Watch Video Of The Orewa Event
Eight Reasons Why The Orewa Event Was A Great Success
We started the set up about 1pm. Locals on the ground were fantastic, helping with this. The meeting was to start at 3pm.
By 2:30 the room was filling.
By 3pm the room was near full.
Suddenly, 50 or so protesters with flags and banners entered the back of the room. A Maori man began walking up the aisle in the middle of the room, shouting challenges/threats/demands/activists babble.
Many of the non-protestors, numbering 120-150, were shouting at him to ‘sit down’ or ‘shut up’ or ‘go home’.
Then the police arrived in numbers, 10 or more. Later, in a debrief with police after the event, we are told that every policeman in Orewa had turned up.
Then the protestors started singing. Obviously, their intention was to drown out anything Julian said. Their interjections and noisy carry on continued throughout the meeting.
One of the highlights was a young New Zealander (male) jumping up. He started to sing the national anthem in English, and the crowd of Julian’s supporters rose to their feet and joined in. It was magnificent.
Julian got through his presentation.
There were no physical altercations, and no damage to property.
Julian closed the meeting in the normal way.
So why was the meeting a huge success? Here are eight reasons.
First, the crowd of 150 or so mostly European supporters saw first-hand co-governance in action.
By this I mean activists opposing free speech.
They had no trouble disrupting a peaceful legal meeting of people who had gathered to hear a speaker speak on the topic both the PM and the leader of the opposition had encouraged the country to talk about. Many non-activist Maori would be ashamed of the behaviour of the activists.
Second, the day was a graphic example of how Maori will run the country via Tikanga, or Maori customs and protocols. So how will they run it?
By the principle of ‘might is right’.
They figured they had every right to trash someone else’s meeting, simply because they didn’t agree with the speaker’s message. That’s tyranny. As such, they are fast becoming the thought police. This is co-governance in action.
Third, the behaviour of the protestors was a graphic display of the hypocrisy of the protestors. They demand to be respected and honoured, yet they show none of the same to others. So they don’t practice what they preach. This makes then Mt Everest size hypcrites. This is co-governance in action.
Fourth, Maori activists put on display for all to see how they like to bully people. The government has spent millions of dollars on anti-bullying campaigns.
These campaigns are usually fronted by people like Meng Foon. However, when Maori go on a bullying rampage, as they did in Orewa, it’s OK. Thus we all witnessed eye watering double standards. Activist bullying and intimidation is co-governance in action.
Fifth, most of the crowd of supporters who came, I am picking, would never have encountered ‘Maori’ like they did in Orewa.
They will have been shocked and dismayed at their behaviour.
But it was important for them to see the behaviour first hand, as eye witnesses. This will fuel / strengthen the desire in their hearts and minds to stand against co-governance, which is really code for tribal rule.
Sixth, Europeans / Pakehas have always and without fail shown respect for Maori by letting them do their thing on their Maraes, simply because they have every right to free speech and to express their culture however they like.
This is their right.
But do they reciprocate? Do they show grace and respect for non-Maori when they hold their meetings? No, they do not. This is co-governance in action.
Seventh, the display by the protestors was a graphic example of how they have been brainwashed by the propaganda fed to them by the Maori elite and activist journalists.
The protestors don’t realise they when tribal rule kicks in fully, they too will become slaves of the Maori elite.
The protestors think that the elite Maori and the average Maori are ‘one’, joined at the hip, and fighting for the same cause.
They are not.
The protestors are simply pawns in the elite Maori plan to take over New Zealand.
Once tribal rule kicks in fully, the average Maori, and the protestors, will be disenfranchised like everyone else. They will become pre-1840 style slaves to the Maori elite.
How do we know this will happen? All through New Zealand’s early history, Maori tribes jostled for dominance.
The dominant tribe always enslaved the lesser tribes.
This is a fact of history, and nothing has changed today.
The tragedy is that the protestors don’t realise that Julian and his team are fighting for Maori, and the other 160 cultures living in New Zealand to prevent tribal rule.
Julian has a paper which he has produced which details how Maori can achieve equitable outcomes.
And the core of the plan is not about giving Maori more money and resources. Not more Waitangi Tribunal Claims. Not more dependence on the government. No no.
Giving Maori money and resources has actually created Maori inequity. It’s weakened Maori on their inside, which has led to their plummet in the social statistics.
What’s on the inside of a man or a woman is everything.
Julian’s paper is concerned with Education. Educating Maori about what?
About the absolute relationship between personal success in life and the development of character. Character has to do with what’s on the inside of a man or woman. Character will lead a man or woman out of the pit and into success. Into prosperity and emotional, physical, mental, and spiritual health.
You see protestors think ‘equality’ is about giving Maori more money and resources until they are living like the rest of society who work hard and achieve a lot.
The current approach to fixing Maori inequity (more money, more resources, more blaming everyone else and everything else for being at the bottom of the ladder) is like putting a band aid on a cancer patient.
But the protestors are not open to solutions.
They prefer bullying, fighting, and intimidation over Education. They prefer handouts.
They prefer shouting and yelling over listening and learning.
This is co-governance in action.
Eight, the protestors can’t debate the issue of co-governance via reasoned discussion. Julian and his team want this. Julian wants to engage. All the protestors have to offer is shouting and bullying and intimidation.
Many good Maori in New Zealand would cringe if they saw the behaviour of the protestors.
In all our meetings we have a Q and A session.
This is important as it allows the crowd to ask sincere questions about the content presented by Julian.
Yet not once has any Maori anywhere asked a reasoned question based on the content presented by Julian. I am not making this up.
Conclusion?
The protestors are showing themselves to be intellectually bankrupt. They have nothing reasoned and rational to say. They don’t want discussion. What other conclusion is there?
Conclusion?
Even though the non-protestors who came to hear Julian at Orewa were denied the right, they did see and witness first hand the eight aspects of co-governance alluded to here.
—————————-
They saw co-governance in action in graphic detail.
They came to hear about co-goverance.
But what they saw was more – they got to see it, not just hear about it.
Seeing is even more powerful than reading or listening.
Nothing is more powerful than being an eye witness.
—————————
Co-governance is not just a disaster waiting to happen. It’s a disaster happening right now.
Thank you, protestors, for showing us this so clearly yesterday at Orewa.
As such, they unwittingly gave great support to our campaign to preserve democracy, to fight for equality against separatism, racism, and apartheid.
In other words, they helped us raise support to oppose co-governance.
Dr John Robinson Responds To Chris Trotter Branding Julian “A Fascist”
“I have frequently agreed with Chris Trotter, and quoted favourably many of his comments. That article seems to have been written by some quite different person. It is complete nonsense.
I am left wing, a socialist and ardently anti-fascist. I am not stupid, I am knowledgeable, I have studied and written of what is going on and to tag the fascist label on to Julian Batchelor, whom I know, is absurd.
I join in the stop Co-Governance movement because I am opposed to racism, and Co-Governance is racist, dividing New Zealanders into the chosen Maori and the others. We are part of a wide movement to stop the movement towards New Zealand apartheid, which is intended to result in two separate houses of parliament, as is explicitly set down in the He Puapua report. Thus while I know that Muriel Newman is right-wing, here we are one, New Zealanders opposed to racism, and ready to work together on that issue, leaving other differences to one side.
I refuse to be labelled as “Pakeha”, which Trotter uses frequently. I am a New Zealander. Julian is not aiming “to build a mass movement of Pakeha New Zealanders”, bringing together “angry Kiwi racists”, as Trotter claims, but inviting us all to become aware of the destruction of democracy. I agree with Julian that we must stop being divided and labelled, we must fight racism – which is the very opposite of being racist.
Trotter insists on calling Julian a “Christian evangelist”. Should I, an atheist, then walk away? No, he has never asked that we be of any one faith. We are all welcome, people of many backgrounds and beliefs, different backgrounds (of course, including Maori), simply fighting the racism that Trotter once spoke against, which he seems now to support. Trotter even voices his support for the suppression of free speech and the banning of meetings, calling the actual opposition to racism as “blatant racism”.”
Janet Wilson: Insane Thinking Leads To Insane Journalism
Journalist with Stuff
Janet thinks Julian Batchelor is a racist because he believe in democracy, and he’s fighting against tribal rule, racism, separatism, and apartheid.
He’s fighting for one person, one vote, for one law for all and racial unity. Janet thinks that’s wrong.
Once upon a time, Julian would have been a hero.
In 2023, he’s a villain.
Such is the intense grooming that’s gone on in New Zealand for the past 10 years to prepare the way for tribal takeover.
Jane is clearly an activist.
You can read what she wrote HERE
Our Waipu Event Is Happening Friday 24 March, 7pm!
Waipu is heartland New Zealand. Township 2 km inland from Bream Bay, 41 km south of Whangārei. It was founded in the mid-19th century by Scottish settlers from Nova Scotia, led by the charismatic preacher Norman McLeod. Facing economic hardship in Canada, the group went first to Australia and then to New Zealand. In 1854 they secured land at Waipū, and were joined by more Scots from Nova Scotia and Scotland. Waipū commemorates its heritage through a museum, the Waipū House of Memories, and events such as the annual Waipū Highland Games which have been held since 1871. Waipū is now a farming centre.
Where? Ruakaka Rec Centre, 9 Takutai Place, Ruakaka.
Who Are The Real Fascists In New Zealand?
It was Mussolini who defined Fascism as “the merger of corporate and state power”. This describes New Zealand perfectly. Here is a quote from my book.
——————————————–
“Ultimately, co-governance is about a small minority of people getting enormous wealth without working for it – free money. Our money. Tax payer’s money. It’s about a determined group of private tribal companies / tribal representatives who are collaborating secretly and closely with MPs in the Beehive, the Waitangi Tribunal, key personnel in every government department, and woke European lawyers and consultants. What for?
To pull off a pre-1840 style tribal raid on the tribe called New Zealand. The booty they seek is the cash and assets belonging to all New Zealanders. And how have they made such progress? By deliberately twisting and corrupting the clear original meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi, over a period spanning four decades. It’s frightening fraud. This book has detailed how this twisting and corrupting has happened. And worst of all? Naive and history ignorant politicians have enabled this. All of it.”
———————————————————
HERE is what Chris wrote. You make up your own mind.
What is the truth of the matter?
It’s not complicated, really.
I am someone who has stepped up to fight for our democracy, for racial unity, for one law for all, for the repeal of all race based legislation, for the exposure of the fraud and corruption swirling around the Treaty Of Waitangi and the Waitangi Tribunal.
I am fighting against eye-watering media corruption.
The inside cover of my book elaborates more, but you got the gist of what I am standing for.
Talking to a friend the other night and telling him what’s been happening at Julian’s events. The friend said “Maori are their own worst enemies”. The amount of disruption they are bringing to Julian’s events proves that their only tactic is to be noisy and intimidating. There is no engagement in reasoned debate, not even from the academics like Mutu or Charters. It’s their way (exclude non-Maori from the discussion) or else
“Maori are their own worst enemies”
Yes they are, but they give the movement more exposure event with the media that lies.
“Maori are their own worst enemies”.
More like the communist worshipers of UNDRIP are their own worst enemies and the enemies of Maoridom.
The average person who considers themselves of part Maori descent are just like all other Kiwis and are tainted by these cunning low I.Q. grifters. These protesters against free speech are descendants of turekareka who would have had a patu across the head and been put in the pot or a hangi before Whitey came along.
Wow! Orewa was a hoot. I really enjoyed it, even with the disruptive activists.
The activists don’t realise that they are part of the show. Even with the lying media reporting on Stop Co-Governance, the meetings are getting exposed more.
The non actions by the Police were disappointing, but they were outnumbered 3 to 1.
Thanks to all of the organisers, it was great. It was also good to meet Julian Batchelor in person and shake his hand.
This man is committed to the cause, people. Support him.
Steve.
Please provide a link to the paper which details how Maori can achieve equitable outcomes.
Thanks
Please provide the link to the paper which details how Maori can achieve equitable outcomes.
Thanks
I’m very please to see someone is willing to exclaim “the emperor has no clothes”, in public and despite the “cancel” culture doing its darnedest to shut Julian Batchelor down. New Zealand desperately needs to stop, take stock and have an urgent and in depth about the direction of New Zealand.
Kerry Campbell “Take Back The Treaty”.
Julian Batchelor
julian@stopcogov.kiwi https://stopcogovernance.kiwi/blog/orewa-event-a-super-success/
WELL DONE A GREAT OREWA EXPOSE OF MAORI INCOMPETENCE AND NON ABILITY TO PERFORM ANY GOVERNANCE. THAT WAS THEIR BEHAVIOUR AND WAY OF BASHING ALL OF US
THERE IS ALSO ANOTHER RECENT HUGE EXPOSE THAT THE MAORIS FAILED ON:
THE MAORIS DID NOT PREDICT THE RECENT DRAINAGE STORM FLOODING PROBLEMS, NOR HAD ANY NOUSE OF MANAGEMENT OF THOSE FLOODS OR DRAINS, AND HAVE NOT PUT FORWARD WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE DONE TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM. THEY ARE WANTING THE MONEY, YET THEY PARADE AS ENTITLED TO OWN ALL THE WATER AND THE DRAINS, BUT HAVE NOT GOT THE HYDRAULICS ENGINEERING SKILLS THAT THE COUNCILS HAVE, SO WHY TAKE THE DRAINS AND WATER FROM COUNCILS AND PUT IT WITH A BUNCH OF RADICAL SAVAGE ELITES WHO ARE GOOD AT ARSE SHOWING EXPOSURE, STAMPING THEIR FEET AND HAVING BIG TONGUES. THAT DOES NOT ENTITLE THEM AS PEOPLE QUALIFIED TO BE IN CHARGE OF THE COUNTRY’S WATER, BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GRAB IT FOR THEM SELVES AND TO GET AT THE MONEY.
THESE IGNORANT BULLIES ARE NOT FIT TO CO-GOVERN THEY DID EXPOSE THEIR BULLY BASHER IGNORANCES AND LIKE GANG VIOLENCE THAT IS THEIR CO-GOVERNANCE INTENDED METHODS
THUGS WHO CANT GOVERN BUT BASH AND THIEVE AND INTIMIDATE AND RAPE AND WANT TO EMPTY CRIMINAL MAORIS FROM PRISONS AND HAVE ATTACK THE GOOD CITIZENS.
THEY WILL IF THEY GET THEIR HANDS ON GOVERNANCE, WILL PUT THEIR OWN FAMILY OF MAORI FIRST. BUT FORTUNATELY MOST MAORIS DO NOT WANT THOSE BASHER CRIMINALS TO GOVERN NOR TO BE LET OUT OF PRISON, AS THOSE BAD ARSE MAORI CRIMINALS ARE TOO DANGEROUS.
JUST TO DISCUSS THE SOVEREIGNTY SITUATION, AS OF THE LAST ONE AND A HALF CENTURIES, AND TO LET YOU KNOW SOME GOVERNANCE ISSUES FROM THE ‘WE WERE HERE FIRST BRIGADE’
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO GET TO UNDERSTAND THE MAORI CLAIMS, OF THE 1835 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, AND THE 1840 TREATY WITH CROWN.
THE CHINESE WERE HERE IN 1423
THE CELTS GOT HERE MANY CENTURIES AGO
THE VIKINGS TOO, AS A VIKING SHIP WAS FOUND DURING WORKS FOR THE RUSSIAN OLIGARCH AT THE NORTH END OF HELENA BAY, AND QUICKLY WAS COVERED BY CONCRETE AS ITS VERY EXISTENCE WOULD UPSET THE THEORY OF THAT MAORIS WERE HERE FIRST.
THE WAIPOUA FOREST STONE BUILDING OF CELTIC STRUCTURES
THE HELEN CLARKE MAKING ALL THE WAIPOUA CAIRNS AS TOP SECRET. AN ELECTION DEAL?
HISTORICALLY THERE WAS A BUNCH OF ‘OFF COURSE, WIND BLOWN CANOES’, MOST BROKE AND WERE LOST AND NO IDEA WHERE THEY WERE, AND MOST DROWNED AND STARVED AT SEA.
MIRACULOUSLY SOME ARIVED BY BOAT, THEY MADE IT, AND THE WINDS DO BLOW SOUTH.
NEXT WHEN AN EXISTING BOAT LOAD GOT SETTLED, AND THEN THE NEW ARRIVALS BOAT LOAD ARRIVED, SAW SMOKE, AND FOUND EACH OTHER, THEY FOUGHT BITTERLY TO CANNIBALISE EACH OTHER. NOT A NATION, AND SEPARATE AS STRANGERS, AND BAD CANNIBAL MURDERS.
THE ENGLISH MISSIONARIES DID MUCH GOOD TO BRING FOOD, SEEDS, FRUIT TREES, PIGS, SHEEP CATTLE, HORSES AND THE STEEL SHARP AXES AND KNIVES AND CLOTH AND BOOTS AND WARM BLANKETS, EDUCATION AND RELIGION AND GOT THE MAORIS TO STOP EATING HUMAN FLESH.
HONE HEKE BOUGHT 600 MUSKETS IN AUSTRALIA AND AT ABOUT 1830 HIS WARRIORS BEGAN KILLING OTHER TRIBES, AND EVENTUALLY KILLED 70,000 OTHER MAORIS, ALMOST HALF OF THE MAORI POPULATION, AND HIS WARRIORS ATE AS MANY AS THEY COULD, INCLUDING SOME WHITE PEOPLE. DO WE WANT HONE KEKE’S OFF SPRING GOVERNING ALL OF US. NO WE DONT HELL NO
WHITE IMMIGRANT SETTLERS HAVE NEVER DONE SUCH ATROCITIES TO MAORI.
OF COURSE MANY MAORIS ARE GREAT FINE LOVELY CAPABLE MAGNIFICENT PEOPLE AND I LOVE THOSE, AND SOME OF MY GRAND CHILDREN ARE PART MAORI. I DONT HATE MAORI. BUT BEWARE
IN 1835 BUSBY OFF HIS OWN BAT BECAUSE OF A HUGE FRENCH LAND CLAIM IN HOKIANGA, COBBLED UP THE IDEA TO MAKE A DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. SIGNED BY 35 CHIEFS OF MAINLY HOKIANGA AND A FEW NORTHERN TRIBES.
IT WAS NOT THE WHOLE OF THE COUNTRY INDEPENDENCE CLAIM, BUT A ‘BUSBY GENERATED’ STATEMENT MAINLY TO ASSERT ASSISTANCE FROM THE BRITISH CROWN, WHO WERE BUSY AT THE BOER WAR IN AFRICA, FOR MAORI TO BE PROTECTED FROM THE INSANE MUSKETS KILLINGS THAT HONE HEKE BOUGHT AND USED AGAINST MAORI, AND HE WENT ON TO MURDER 70.000 AND COULD HAVE CONTINUED TO MURDER ANOTHER 50,000. AND ALSO BUSBY SEEING THE FRENCH AND AMERICAN WHALERS, HE WANTED TO STOP THE FRENCH, AMERICANS AND DUTCH TAKING SOVEREIGNTY OF THE WHOLE OF THE COUNTRY. SO HE LINED UP THE 1835 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, TO PUT OFF THE HUGE FRENCH CLAIMS BEING PUSHED INTO THE HOKIANGA, BY DeTHIERY, TO AWAIT THE BRITISH TREATY OF 1840, AND KEEP THE LAND CLAIMS AS BRITISH.
IT WAS ONLY FOR THOSE AREAS 35 CHIEFS CONTROLLED, A LEGITIMATE DECLARATION OF THEIR SOVEREIGN RIGHTS OVER THEIR OWN NORTHERN LANDS. YES. BUT NOT A CLAIM OVER THE REST OF THE COUNTRY BUT OF THEIR LANDS ONLY. IT STATED THEY WISH FOR THE SOUTHERN TRIBES TO JOIN THEM, SO THE DECLARATION ADMITS IT WAS NOT A CLAIM OVER ALL OF NZ. Take Note.
IT WAS A GOOD STATEMENT OF INDEPENDENCE FOR THOSE MAORI, BUT IT HAD A REAL LIMITING CLAUSE THAT COULD APPOINT “legislative authority separate from themselves” “TO OTHERS”, OF any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, by THOSE persons appointed by the 35 CHIEFS. WHICH IF THEY DID SO APPOINT, WOULD TRANSFER THE MAORI CONTROL OF THEIR LAND, IF THE TRANSFER WAS A TOTAL TRANSFER, AND SURE ENOUGH THEY DID TRANSFER ALL OF THEIR SOVEREIGNTY OVER THOSE LANDS TO THE QUEEN IN THE 1840 TREATY. WHEN THEIR DECLARATION HAD THE ‘UNLESS CLAUSE” ACTIVATED, AND UP TILL THEN WAS UNDER THOSE CHIEFS CONTROL, WHEN THEY ENACTED THE ‘UNLESS’ CLAUSE, AND DID SO LATER IN FEB 1840 BY 3/4 OF THOSE CHIEFS WHO SIGNED OVER THE FULL SOVEREIGNTY FROM THEM SELVES TO QUEEN VICTORIA AS IN THE 1840 TREATY. SHE BEING THE OTHER, WAS THENCE APPOINTED TO DO THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY OF ANY FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE SAID TERRITORIES. AND BY 1852 WAS ENTITLED AND DID MAKE THE NZ 1852 CONSTITUTION
CLAUSE 2 OF THE 1835 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE HAD THAT PROVISO, AN EXCEPTION, AN “UNLESS BY PERSONS APPOINTED BY THEM”. AND THAT WAS AN APPOINTMENT TO THE BRITISH CROWN IN 1840 BY MOST OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE CHIEFS. THE FULL NZ INDEPENDENCE WAS SIGNED OVER TO THE QUEEN AND SHE WAS APPOINTED, AND THAT WAS All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand THAT WAS hereby declared NOT to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, NOW WAS NOW SIGNED AS DECLARED AS RESIDING EXCLUSIVELY WITH THE QUEEN. THE CHIEFS THENCE also declare that they will NOW permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, AND THAT any function of government IS to be exercised within the said territories, by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled, WHICH WAS APPOINTED BY 25 OF THE 35, TO BE DONE BY THE QUEEN. THUS THAT CAPACITY OF LETTING A LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY SEPARATE FROM THEMSELVES, FOR ANY FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT BE EXERCISED BY THE APPOINTED PERSON, IS AND WAS NOW BEING DONE BY THE QUEEN, AS TRANSFERRED TO THE QUEEN. BECAUSE MOST OF THE 35 CHIEFS, AS 25 OF THE DECLARATION SIGNING CHIEFS, SIGNED THE APPOINTMENT OVER TO THE QUEEN, TO HAVE EXCLUSIVE SOVEREIGNTY IN THE TREATY OF 1840. THAT WAS ALL OF THEIR DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND ENTIRE LAND SOVEREIGNTY WENT EXCLUSIVELY TO THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND IN PERPETUITY FOR EVER.
THE OREWA CO-GOVERNANCE GANG MEMBERS STORMING OF YOUR MEETING HAD LOST THEIR OWN SOVEREIGNTY BACK THEN, IN 1840. THEN IN 1852 THE CONSTITUTION ACT BY VICTORIA CONTINUED THE QUEENS RULE, SO THEY NEVER GOT IT BACK, NOR TOOK IT BACK NOR ASKED FOR IT BACK, AND BY TREATY WAS DETERMINED PERMANENTLY TO BE WITH THE QUEEN AND TO BE MANAGED AND DONE AND RULED BY HER AND HER GOVERNMENT.
NOW THE MAORI ARE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, THEY ARE CO- CITIZENS OF NZ. THEY ARE 300,000 OF THE 4,000,000, BUT ARE NOT IN CO-GOVERNANCE. AS IF THEY ARE A HALF OF NEW ZEALAND.
Declaration of Independence of New Zealand:
1. We, the hereditary chiefs and heads of the tribes of the Northern parts of New Zealand, being assembled at Waitangi, in the Bay of Islands, on this 28th day of October, 1835, declare the Independence of our country, which is hereby constituted and declared to be an Independent State, under the designation of The United Tribes of New Zealand.
2. All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, unless by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled.
3. The hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the autumn of each year, for the purpose of framing laws for the dispensation of justice, the preservation of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and they cordially invite the Southern tribes to lay aside their private animosities and to consult the safety and welfare of our common country, by joining the Confederation of the United Tribes.
4. They also agree to send a copy of this Declaration to His Majesty, the King of England, to thank him for his acknowledgement of their flag; and in return for the friendship and protection they have shown, and are prepared to show, to such of his subjects as have settled in their country, or resorted to its shores for the purposes of trade, they entreat that he will continue to be the parent of their infant State, and that he will become its Protector from all attempts upon its independence.
CLAUSE 1 NO LONGER HAS CONTROL AS BY THE ‘UNLESS’ IN CLAUSE 2 THE SOVEREIGNTY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE CROWN AS THROUGH THE TREATY AND STOPPED BEING OF THE CHIEFS WHEN THE ‘OTHER PERSONS’ WAS APPOINTED. AND SO TOO, CLAUSE 2 HAS NO LONGER GOT CONTROL. THE GOVERNANCE OF All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared NOT to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who CAN NOT NOW also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, AND WHO CAN NOT NOW, PERFORM any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, BECAUSE THEY HAVE APPOINTED IT BE DONE BY OTHER persons AS THEY HAVE appointed THE QUEEN, SO THE QUEEN IS NOW acting under the authority of laws OF THE QUEEN AS regularly enacted by HER in Congress assembled. CLAUSE 3 MAYBE STIL HAPPENS EACH YEAR IN FEBRUARY AT WAITANGI, I DONT KNOW, BUT IS UNDER THE CROWN AS THE 1840 TREATY PUT ALL SOVEREIGNTY SQUARELY INTO BEING UNDER THE BRITISH CROWN AND THE QUEEN.
CLAUSE 4 ACCEPTS SETTLERS AND ASKS THE CROWN TO CONTINUE TO BE THE PARENT OF THEIR INFANT STATE, THE KING WILL PROTECT IT FROM ATTEMPTS UPON ITS INDEPENDENCE. THAT IS PROTECTION FROM HONE KEKE MURDER MUSKETS, AND FROM THE FRENCH CLAIMS. BUT SINCE THE APPOINTMENT TO THE QUEEN IT IS FOR THE QUEEN TO PROTECT THE INFANT STATE OF WHICH THE SOVEREIGNTY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE QUEEN AS HAS ALL THE sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively NOW IN WITH QUEEN, who HAD PREVIOUSLY also declareD that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, unless by persons appointed by them, AND THEY DID SO APPOINT THE QUEEN IN 1840. and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them BEING NOW BY HER AND SHE ENACTED THE 1852 CONSTITUTION ACT TO CONTINUE HER APPOINTMENT AS EXCLUSIVE AND AS PERMANENT AS THE TREATY OF 1840 WAS PERMANENT. HAVING HANDED OVER SOVEREIGNTY AS BY AN APPOINTMENT THE CONGRESS assembled ARE REPLACED BY THE QUEEN AND HER OWN ASSEMBLY.
BUT WHAT WAS THIS INDEPENDENCE THAT THE NORTHERN CHIEFS AND THEIR TRIBES DID NOT ALREADY HAVE AS WAS THEIR THEN SELF DEPENDENT LIFESTYLES. THE WORD INDEPENDENCE WAS NOT THAT THE NORTHERN TRIBES BECAME INDEPENDENT FROM WHAT WAS TILL THEN A DEPENDENCY OF ANY COUNTRY INVOLVING BOTH THAT COUNTRY AND OF MAORI. THIS CLAUSE 4 WAS PUT THERE TO DETER FRENCH CLAIMS, AND THAT INDEPENDENCE IS NOT WHAT SOME COMMONWEALTH COUNTRIES HAVE DONE A HUNDRED YEARS AFTER THE DECLARATION. THERE WAS NO REVERTING FROM A CO-DEPENDENCE OR A DEPENDENCY TO AN INDEPENDENCE. SO THAT IS THE CONTINUED MAORI SELF DEPENDENCE AS WAS INDEPENDENTLY DONE IN THEIR MAORI CUSTOMARY LIFESTYLE, CONTINUED. NOT GAINING ANY ACTION OF SEVERANCE BY INDEPENDENCE FROM THE CROWN NOR GETTING IT FROM THE QUEEN, NOR GETTING INDEPENDENCE BACK AGAIN.
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE WAS A BUSBY THING, AND EXPECTED SOME DELEGATION TO OTHER PERSONS APPOINTED, AS THE “UNLESS BY PERSONS APPOINTED” HAD PROVIDED, NO DOUBT HE ENVISAGED FOR THE CROWN TO LATER TAKE IT OVER. SO WERE OTHER PERSONS APPOINTED, AND YES, YES THEY WERE, AS THE QUEEN WAS, BUT NOT JOINTLY WITH THE CHIEFS, BUT ENTIRELY APPOINTED AS TRANSFERRED FULLY OVER TO THE QUEEN, IN FEB 1840. TWENTY FIVE OF THE THIRTY FIVE WHO SIGNED THE DECLARATION, DID FOUR AND A HALF YEARS LATER, AS TRANSFERRED BY APPOINTING WHEN THE CHIEFS ALL DID SUBSEQUENTLY SIGN THE 1840 TREATY, VESTING THE FULL SOVEREIGNTY INTO THE QUEEN VICTORIA GOVERNMENT FOR THE QUEEN TO DO EVERYTHING THAT THE 35 CHIEFS HAD DESCRIBED IN CLAUSE 2, CAN AND IS TO BE DONE BY PERSONS APPOINTED, AND THAT BECAME THE QUEEN AND HER GOVERNANCE STAFF IN ENGLAND AND LATER THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNANCE STAFF. ALSO THE REST OF THE MAORIS THROUGH OUT THE WHOLE COUNTRY MOSTLY ALL DID SIGN THE TREATY AS WELL, SO IT WAS A VERY DEMOCRATIC SIGNING AS WAS DONE BY INTENT BY THE MAJORITY OF MOSTLY ALL THE WHOLE COUNTRY MAORI CHIEFS.
THERE WAS NO CO-GOVERNANCE IN VOLVED, BUT SO TOO IF THESE RADICALS ASSUME AND OR MAORI ASSUME TO HAVE CO-GOVERNANCE, THEN FOR AT LEAST HALF THAT THEY DO THUS CEDE THAT, AT LEAST HALF OF THE SOVEREIGNTY DID GO TO THE QUEEN IN THE TREATY OF 1840. BUT THE WORD HALF WAS NOT EVER MENTIONED BUT ONLY FULL CEDING WAS. SO AS THE TREATY STATED FOR EVER, IT WAS IRREVOCABLE AS ENTIRELY FOR EVER. AND STILL IS. THAT IS AS THE NOW COINED HALF AT LEAST IS IRREVOCABLE OF THAT HALF, BUT THERE WAS NOT A DIVISION AS TWO HALVES, BUT A FULL CEDING. RECENT MAORI TALK IS TALKING UP THE NOTION OF PARTNERSHIP HALF AND CO- BUT THERE NEVER WAS ONLY HALF NOR CO- BUT IS NOT ABOUT WHAT OF THE OTHER HALF, AS IF MAORI RETAINED A HALF AS THAT WAS NEVER INVOLVED NOR IN THE TREATY WORDS. BUT THAT THEY DO AND CONTINUE TO CEDE THAT THEY CEDED SOVEREIGNTY AND DID SO OF THE ONLY DESCRIPTION THAT WAS THE WHOLE LOT OF THE WHOLE SOVEREIGNTY, NOT A DEFINED HALF ONLY, AS HALF TO THE QUEEN AND AS IF HALF FOR MAORI. THAT ‘HALF’ WAS NEVER MENTIONED TO BE WHAT WAS IN THE TREATY.
IT WAS FOR ALL TO BE UNDER THE QUEENS RULES. MAORI HAD CONCEDED SOVEREIGNTY BUT NOW TRY TO SAY IT WAS ONLY FOR HALF BUT NEVER THE LESS WAS ALL CEDED. CEDING HAPPENED SO THE QUESTION IS: IS THE RECENT COINED HALF AS 50/50 AND AS CO-GOVERNANCE GOT ANY EVIDENCE THIS WAS ONLY HALF, AND NOTHING THAT IT WAS OR WAS IT NOT. THE SECOND QUESTION IS DID ANY CEDING HAPPEN AND THERE IS EVIDENCE THE WHOLE OF SOVEREIGNTY WAS CEDED. SO ALL SOVEREIGNTY WENT TO THE QUEEN, BUT MAORI DID NOT EVER RETAIN ANY HALF, NOR THEN IN 1840 OF ANY SUGGESTION OF IT. THE 50/50 IS A NEW STUNT TO ATTEMPT IT IS A GIVEN AS IF THERE ARE 2 PARTNERS TO THE TREATY, MAORI AND BRITISH SETTLERS AS IF IT WAS THE SOVEREIGNTY WAS ONLY 50% GIVEN. AND AS IF THERE MIGHT BE AN AGREEMENT OF CO-GOVERNANCE, BUT THE TREATY PROVIDES 100% TO THE QUEEN, NONE WAS RETAINED BY MAORI. CO-GOVERNANCE IS NOT IN EXISTENCE AND STILL IS NOT.
THE MAORI LANDS AND CUSTOMS OF MAORI ALL REMAINED WITH MAORI. THE SUBSEQUENT SELLING OF THE MAORI LAND, WAS BY THE WILL OF THE MAORI WHO OWNED IT AND THEY THEMSELVES DILUTED THEIR LAND HOLDNG, BY THEIR OWN SELLING OF SO MUCH OF IT, OVER THE TWO CENTURY’S TO THE SETTLERS.
THE NGA PUHI NOW SEE THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF NORTHLANDS RICH FARM LAND AND EXCLUSIVELY MIRACULOUS COASTAL BEACHES AS IF IS STILL MAORI LAND, SO THEN ARE MOTIVATED TO TRY CLAIM IT ALL, BUT ONLY IF THEY PROVE THE WHOLE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY DID NOT TRANSFER TO THE QUEEN. BUT THAT CANT BE DONE AS ALREADY THE VAST MAJORITY CONSENSUS OF MAORI WAS, THAT ALL OF MAORI THAT HAVE SIGNED THE 1840 TREATY HAD ALL AGREED TO THE FULL TRANSFER OF SOVEREIGNTY TO THE QUEEN. INCLUDING SIGNED BY CHIEFS OF NGA PUHI. CERTAINLY THE 25 OF THE 35 DECLARATION CHIEFS SIGNED THE 1840 TREATY. SO BY A HUGE MAJORITY NGA PUHI DID SIGN THE FULL SOVEREIGNTY OVER TO THE QUEEN.
IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFERRED TO THE QUEEN EXCEPT A STUNT BY MAORI TO TRY TO WEASLE SYMPATHY TO GET BACK WHAT THEY SOLD. THE MAORI ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH THOUSANDS OF IMMIGRANTS SETTLING EVERY DAY IN NZ, BUT REVERTING TO THE INTRINSIC GOOD NATURE OF THE OFF SPRING OF THE EARLY SETTLERS TO JOG THEIR GUILT THAT THEY STILL OWE MORE FOR THE PRICE OF THE LAND, BUT NOW ARE ASSERTING TO THE EARLY SETTLERS OFF SPRNG THAT THE DID NOT TRANSFER THE SOVEREIGNTY. BUT THEY DID. WHY IS IT THE DIRECTION OF THE MAORI IS ALWAYS MOSTLY ENTIRELY AGAINST THE EARLY SETTLERS, A STALE OLD REDUNDANT ARGUMENT WITH MUCH WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE, AND NOT OF THE SERIOUS DAMAGE BEING DONE BY CURRENT IMMIGRATION INFLOWS AND WHY ARE THE MAORIS STILL DOING DRAMA AGAINST THE GREAT GREAT GRAND CHILDREN OF THE EARLY SETTLERS BUT NOT AGAINST THE CURRENT OF IMMIGRANTS, NOR AT THE GREED OFTHE CHINESE OR KOREANS OR EUROPEANS OR ISLANDERS AND AFRICANS ??
NGA PUHI STILL HAVE COASTAL ACCESS AS WE ALL DO. BUT IS IT THEIR THINKING ‘WE WERE HERE FIRST’ SO NO ONE ELSE WHO IS NON MAORI CAN HAVE OR SHARE OR IN CONCEPT OWN THAT COAST AND ITS COASTAL ACCESS.
IF THE NGA PUHI ASSERT THEY ARE SEPARATE THAT IS LIKE A SEPARATE NATIONS SOVEREIGNTY TO THOSE OTHER TRIBES AND SOUTHERN TRIBES AND ALL OTHER IWI WHO HAVE SETTLED AND THAT ONLY NGA PUHI HAVE A SPECIAL INDIVIDUAL RELATIONSHIP, THEN THAT FATALLY FAILS AS IT WAS THE NGA PUHI 35 CHIEFS WHO DECLARED THE INDEPENDENCE,AND IT WAS 25 OF THOSE CHIEFS WHO DID TRANSFER THE FULL SOVEREIGNTY AND ROLE OF LEGISLATION TO THE QUEEN IN THE UNLESS PROVISO TO EXCLUSIVELY BE APPOINTED TO BE DONE AND CONTROLLED AND LEGISLATED BY THE QUEEN.
ONCE THAT DELEGATION AND TRANSFER WENT TO THE QUEEN, IT WAS THEN IN 1852 THAT THE QUEEN NAILED IT DOWN AS HER RETAINING THE PERMANENT GOVERNANCE AND SOLE RIGHT TO MAKE THE LEGISLATION. THAT WAS CERTAIN DOUBLING OF THE QUEENS ROLE AND EXCLUSIVE GOVERNANCE AS 100%, WITH NOT A MENTION OF A RESIDUAL CO-GOVERNANCE. MAORI HAVE NO CLAIM FOR CO-GOVERNANCE BUT MIGHT BE GIVEN THAT, BUT DO SO BY THE OREWA DEBARKLE OF THEIR BELLIGERENT BEHAVIOUR WITHOUT SHOWING A POSSIBLE ABILITY TO CO-GOVERN. THE MAORI INTENT IS TO LAND GRAB BY ANGER, AS THE OREWA DEMONSTRATED THEY ARE NOT GOING TO SHOW MATURITY OR SKILL OR ABILITY BEYOND POKING OUT THEIR TONGUES AND BEING OVER BEARING THUGS.
MAORI ARE ATTEMPTING TO BACK TRACK ON THE TREATY AND INSERT AN UNDER HAND RETROSPECTIVE CHANGE TO INCLUDE A NON EXISTENT PARTNERSHIP AND HALF CO-GOVERNANCE AS AN AFTER THOUGHT, AS IF IT IS A RIGHT AND AS IF IT WAS AGREED TO, BUT IS A FRAUD UPON THE TREATY AND EVERY OTHER CITZEN OF NZ, THAT THEY HAD SIGNED WHICH HAD NOT ANY DIVISION AT ALL OF HALF BEING RETAINED. THE FULL SOVEREIGNTY WENT TO THE QUEEN, AND FULL LAND OWNERSHIP STAYED WITH MAORI UNLESS THEY SOLD SOME OF THEIR LANDS, AND THAT THEY DID SO SELL SOME LANDS. SO BE IT.
WORLD MIGRATION AND MASS MOVEMENT OF PEOPLES IS A THING OF PEOPLE OF THE WORLS AS BEING ALIVE, AND MOBILE AND ABLE TO TRAVEL, BUT NOT SOMETHING MAORI CAN DISPUTE 180 YEARS LATER, AS IF THEY ARE STILL AT THE TREATY TABLE AND STILL CAN CHANGE THE AGREEMENT.
WITHOUT THE TREATY AND WITHOUT THE BRITISH SETTLERS ARRIVING, AND EVEN IF THE 25 HAD NOT TRANSFERRED THE DECLARATION SOVEREIGNTY TO THE QUEEN AND NO ONE SIGNED THE TREATY, THE REALITY IS THIS COUNTRY WOULD STILL BE FLOODED WITH MILLIONS OF IMMIGRANTS, AND MAYBE BY THE FORCE OF GUNS, BUT THERE IS NO CERTAIN GUARANTEE THAT MAORI WOULD EXIST AS THEY DO NOW AND MAY BE EXTINCT OR ASSIMILATED TO NOT BE NOTICED AS OTHER THAN THE SAME AS EVERY ONE ELSE. THAT REALITY MUST BE ACCEPTED AND NEITHER IS THERE ANY LIKELY-HOOD WITH THAT OF THE MAORI HAVING BEEN CAPABLE AS GOVERNORS, AND SO WHO WOULD DOMINATE NZ AND HAVE TAKEN GOVERNANCE, OF WHICH MAORI WERE WAY BEHIND THE EUROPEANS, SO WOULD WE BE FRENCH OR DUTCH, AND WOULD THE MAORI BE MORE EXPLOITED.
BUT THE MAORI LAND WAS NOT TAKEN, BUT THAT WAS AGAIN NOT THE LAND, AS THE LAND STAYED WITH MAORI, SO THEIR ASSERTING OF THE WHITE MAN OR SETTLERS STEALING THEIR LAND UNDER THE TREATY IS NOT CORRECT. AFTER THE 1852 CONSTITUTION THE QUEEN DID TAKE “WASTELANDS” THE MOARI WERE NOT USING. BUT THOSE ARE INCLUDED AS RETURNED OR COMPENSATED BY THE TRIBES AND IWI TREATY SETTLEMENTS, AND THOSE ARE ALL MOSTLY ENTIRELY COMPLETED, EXCEPT FOR NGA PUHI WHO RESIST ANY SETTLEMENT AS SAYING DISHONESTLY THEY NEVR CONCEDED SOVEREIGNTY. BUT SEE THE NGA PUHI CHIEFS DID SIGN IT OVER. NGA PUHI NOW WISELY REJECT THE IDEA OF GIVING SOVEREIGNTY BUT IT IS TOO LATE, AND THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THEY COULD HAVE DONE BETTER THAN THEY HAVE SO FAR ACHIEVED.
THEY DID HAND OVER SOVEREIGNTY TO THE CROWN. BUT HAS THAT MADE THEM WAY WORSE, OR ARE THEY WAY BETTER OFF THAN HAD THEY NOT GIVEN SOVEREIGNTY TO THE QUEEN. THERE IS NO THANKS BEING SHOWN BY THE MAORI NOR A REAL EVALUATION THAT THEY ARE INDEED MUCH BETTER OFF THAN HAD THERE NOT BEEN THE QUEENS LEGISLATION, AS OPPOSED TO BEING UNDER THE DUTCH, TO SUFFER WHAT THE SOUTH AFRICANS SUFFERED UNDER THE DUTCH.
THUS AS IT IS NGA PUHI AND THEIR COERCION OF OTHER TRIBES, AS THAT NGA PUHI IS ASSERTING THE OTHER TRIBES/IWI GAVE ONLY HALF AS AS IF ALSO NGA PUHI DID, TO STILL BE IN 50/50 PARTNERSHIP. AS IF EVERY IWI GAVE HALF, BUT AS IF EVERY IWI TRIBE HAD RETAINED HALF. AS INFERRED SAID BY FRAUDING, THEY RETAIN A 50/50 PARTNERSHIP AS 50%, BUT THEN CONTRADICT BY ASSERTING THEY NEVER GIVING UP ANY SOVEREIGNTY, NOT 1%, BUT IN THE TREATY THEY DID GIVE 100%, AND ARE EXPECTING TO BELIEVED THEY STILL DO HAVE 50%. BUT IN THE TREATY IT IS NOT 50% NOR ANY PERCENT. IT NEVER WAS A 50/50 PARTNERSHIP AND IS IT NEVER A 50% CO-GOVERNANCE. AND THAT IS EVIDENCED BY THAT THEY DO NOT YET HAVE ANY CO-GOVERNANCE, NOR ANY SOVEREIGNTY NOR ANY QUEENS OR KINGS AUTHORITY TO ASSUME THEY HAVE. THE MERE FACT THEY NEVER HAD IT AND ARE WANTING IT AFRESH, IS THEY NEVER BEFORE EVER HAD IT, SO THEY STILL CANT PROVE THEY DID OR DO, BUT THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT, AND ARE ADMITTING THEY DONT YET HAVE. THAT PROVES THEY WANT IT BUT DO NOT HAVE CO-GOVERNANCE. THUS ADMIT THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO IT OR THEY WOULD HAVE IT. IT IS ABOUT THEIR WAY OF ASKING FOR IT, IS SO RAMCID, IS BY THEIR RUDE BULLY BELLIGERENT OREWA STUNT, IS THAT THEIR EXPECTED BEHAVIOUR AND THAT OREWA IS A PRECURSOR OF THEIR STYLE OF GOVERNING.
BUT ARE NOT ENTITLED TO HAVE IT, UNLESS WE STUPIDLY GIVE THEM SIX VOTES PER MAORI IN ELECTIONS. 8%X6=48% AS IF 50%, AND GRANT IT TO THEIR VIOLENT AGGRESSIVE DEMANDS AND STAND OVERS. BUT THEY CANT RUN THE NATION, AND THAT IS DONE BY VOTING CANDIDATES, OF WHICH MAORI CAN EQUALLY BE.
THE LAND WAS NOT TAKEN BY THE TREATY NOR BY VICTORIA, THE TREATY DID NOT TAKE THE LAND BUT MAORI SOLD THEIR LAND. AS UNLESS MAORI SOLD OFF SOME OF THEIR LAND, WHICH THEY DID AND SOLD A LOT OF IT, AS THEY COULD DO AND DID DO, THEY REDUCED THEIR OWN HOLDINGS OF THE LAND, IT WAS NOT TAKEN BY THE TREATY. BUT THAT HAD TO BE DONE VIA THE CROWN TO ENSURE A FAIR PRICE, PROPER BOUNDARY AND A LEGAL TITLE. THE TREATY NEVER TOOK MAORI LAND BUT THE TREATY DID ONLY GET AWARDED FULL SOVEREIGNTY TO THE CROWN TO MAKE LAWS, AND EVER SINCE THE CROWN HAS HAD THAT FULL SOVEREIGNTY, AND HAS MADE ALL THE LAWS AND MAORI HAVE IT NOT AFTER THEY HAD SOLD IT. NGA PUHI WANT THAT ALL REVERSED, BY CLAIMING THEY NEVER GAVE ANY SOVEREIGNTY, BUT YET FOR OVER THE FIRST HUNDRED YEARS THEY NEVER DEMANDED THAT THE TREATY DID NOT INCLUDE SOVEREIGNTY.
THE MAORI SOLD MUCH LAND, AS WAS LAND SOLD BY MAORI, SO THAT IT NOW BELONGS TO SETTLERS WHO BOUGHT IT. THAT LAND IS LAND THAT THE MAORI SOLD, AND THAT IS GONE FROM THEM, INTO POSSESSION OF THOSE THEN BUYER OWNERS, AND SOLD ON, OR INHERITED, AS OWNED AS OF TODAY, BY A LARGE ASSORTMENT OF THE TWO CENTURIES OF OVERSEAS SETTLERS. BUT NOT MUCH STILL OWNED BY MAORI, AS MOSTLY MAORI DONT NOW OWN MUCH OF THE LAND
THAT “OTHER PERSONS APPOINTED” WAS NOT EXTINGUISHED NOR WITHDRAWN, AND VARIOUS ACTS AND LAWS WERE MADE, AND BY 1852 THE NZ CONSTITUTION ACT WAS MADE BY VICTORIA AND THAT WAS THEN THAT THE UNLESS TO OTHER PERSONS BECAME PERMANENTLY MADE, BUT LATER GOT SOME AMENDMENTS AND WAS A CENTURY LATER REPLACED. FROM 1948 THROUGH, IT THEN WAS THE RAW 1840 TREATY AS WHAT HELD SWAY, BUT ALL THE ACTS INVOLVING MAORI WERE ALL ON THE BOOKS AND THE SOVEREIGNTY STILL WAS FULLY WITH THE CROWN, AS PER THE TREATY, AND ON UNTILL THE NEXT NZ CONSTITUTION ACT OF 1986. THAT ASSERTS THE KING HAS FULL SOVEREIGNTY, WE HAVE THE TREATY AND THE 1986 ACT ENDORSING SOVEREIGNTY IN THE CROWN, AND IS STILL WITH THE SOVEREIGN OF RIGHT OVER NZ, THAT IS KING CHARLES AND HIS DELEGATED GOVERNOR AND HIS LEGISLATIVE RULING PARLIAMENT.
WE NOW NEWLY HAVE THE ‘MIRACLE’ OF THE CO-GOVERNANCE BEING FLOATED AND OF 50/50 PARTNERSHIPS AS IF MEANING ONLY HALF THE SOVEREIGNTY HAD HISTORICALLY GONE TO VICTORIA, BUT THAT CO-GOVERNANCE IS THE FAKED LIES AND CONVEYED BY THE MAORI ANGER AND THEIR THREATS, AS THE CO-GOVERNING ACTUALLY OTHERWISE DOES NOT AND DID NOT EXIST.
MEANWHILE MANY MANY LAWS AND ACTS WERE ENACTED AND THE INTERNATIONAL IMMIGRATION PRESSURE SENT HUGE POPULATIONS OF SETTLERS TO NEW ZEALAND. THAT THE LAND GOVERNANCE SOVEREIGNTY STAYED WHERE IT LIES, WITH THE BRTISH CROWN AND DELEGATED N.Z. GOVERNORS. MAORI HAS NEVER REGAINED NOR TOOK BACK THE WAITANGI TREATY CEDED SOVEREIGNTY, THAT WAS FOREVER WITH THE QUEEN, AND NOW WITH KING CHARLES. NOR HAVE MAORI REPEALED OR REVOKED OR EXTINGUISHED THEIR 1835 DECLARATION CLAUSE 2 APPOINTING OF OTHER PERSONS, AND IT NOW IS WAY TOO LATE TO DO SO, AS THE CROWN HAS MADE SO MANY ACTS, AND HAS LET THE APPOINTED PERSON CONTINUE TO MAKE BY POWER AND AUTHORITY, TO PERMIT ANY LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY THAT THE QUEEN HAS USED, AND MADE LAWS BY THAT AUTHORITY SINCE THE SIGNING OF THE THE TREATY. THE TREATY STILL APPLIES, SO SOVEREIGNTY STILL RESIDES IN THE BRITISH CROWN, AND KING CHARLES AS THE 1986 CONSTITUTION NOW CONTINUES IT. THERE IS NOT ANY CO-GOVERNANCE
SO NOT SO UNTILL THE TREATY IS AGREED TO LAPSE, AND IS SIGNED TO LAPSE AND TO DEVOLVE AND BE OVER RULED, AND TO NO LONGER BE A TREATY. THE MAORI RADICALS AT OREWA ARE STILL UNDER THE 1840 TREATY AND 1986 CONSTITUTION WITH ITS FULL SOVEREIGNTY VESTED IN THE CROWN. THE 1986 CONSTITUTION PREFERS A GOVERNOR REPRESENTATIVE TO BE THE ACTUARY IN NZ. BUT THE MAORI RADICALS ARE NOT STILL UNDER NOR RETURNED TO THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, NOR CAN CLAIM THE RIGHTS AND POWERS TO LEGISLATE ROLES PURSUANT TO IT. YET THE 1835 DECLARATION ENTITLEMENTS AS DESCRIBED ARE STILL APPOINTED TO THE CROWN AND NOW STILL BEING OPERATED BY THE QUEEN/ KING. THE RADICALS ARE STILL WANTING TO BE USING IT AND INCLUDED IN IT, AS IF USING IT AS IF THEY ARE THE CHIEFS HEIRS AS ALLOWED AT CLAUSE 2 BUT BY IGNORING GOING PAST THE THE PROVISO OF APPOINTMENT GOING TO THE QUEEN. THE PROVISO HAS APPOINTED THE BRITISH CROWN BECAUSE THE 25 CHIEFS SIGNED THE TREATY, AS : All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively, NOT ANY LONGER IN the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, BUT WITH THE QUEEN AS APPOINTED, AND SO THE 25 CHIEFS NOW declare that they will permit any legislative authority separate from themselves AS WAS in their collective capacity to exist, AND CONTINUE, AND WILL AND DID BY THE TREATY GIVE THAT TO THE QUEEN, TO ALLOW any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, by persons appointed by them, SO TO THE QUEEN THAT WAS WITH THE QUEEN NOW acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them, BUT BY NOW ENACTED BY THE QUEEN in HER Congress assembled, IS SINCE 1840 IS NOW ALLOWED AS APPOINTED TO THE CROWN. BUT DOES NOT STATE THAT THE HEREDITARY CHIEFS RETAIN THEIR CAPACITY NOR ANY PART OF IT, AS IN THEIR AUTHORITY, AND DOES NOT STATE THEY HAVE ANY REMAINING LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY. THE LAWS ENACTED IS AND ARE NOW THOSE LAWS AS MADE BY THE CROWN.
MAORI STILL HAVE CUSTOMARY RIGHTS LIKE FISHING ETC, BUT NO LONGER EXCLUSIVELY MAORI CUSTOMARY RIGHTS AS SO TOO DOES THE SETTLER NOW HAVE CUSTOMARY RIGHTS, WHO BY THE ‘ICOMOS CHARTER’ HAVE HAD THEIR OVER 100 YEAR SETLER HERITAGE ACTIVITY AND LIFESTYLE ACTIVITY AND ANY FISHING AND COASTAL ACCESS, ETC, HAVE ALSO BECOME INCLUDED AS THEIR OWN CUSTOMS, AND ARE NOW ADDED, OR ALONGSIDE THAT OF MAORI, BEING SIMILAR TO WHAT THE MAORI HOLD AND HAVE HAD, OF CUSTOMARY RIGHTS FOR OVER A 100 YEARS. MAORI ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE POSSESSORS OF CUSTOMARY RIGHTS, AS THE CUSTOMS OF THE IMMIGRANTS ARE NOW CUSTOMARY RIGHTS.
IT IS NOT ANY MORE A ‘WE THE MAORI WERE HERE FIRST’, NOR ‘WE ARE HALF THE PEOPLE’, NOR A ‘CO-GOVERNANCE OF JUST THE MAORI AND THE WHITE MAN’, NOR ‘MAORI WITH THE DESCENDANTS OF SETTLERS’. BUT IT IS A NZ CONTAINED MULTI DWELLING OF A WORLDWIDE CONGLOMERATION OF ALL THE SETTLERS AS HAVE ARRIVED FROM A HUNDRED DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, INCLUDING THE RECENT IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES AND OF NEW WANNA-BE’S TO WANT TO MOVE TO NEW ZEALAND AND STILL DO AND ARE STILL COMING IN DROVES.
THE TREATY NEVER MENTION 50/50, NOR 50% IS RETAINED BY THE HEREDITARY CHIEFS OF THE DECLARATION, NOR MENTIONED 50/50 NOR 50% OF THE TREATY IS RETAINED BY THE CHEIFS NOR BY ANY PARTICULAR TRIBE NOR IWI. NEITHER IS 50% RETAINED BY THE SETTLERS FAMILIES, NOR IS 50% INCLUDED BY THE PACIFIC ISLAND NATIONS, NOR IS 50% RETAINED AS INCLUDED BY RECENT IMMIGRANTS.
NOTABLY THE NGA PUHI CLAIM THEY SAY THEY NEVER CEDED SOVEREIGNTY, BUT WAS NOT SEPARATELY RECORDED NOR WAS IT AGREED TO, OR MENTIONED IN THE TREATY THAT THOUGH THE OTHER TRIBES ALL CEDED THEIR COLLECTIVE FULL SOVEREIGNTY TO THE CROWN, BUT THAT NGA PUHI DID NOT, AND WOULD NOT, DOES NOT SHOW UP AND IS NOT RECORDED, NOR CAN IT BE DEMONSTRATED. SMART DOUBLE TALKING MAORI FRAUDSTERS ARE NOW THE ONES TO SAY IT DOES. BUT THEY TELL LIES AND ARE GREEDY HOPEFULS WITH NO ENTITLEMENTS
NEITHER THE BUSBY MADE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE NOR THE TREATY OF 1840 EVER INDICATED A DUALITY OF THE GOVERNMENT AS HALF MAORI. BUT AS THE OREWA SPECTACLE SHOWED IF MAORI ARE 8% THEN THAT IS ABOUT ALL THEY CAN DO TO GET MORE, IS IF THEY BULLY TO ASSERT THEY OUGHT TO BE TREATED AS 50% AND FORCE IT TO BE GIVEN TO THEM. THAT IS 8% GET 50% OF THE VOTE. BUT THEIR BEHAVIOUR IS NOT OF PROFESSIONAL GOVERNANCE.
SO FOR CO-GOVERNANCE, IT IS REALLY OF PERSONS OF A HUNDRED DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES INVOLVED AS CO-GOVERNING, OF WHICH MAORI ARE ONE PART ONLY AND NO MORE. THEY ARE NOT HALF THE POPULATION, AND THE CLAUSE OF ‘UNLESS BY OTHER PERSONS APPOINTED’ HAS BEEN TRIGGERED IRREVOCABLY AND THE CHIEFS OF THE DECLARATION HAVE ALREADY ALLOWED THE FIXED ENACTMENT OF QUEENS LAWS, SO WE NOW HAVE GONE TO BEYOND THE DECLARATION AND INTO A DEMOCRACY OF ‘ONE PERSON HAS ONE VOTE. NOT 8% GET 50% OF THE VOTE. IT IS RELEVANT THAT MAORI ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL AND NOW ARE ONLY A SMALL PART OF IT, BUT ARE NOT A HALF OF IT, SO THERE IS NO 50/50 CO-GOVERNANCE WITH MAORI, BUT IS A HOPED FOR GRABBING OF 50% OF ALL RESOURCES AND MONEY BY MAORI TO WHICH THEY GREED FOR, BUT OF WHICH THEY CANT HAVE, NOR BE ALLOWED TO BLEED THE RESOURCES OF THE COUNTRY’S GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT AS MAINLY WORKED FOR BY THE NON MAORI ENTERPRISES AND NON MAORI RESOURCES. WITH MUCH INVESTMENT TO MAKE THE ECONOMY HAPPEN, FROM OVERSEAS INVESTORS.
NEITHER THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, NOR THE 1840 TREATY EVER MENTIONED NOR INTENDED ANY CO-GOVERNANCE, NOR EQUAL GOVERNANCE SHARING EXCLUSIVELY WITH ONLY THE BRITISH SETTERS AND MAORI. BUT THAT ALL POEPLE ARE TREATED AS EQUALS AND AS BRITISH CITIZENS. WHAT STILL DOES EXIST IS THAT MAORIS ON THEIR OWN LAND ARE 100% IN CUSTOMARY USEAGE AND UNDER THE LAWS OF THE GOVERNMENT, AND WHEN ON OTHER LAND THEY ARE AS PER THE OWNERS RULES AND THE LAW OF THE GOVERNMENT
THERE NEVER WAS ANY CO-GOVERNANCE CLAUSE IN THE TREATY. THAT IDEA CAME FROM THE COINING OF THE WORDS ‘TREATY PARTNERS’ TO THE TREATY, AS IF EQUAL GOVERNANCE LIKE 50/50, BUT IT WAS NOT, BUT WAS ENTIRELY CROWN GOVERNANCE, NOT MAORI GOVERNANCE NOR PART GOVERNANCE NOR SETTLER GOVERNANCE, BUT OFF-SHORE VICTORIA CROWN GOVERNANCE AND WHAT LAND MAORI SOLD IS LAND SOLD AND GONE. NO MORE.
BUT WE MUST HAVE FULL RESPECT FOR MAORI MARAES AND WHEN OFF MARAE THEY ARE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, CITIZENS OF THE WORLD AND OWN WHAT THEY HAVE NOT YET SOLD, AND OWN LANDS THAT THEY HAVE BOUGHT FROM OTHER MAORI AND OR FROM OTHER IMMIGRANTS OR SETTLERS FAMILIES.
THE ‘WE WERE HERE FIRST’ AND ‘ARE STILL FIRST’ IS BAD BEHAVIOUR AS YOU SAW AT OREWA. THATS WHAT THEY ARE LIKE AND WANT TO BE LIKE. THEY HAVE NO SOVEREIGNTY AND SOLD WHAT THEY SOLD, AND ARE JUST PART OF THE FABRIC OF INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS, SETTLERS, IMMIGRANTS, VISITORS, RESIDENTS, TRAVELLERS, DWELLERS, AND NEED TO BEHAVE AS FELLOW CITIZENS. THEY ARE 8% AND NOT 50%. MAORI ARE NOT AND NEVER WILL BE ENTITLED TO 50%.
THIS UPRISING OF SAVAGES IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. GOOD ON YOU !! BUT WATCH YOUR BACK AND HAVE SECURITY, AS THE MOMENTUM OF THE CO-GOVERNANCE 50/50 IS NOT GOING AWAY TILL THEY ARE PHYSICALLY STOPPED AND THEY HAVE THOUSANDS OF GUNS AND MANY A GANG PROSPECT WHO MIGHT POINT A GUN AT YOU, AS THEY THINK WITH GANG PASSION THAT THEIR LAND IS TO BE RETAINED AND TO DIE FOR IT.
THE ISSUE IS WE SHOULD NOT DISTURB THOSE MAORI STILL ON THEIR LAND, NOR ON OTHER OWNED LAND, THOUGH THEY STILL ARE UNDER THE LAWS OF THE COUNTRY, NOT AS THEY THINK THEY ARE IMMUNE, AND THAT WE ALL DO NOT DISTURB ANYONE, AND THAT IS EVERYONE NOT DISTURB ANY ONE ELSE, EITHER.
THOSE OREWA RADICALS COME FROM THE MINDSET OF STILL HAVNG CLAUSE 1 AND CLAUSE 2 BUT THEY DO NOT STILL HAVE THAT, AND THEY WONT BE WANTING TO ADMIT 25 OF THEIR 1840 CHIEFS DID GO TO THE ‘UNLESS BY PERSONS APPOINTED’ AND GIVE IT TO THE OTHER PERSON BEING THEY GAVE IT TO THE QUEEN, AND THE OREWA RADICALS ARE FROM THE BELIEF THOSE TWO STILL APPLY, AS 1 AND 2 BUT UP TO JUST BEFORE ‘UNLESS’ ENTITLES THEM OF CONTINUED AND FULL EXCLUSIVE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE WHOLE OF THE COUNTRY AS IF IT WAS PRIOR TO THE 1840 TREATY APPOINTMENT TO THE QUEEN, AND AS AT FROM THE FOUR AND A HALF YEARS OF 1835 TO UP TO FEB 1840, BUT WE ARE 188 YEARS PAST THE DECLARATION. WE ARE PAST THE TREATY OF 1840, BY 163 YEARS AND MAORI ARE ONLY NOW 8%, BUT MOST ARE OF EUROPEAN ANCESTRY. IT IS THE EUROPEANS WHO ARE FAIR, ARE SENSIBLE AND WITHOUT VIOLENCE. THE MAORIS HAD THEIR INDEPENDENCE AND SOVEREIGNTY FROM OCT 1835 WHEN THEY FIRST KNEW OF THE WORDS INDEPENDENCE AND SOVEREIGNTY, TO UP TILL WHEN THEY SIGNED IT OVER TO THE CROWN IN FEB 1840 AND FROM THEN KNEW OF SOVEREIGNTY BELONGING TO THE CROWN.
ALL THEY WANT IS TO GO BACK TO : 1. We, the hereditary chiefs and heads of the tribes of the Northern parts of New Zealand, being assembled at Waitangi, in the Bay of Islands, on this 28th day of October, 1835, declare the Independence of our country, which is hereby constituted and declared to be an Independent State, under the designation of The United Tribes of New Zealand.
2. All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, UNLESS, unless by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled.
THAT IS THE 8% WANT NOT MERELY HALF OF EVERYTHING BUT STILL EXPECT EVERYTHING AS WORSE THEY WILL STILL SPILL OVER INTO THE OTHER 50% TO MURDER, ROB, TO BURGLE AND RAPE AND THREATEN THE OTHER 50%. TO DEMAND 60%, AND OUT VOTE TILL THEY GET EVERYTHING. BUT NOWHERE IS CO-GOVERNANCE IN THEIR HISTORY NOR FOUNDING CONTRACTS OR IN ANY TREATIES, BUT IS A RECENT AND DISHONEST AND BULLYING STUNT.
THE ‘UNLESS’ WAS ACTIVATED ON FEB 1840 IN THE TREATY AS THE ‘PERSONS APPOINTED BY THEM’, THAT BEING THE CROWN AND BRITISH GOVERNMENT.
THEIR SELFISH ONE EYED ‘WE WERE HERE FIRST’ AND ‘WE WANT HALF OF EVERYTHING’ AND ‘CONTROL HALF’, IS TOTALLY BANKRUPT FROM THE 92% POSITION, AS IT IS OF THEIR FELLOW PACIFIC ISLANDERS ANCESTOR RELATIVES, WHO THOUGH ARRIVED LATER, ARE GIVEN NOTHING WHAT SO EVER, OF THEIR ISLAND CUSTOMS AND SOVEREIGNTY, BUT ARE BY THE MAORI INCLUDED IN THE NON MAORI 50%, BUT REALLY ARE PART OF THE 92%. THE ISLANDERS DO BEHAVE AND CO-OPERATE WITH THE TOTAL FABRIC OF THE NZ NATION AND CITIZENSHIP. MANY MAORI AS THOSE WHO ARRIVED AT OREWA DO NOT. THE MAORIS DONT HAVE THE INDEPENDENCE ENTITLEMENT AT ALL, BUT ONLY THEIR REPRESENTATIVE 8% AND DO NOT OWN MORE THAN THEIR REMAINING LANDS, FULL STOP. THEY HAVE AND GET NO MORE.
THIS MUST REVERT TO FELLOW HUMANS BEING KIND AND SUPPORTIVE AND POLITE, AS DEMOCRATIC AND BUSY WITH FAMILY AND IN HUMAN DIVERSITY. AS THE ONE MAN: ONE VOTE, AND BEING ENGAGED IN POLICY MAKING SUBMISSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF ALL OF US TOGETHER, AS A HEALTHY NON COMBATIVE SOCIETY AND FREE COMMUNITY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS AND MERITORIOUS ENDEAVOUR BEING REWARDED AND RESPECTED AND FAMILIES BEING SAFE.
Kind regards, Richard