswell On the New Freeland Radio Show.

Great to see Ex Libertarianz Party Leader Peter Cresswell listed as a Co Author of Twisting the Treaty!
Watch Here @ Eternal Vigilance for further commentary on this Book.

P.S Deep Purple in Concert Tonight! Yeah!

Treaty of Waitangi – sleight of hand

The Treaty of Waitangi is a contract signed between two parties – Maori Chiefs and Queen Victoria’s representative.

The contract was intended to bind Queen Victoria and her successors and to bind Maori Chiefs and their successors.

If Maori leaders believe that there has been any breach of the Waitangi contract then they should seek compensation from Queen Elizabeth. If any injustice has been committed by the New Zealand government she is responsible. Her representative, the Governor General, is the overseer of the government and she ultimately has the authority and a duty to ensure the New Zealand government does not act unjustly.

Currently Maori leaders effectively seek compensation from the New Zealand taxpayers.

Paul Holmes on Waitangi day Stench.

give2bme2bmoney2bor2belse

‘Liberated’ the following speil from my facebook friend Stephen Maire…
It’s Holmes at his best.

the late Sir Paul Holmes – who had a wonderful way with words – wrote the following:

“Waitangi Day produced its usual hatred, rudeness, and violence against a clearly elected Prime Minister from a group of hateful, hate-fuelled weirdos who seem to exist in a perfect world of benefit provision. This enables them to blissfully continue to believe that New Zealand is the centre of the world, no one has to have a job and the Treaty is all that matters.

“I’m over Waitangi Day. It is repugnant. It’s a ghastly affair. As I lie in bed on Waitangi morning, I know that later that evening, the news will show us irrational Maori ghastliness with spitting, smugness, self-righteousness and the usual neurotic Maori politics, in which some bizarre new wrong we’ve never thought about will be lying on the table.

“This, we will have to address and somehow apply these never-defined principles of the Treaty of Waitangi because it is, apparently, the next big resentment. There’ll be lengthy discussion, we’ll end up paying the usual millions into the hands of the Maori aristocracy and God knows where it’ll go from there.

holmes

“Well, it’s a bullshit day, Waitangi. It’s a day of lies. It is loony Maori fringe self-denial day… No, if Maori want Waitangi Day for themselves, let them have it.”……

On the Independent Constitutional Review team

Here are the good folk on the Independent Constitutional Review team. They’re not in on the con

The Independent Constitutional Review has been established by the New Zealand Centre for Political Research in response to the Maori Party’s plan to replace our constitution with one based on the Treaty of Waitangi to give the tribal elite supreme power in New Zealand.

but they’re on to it! Please sign the Declaration of Equality.


David Round
Independent Constitutional Review Panel Chairman
Law Lecturer, Canterbury University; NZCPR Associate

David Round teaches constitutional law at the University of Canterbury and is author of "Truth or Treaty? Commonsense Questions about the Treaty of Waitangi".

rata Associate Professor Elizabeth Rata
Deputy Head of School of Critical Studies in Education, Auckland University.

Dr Rata is a sociologist of education specialising in the relationship between education and society. She is Editor of Pacific-Asian Education, Leader of the Knowledge and Education Research Group, a member of a European Union International Research Staff Exchange Scheme, and a former Fulbright Senior Scholar to Georgetown University, Washington D.C. She is the author of numerous books.

devlin_martin Professor Martin Devlin (ONZM)
Professor Emeritus, Massey University

Professor Devlin has a distinguished career in the fields of education – in business, management, entrepreneurship, and corporate governance – in the private business sector, and in the NZ Army. He was appointed an Officer in the NZ Order of Merit, ONZM, in the Queens Birthday honours in 2011 for services to education. He is a fifth generation New Zealander.

allan-james Professor James Allan
Garrick Professor of Law, University of Queensland

The Garrick Professor of Law at the University of Queensland, Professor Allan is a member of the Mont Perelin Society, an author and commentator. Canadian born, he practised law in Canada and at the Bar in London before teaching law in Hong Kong, New Zealand and Australia. He has worked at the Cornell Law School in the US and at the Dalhousie Law School in Canada where he was the 2004 Bertha Wilson Visiting Professor in Human Rights

Mike-Pic Mike Butler
NZCPR Associate

Mike Butler is a property investor and manager. He is author of "The First Colonist — The life and times of Samuel Deighton 1821-1900", a former contract writer for the New World Encyclopedia, and he was the chief sub-editor of the Hawke’s Bay Herald-Tribune between 1986 and 1999.

Dr Muriel Newman
Convenor of the Independent Constitutional Review
NZCPR Founder and Director

Muriel Newman established the public policy think tank, the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, in 2005 after nine years as a Member of Parliament. Her background is in business and education. She currently serves as a director of a childrens’ trust.

State of Confusion. The Rule of Law vs The Mandate of the Majority. New Zealand’s Constitutional Crisis.

letter
NZHerald letter-to-the-editor 31/1/13 posted to the facebook page ‘Constitutional Reveiw’ for discussion.

My reply….

This letter displays many ‘all too common’ errors in that it starts off quite well, yet by the time it finishes, it has undone itself.
By this I mean that the writer is correct when they say that a constitution which embodies the false (separatist) treaty principles would exacerbate our already intolerable system of inequality, yet the writer fails to appreciate that the “Government interventions via regulation” as the solution to inequality… is in fact a continuation of the status quo!… ie these interventions and regulations are fundamentally the politics of favoritism, and oppression!

The purpose of a constitution is not to empower the state or parliament to pass any legislation it deems advantageous to achieving it’s political agenda, but to limit the powers of parliament to upholding the Principles of justice while protecting individuals and minorities from Mob rule, and arbitrary power.

Lady Justice is blind to Race, Creed, sex, Wealth, etc.
She holds the balances which are true. Ie the fulcrum is so positioned as not to flavor anyone.
These are principles of justise and they determine what it means to be governed by the rule of Law as opposed to the rule of whim.
Governments which write laws in contravention of these principles are establishing injustice!
A proper Constitution forbids the generation such unjust legislation.

So many people have been duped by years of socialist democracy into mistaking the mandate of the majority as being the rule of Law.
It is no such thing. Without constitutional restraints which embody universal principles of justice (such as equality before the Law), the mandate of the majority is purely arbitrary and oboundless…. only dependent upon the whims of the biggest Mob.

It is surprising to me that so many people whom are actively attempting to End treaty separatism fail to understand that we got into the current Apartheid mess because of the unchecked mandate of the majority… not because of the treaty.

It was not the minority of Maori radicals whom created the current apartheid state, but the Predominantly/ majority Pakeha parties…. Full of socialists whom believe all the anti-western, and anti-capitalist doctrines of intervention and indigenous rights.
Having swallowed all the anti-British colonization Myths and doctrines which teach Maori suffered a holocaust at the hands of invaders and were cheated and dispossessed of their lands in violation of the treaty… They began to dance to the Beat of the Maori Radicals.
Being free to simply Ignore the principles of Equality before the Law, It was the Majority parties, National and Labour whom perpetuated the lies of the treaty principles which sever our Nation racially in twain… all in the face of the fact that the treaty granted all the peoples of New Zealand equal rights as Brittish subjects, and that Hobson declared to each chief upon signing the treaty “He Iwi’ Tahi Tatou”… “We are now one people”.

This institutionalized racism demonstrates the evils of not having an ironclad constitution which would nullify any and all laws which are unequal … even if it is the will the majority to create them!
It was New Zealand shamefully childlike refusal to cut the final cords from Mother England and establish ourselves as a republic, in spite of the fact that England had granted us self government many generations ago!
Foolishly many believed remaining in the commonwealth was a form of protection, when in reality it left us exposed to popular Machiavellianism.

It’s true to say that the separate electorol rolls have proved the evils of Racist institutions… though like their modern ‘closing the gaps’ counterparts were created by ‘socialists’ seeking to improve justice, yet ultimately it was the ‘liberty’ to ‘wheel and deal’… which allowed the Majority to pander to the separatists whom held the ballance of power.
Yet so many whom oppose the treaty graveytrain which resulted, actually fear shacking parliament… you hear them talk of ‘activist judges’. Yet Activist judges are a consequence of the status quo. ie of not having clearly defined principles enshrined in a constitution.
Those whom propagate such fears are slippery devils whom covet political power and dont want limits set for parliamentary power and the gullible and fearful believe their ruse..

I could go on to talk about why the separatists are now busy seeking to dominate all discussions about forming a New Constitution, yet I will leave that for another time.
It is suffice to say that the majority of people involved in this constitutional review… on both sides of the treaty debate, don’t understand what the Rule of Law really is, or how to differentiate it from social arbitrary power.

I support those people whom have actively spoken out about the injustice of Waitangi racism, yet there has been no real discussion of any caliber in the public arena, in respect to what is necessary to remedy it, or what a Constitution needs to embody to function as a defense against unjust law and Government power.

I mean no offence. This issue is far too important for pettiness. I offer my services to the people of New Zealand to see that this most vital of subjects get proper debate and the real issues are presented to the public mind.

Tim Wikiriwhi.

In on the Con(stitutional Advisory Panel)

There’s another Treaty Debate on tonight at Te Papa.

Treaty Debate Series 2013 – My Voice Counts

This year, we focus on the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements. Participants include two prominent lawyers and a panel of young people.

Kim Hill, 2012 International Radio Personality of the Year, chairs the second Treaty Debate of 2013. This year, we invite a panel of young people to discuss the Constitutional Review, which wraps up in late 2013. They answer the question: What are the issues you care about?

The event is introduced by Claudia Orange, Te Papa’s Treaty of Waitangi scholar, and Carwyn Jones, from the New Zealand Centre for Public Law.

The Treaty Debates are organised by Te Papa in partnership with the New Zealand Centre for Public Law at Victoria University of Wellington

I plan to go along to give John Ansell some moral support, perhaps I’ll assist by holding one end of his protest banner, which reads, “Enough Treaty Treachery – Treatygate – The Conning of a Country”.

The rigged panel of Griever Maori and Appeaser Pakeha charged by the National-Maori alliance with misrepresenting your desire for a Treatyfied constitution.

Ansell is right. The country is being conned.

There are no Treaty principles. There is no Treaty partnership. At least, not in the original Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi).

The third article of the Treaty guaranteed to all Māori the same rights as all other British subjects. This meant one law for all.

constitutional-advisory-panel-in-on-the

But there is at least one member of the Constitutional Advisory Panel who (last time I checked) doesn’t understand what “one law for all” means. She says

One-law-for-all is emotive nonsense. We have all sorts of varied laws for different categories of the population, age being the best example. Will Act, under Brash, get rid of the legal age for drinking, voting and obtaining a driver’s licence?

A libertarian friend tries to correct her woolly thinking. He says

You’re not comparing like with like. The drinking age is not a violation of one law for all. It applies equally to everyone. If there were an exemption for Maori, that would violate one law for all.

and goes on to ask

Is your article intended as an apologia for preferential treatment for Maori?

Perhaps it was intended as a job application?

A few brief words on why ageism is acceptable (in the cases to which Deborah Coddington refers) and racism is not. Law is all about discrimination. Morality is all about discrimination. We treat a man who has been found guilty of murder differently from a man who has been charged with murder and acquitted. We discriminate between the two cases. As we should. Legally (and morally), the difference between a Guilty verdict and a Not Guilty verdict is relevant to how people should be treated. In the case of age vs. race, a person’s age is morally relevant (they are deemed to be too young to give informed consent) to how they should be treated. A person’s skin colour is not.

It beggars belief that Coddington was once the Deputy Leader of the Libertarianz Party.

[Cross-posted to SOLO.]