This is absolutely brilliant, I am so happy I found it to broaden my awareness and knowledge and understanding better our historic times. He taonga tou kōrero, he Rangatira koe
Land, sea and foreshore belongs to the creator not Māori not Pakeha or any other ethnicities we're all tenant's under one landlord and expected to keep the place tidy and get along with our neighbour's, Māori and Pakeha caused the deaths of hundreds of others so they both have no moral ground to stand on.
56:12 Why is he lying? The New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General [1987] 1 NZLR 641 clearly states, "What has already been said amounts to acceptance of the submission for the applicants that the relationship between the Treaty partners creates responsibilities ***analogous to fiduciary duties***. Counsel were also right, in my opinion, in saying that the duty of the Crown is not merely passive but extends to active protection of Maori people in the use of their lands and waters to the fullest extent practicable." The English Crown and Maori were never a "partnership". Williams tries to fool these plebs by stating Maori were not a contractual people and then in his next breath states that the signing of a treaty was a partnership. Huh? As for his fictional tale of Maori taking on the greatest military power in the World is farcical at best. Maori knew all too well the military might of the English. The Westminster constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty was not given away to New Zealand lightly. It was not until 1987 that New Zealand became a free-standing constitutional monarchy whose parliament has unlimited sovereign power. Yet according to the revisionist Joe Williams 1840 Maori entered into a partnership with Queen Victoria???? Yeah right!!! English sovereignty could not have ever been considered to be a partnership under the 1840 concept of sovereignty under English constitutional law. Even now the Scottish parliament is not in a partnership with Westminster. The partnership Joe Willliams is calling is going to be the same trainwreck as is happening in the UK. Devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland was implemented in the late 1990s without much consideration (read hubris) of how such a radical reform would affect the UK Parliament and Government. Even though devolution marked a major change in the governance of the devolved nations, Westminster and Whitehall did not initially need to adapt very much to the new context. Why was that? Because devolution in the eyes of Westminster did not change the constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Westminster transferred only certain powers to Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast, but retained the ability to legislate in all areas, devolved or not. Also, devolution retained the Barnett formula for distributing money to the three nations and the guiding approach to devolution has been to draw a clear division between what is devolved and what is ‘reserved’ to Westminster. Few functions are formally shared between central and devolved governments. As a result, the UK Government did not create systems or processes for joint working with the devolved administrations. In practice, however, devolution has had several significant effects on Westminster and Whitehall. The arrangements for funding devolution have evolved significantly since 1999. The UK Parliament has also had to develop new mechanisms for dealing with legislation for the different nations of the UK, and the UK Government has had to manage tensions and disputes with the devolved administrations, not least over Brexit. Not least the ways in which Westminster and Whitehall have had to adapt to devolution, and consider the state of the relationship between central and devolved governments after the EU referendum. Partnership will not work in New Zealand. Not least because Maori and English common law have opposing views over fundamental concepts like the ownership of water and other resources.
Quite a history about the Maori - put the Inca's or the Aztecs to shame in degeneration. Outcast as weaker primitive Neolithic people by the invading Hawaiians & Tongans (Maori were from the original wave of primitive Asian/Melanesians pushed right out across the Eastern Pacific by successive stronger races coming from the west). They were outcast on rafts and some floated up in NZ stranded for 500 years. The weaker were pushed down to the South Island or Chathams etc. So the South Island Maori (had their own language) were the weakest of the weak. They were captured and eaten as 'Slave flesh' by the northern Maori doing raids. (Well they all ate each other - 80% of Maori pre European were dark skinned easily fattened slaves farmed and eaten by a lighter skinned 'Ariki' thin wiry elite royal caste). So it was with some righteousness as well as British cunning that they armed the southern Maori who then with muskets launched a genocidal war on the north.. That plus measles & flu halved the Maori population and removed most of the elite. The British then liberated the slaves and outlawed cannibalism. The northern Maori fought with the British against the south bad west Maori 'rebels'. The Maori sued for peace and a treaty was signed that removed all sovereignty and made them subjects to the English crown where the English would protect them from each other. Land could only be sold to or via the Crown. Maori could live on their reservations with native custom but none did. The treaty of Waitangi is strikingly clear in that the Maori cede any claim and give up and die as an original society - all 3 clauses lock that in. Nothing in today's 'Maori' culture is authentic. The music - all European (Maoris did not have tonal music, the songs are missionary tunes or introduced - Poi dance is from Islands and Stick dance from old Malaya. The carvings and art - all European - Arabesques that was the fashion at the time. Original Maori had limited dash carving and no painting of objects. No written language - all the syntax & grammar plus vowel inflection is European. No technology - some lagoon canoes and wood or stone Neolithic tools. No food sources - like pigs or crops - they left that all behind, all they had was a weak inbred fox (now extinct), some rats and a weak dismal pacific yam. They ate out all the bird-life, didn't know how to farm the sea as were island people and so they turned to societal cannibalism. Today - no full blood or half blood left. No genuine tradition and almost all are offspring of Maori slave females sold to white settlers for muskets or food. -So more fake than the 'Sioux' or 'Cherokee' or 'Crow' who had at least retained some genuineness about who they were and their history. -Everything you 'saw or experienced' is Fake. A totally convected disneyfied tokenistic set of inventions fueled by a grievance culture of almost totally European people fetishing a false past bad history because it pays benefits. 'This Horrid Practice' - Professor Paul Moon, 'Behind The Tattooed Face' - Heretaunga Pat Baker, 'A History Of New Zealand Anthropology In The 19th Century' - H D Skinner
![เจอประจำ ตอน เปิดเทอมวันแรก [EP.29]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eFK-B836i60/mqdefault.jpg)
Really well balanced presentation that not only deals with the past but presents vision for the future. Thank you.
This is absolutely brilliant, I am so happy I found it to broaden my awareness and knowledge and understanding better our historic times. He taonga tou kōrero, he Rangatira koe
Kai pai ehoa
What gospel and bishop is he refering to? Is it mormon or lds?
Land, sea and foreshore belongs to the creator not Māori not Pakeha or any other ethnicities we're all tenant's under one landlord and expected to keep the place tidy and get along with our neighbour's, Māori and Pakeha caused the deaths of hundreds of others so they both have no moral ground to stand on.
Sir Joe is deluded. Half truths. Nothing worst. I just wonder how many Maoris have bent their knee to Baal!
It was genocide committed tell the truth all them hapu were all whanau wot a joke
56:12 Why is he lying? The New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General [1987] 1 NZLR 641 clearly states, "What has already been said amounts to acceptance of the submission for the applicants that the relationship between the Treaty partners creates responsibilities ***analogous to fiduciary duties***. Counsel were also right, in my opinion, in saying that the duty of the Crown is not merely passive but extends to active protection of Maori people in the use of their lands and waters to the fullest extent practicable."
The English Crown and Maori were never a "partnership". Williams tries to fool these plebs by stating Maori were not a contractual people and then in his next breath states that the signing of a treaty was a partnership. Huh? As for his fictional tale of Maori taking on the greatest military power in the World is farcical at best. Maori knew all too well the military might of the English. The Westminster constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty was not given away to New Zealand lightly. It was not until 1987 that New Zealand became a free-standing constitutional monarchy whose parliament has unlimited sovereign power. Yet according to the revisionist Joe Williams 1840 Maori entered into a partnership with Queen Victoria???? Yeah right!!!
English sovereignty could not have ever been considered to be a partnership under the 1840 concept of sovereignty under English constitutional law. Even now the Scottish parliament is not in a partnership with Westminster. The partnership Joe Willliams is calling is going to be the same trainwreck as is happening in the UK.
Devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland was implemented in the late 1990s without much consideration (read hubris) of how such a radical reform would affect the UK Parliament and Government. Even though devolution marked a major change in the governance of the devolved nations, Westminster and Whitehall did not initially need to adapt very much to the new context.
Why was that? Because devolution in the eyes of Westminster did not change the constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Westminster transferred only certain powers to Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast, but retained the ability to legislate in all areas, devolved or not. Also, devolution retained the Barnett formula for distributing money to the three nations and the guiding approach to devolution has been to draw a clear division between what is devolved and what is ‘reserved’ to Westminster. Few functions are formally shared between central and devolved governments. As a result, the UK Government did not create systems or processes for joint working with the devolved administrations.
In practice, however, devolution has had several significant effects on Westminster and Whitehall. The arrangements for funding devolution have evolved significantly since 1999. The UK Parliament has also had to develop new mechanisms for dealing with legislation for the different nations of the UK, and the UK Government has had to manage tensions and disputes with the devolved administrations, not least over Brexit. Not least the ways in which Westminster and Whitehall have had to adapt to devolution, and consider the state of the relationship between central and devolved governments after the EU referendum.
Partnership will not work in New Zealand. Not least because Maori and English common law have opposing views over fundamental concepts like the ownership of water and other resources.
Boring 😴 😴😴😴
Quite a history about the Maori - put the Inca's or the Aztecs to shame in degeneration. Outcast as weaker primitive Neolithic people by the invading Hawaiians & Tongans (Maori were from the original wave of primitive Asian/Melanesians pushed right out across the Eastern Pacific by successive stronger races coming from the west). They were outcast on rafts and some floated up in NZ stranded for 500 years. The weaker were pushed down to the South Island or Chathams etc. So the South Island Maori (had their own language) were the weakest of the weak. They were captured and eaten as 'Slave flesh' by the northern Maori doing raids. (Well they all ate each other - 80% of Maori pre European were dark skinned easily fattened slaves farmed and eaten by a lighter skinned 'Ariki' thin wiry elite royal caste). So it was with some righteousness as well as British cunning that they armed the southern Maori who then with muskets launched a genocidal war on the north.. That plus measles & flu halved the Maori population and removed most of the elite. The British then liberated the slaves and outlawed cannibalism. The northern Maori fought with the British against the south bad west Maori 'rebels'. The Maori sued for peace and a treaty was signed that removed all sovereignty and made them subjects to the English crown where the English would protect them from each other. Land could only be sold to or via the Crown. Maori could live on their reservations with native custom but none did. The treaty of Waitangi is strikingly clear in that the Maori cede any claim and give up and die as an original society - all 3 clauses lock that in. Nothing in today's 'Maori' culture is authentic. The music - all European (Maoris did not have tonal music, the songs are missionary tunes or introduced - Poi dance is from Islands and Stick dance from old Malaya. The carvings and art - all European - Arabesques that was the fashion at the time. Original Maori had limited dash carving and no painting of objects. No written language - all the syntax & grammar plus vowel inflection is European. No technology - some lagoon canoes and wood or stone Neolithic tools. No food sources - like pigs or crops - they left that all behind, all they had was a weak inbred fox (now extinct), some rats and a weak dismal pacific yam. They ate out all the bird-life, didn't know how to farm the sea as were island people and so they turned to societal cannibalism. Today - no full blood or half blood left. No genuine tradition and almost all are offspring of Maori slave females sold to white settlers for muskets or food. -So more fake than the 'Sioux' or 'Cherokee' or 'Crow' who had at least retained some genuineness about who they were and their history. -Everything you 'saw or experienced' is Fake. A totally convected disneyfied tokenistic set of inventions fueled by a grievance culture of almost totally European people fetishing a false past bad history because it pays benefits.
'This Horrid Practice' - Professor Paul Moon, 'Behind The Tattooed Face' - Heretaunga Pat Baker, 'A History Of New Zealand Anthropology In The 19th Century' - H D Skinner
this is what happens when you tell non-maori only a bit of the truth it becomes all distorted like this piece of fiction lol
There’s no saving you I’m afraid