Index To All The Stop Co-Governance Videos by Stop Co-governance Publishing

INDEX TO STOP CO-GOVERNANCE VIDEOS

The content of most of the videos produced by the Stopcogovernance organisation have been recorded here.

Each page contains:

• The name of the video with an embedded link to the video on YouTube.

• The date of release if known.

• A short synopsis of the content.

• A longer bulleted and more complete record of the content.

• All but a few short videos have a ﬁve quesCon quiz on the video content. This can be used by individuals or as a discussion starter for a group.

Searching the issuu flipbook:

1. Go to the right side of the bottom menu.

2. Click on this icon .

3. Type your target word or phrase into the box that appears at the top.

4. Press the ENTER or RETURN key. Your target word appears highlighted throughout the flipbook text.

5. Use < and > to move between occurrences of the target word in the text.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 1

Jun 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori acCvist. He is advised by Māori acCvist Potaka. Luxon believes in Māori.

QUIZ

1. Who is Luxon’s adviser on Māori ma]ers?

2. What is the diﬀerence between Government and Private Land sovereignty?

3. What is the diﬀerence in the English meaning of ‘Tino rangaCratanga’ in the TOW compared to the current acCvists.

4. What does Luxon think ‘taonga’ means and how is this diﬀerent to the TOW meaning.

5. Why does Potaka avoid answering the quesCon: ‘Did Māori cede sovereignty in the TOW? ’

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Pataka is Luxon’s advisor on Māori ma]ers. Ref: John Robinson ‘Who Really Stole the treaty’ (Tross Publishing, 2024) calls Potaka a ‘Fox in the Henhouse’.

• Two types of sovereignty: Governmental sovereignty of a country; Private land Sovereignty (council laws must be observed). In the Treaty Of Waitangi (TOW) 540 chiefs ceded sovereignty to the Queen (Art 1) and were granted sovereignty over the land they owned (Art 2 S 1). ‘Tino rangaCra -tanga’ was used to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’ in 1840.

• From 1989 acCvists say it means: ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’. They think the Queen gave Māori over land for ever. This contradicts Art 1.

• VIDEO: PARLIAMENT QUESTION TIME:

• Willi Jackson quesCons Potaka about the fact that Māori ceded sovereignty. Potaka avoids answering four Cmes and changes the subject.

• Potaka’s thesis states that more poliCcal power needs to go to Māori; he slyly replies ‘the Crown would protect the ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’ of our people because the TOW says so.

• Shane Jones quotes Apirana Ngata. Potaka pretends to believe what Ngata wrote. This is a lie since Ngata wrote that Māori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in Art 1.

• VIDEO: TV JACK TAME INTERVIEWS LUXON:

• Luxon admits he lacks knowledge of TOW. He has an acCvist understanding of Art 2. He thinks ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’ means ‘partnership’ and not ‘cogovernance’, and thinks ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’.

• Luxon is waiCng for the Waitangi Tribunal to ponCﬁcate on whether Māori ‘ceded sovereignty’. He is unaware that 240 Ngapuhi chiefs signed the TOW and ceded sovereignty.

• Giving a special place to Māori is not equality. ‘Equal but’ indicates he believes Māori need a special place. He adds ‘there are many inequiCes’.

• Luxon is a closet acCvist. The Fast Track Bill has iwi all through it. He keeps MāoriﬁcaCon going.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 2

Jun 2024

Chris Luxon is a closet Māori acCvist. He believes in Māori partnership which is not in the TOW.

QUIZ

1. Who was the Māori member of the Waitangi Tribunal who changed the English meanings of the original Māori words?

2. How do we know Ngapuhi chiefs thought ‘toanga’ meant property?

3. What was the acCvist reason for changing ‘taonga’ to mean treasure?

4. What word was added to the Māori version of Art. 3 of the TOW?

5. Luxon thinks the TOW is ‘a partnership’. What did JusCce Cooke actually say the TOW was?

BULLET POINTS

• REVIEW OF PART 1

• Luxon thinks ‘Tino rangaCra-tanga’ means ‘authority’ rather than the TOW meaning of ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’.

• He thinks ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’ rather than the TOW meaning of ‘property’ (or cha]els). Ngapuhi chiefs used ‘taonga’ to mean ‘ﬂax, pork potatoes’

• He thinks the TOW is a ‘partnership’ ‘ because Judge COOKE said it was ‘akin to a partnership’.

• VIDEO: TV JACK TAME INTERVIEWS LUXON:

• Luxon admits he lacks knowledge of TOW.

• He has an acCvist understanding of Art 2. He thinks ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’ means ‘authority’

• TOW is a ‘partnership’ but not ‘cogovernance’. (Art 3 in Māori is the same as Busby’s ﬁnal English draj, except the word Māori was added to the Māori version.)

• The change of ‘taonga’ to mean ‘treasure’ was done by Sir Hugh Kawharu and it opened the gates of corrupCon, as ‘treasure’ is broad and vague and even includes the air waves.

• Luxon is waiCng for the Waitangi Tribunal to ponCﬁcate on whether Māori ‘ceded sovereignty’. He is unaware that 240 Ngapuhi chiefs signed the TOW and ceded sovereignty because they wanted a BriCsh government in NZ.

• Giving a special place to Māori is not equality.

• Luxon is a closet acCvist. The Fast Track Bill has iwi all through it. He keeps MāoriﬁcaCon going.

• NZ was misled by what Ardern kept secret; Luxon is doing the same. He is not reversing race-based legislaCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 3

Jun 2024

• Luxon believes the myth that TOW is a partnership. However there is no legal authority for this as has been explained by judge Anthony Willy.

QUIZ

1. Who was the legal expert who disproved the TOW was a partnership?

2. In what year did the idea of ‘partnership’ appear in the Waitangi Tribunal?

3. What was the important case that produced the ‘partnership’ concept?

4. Name two poliCcians who also said the TOW was not a ‘partnership’

5. Is it possible to run a democracy in which one racial/ethnic group has special status?

• Luxon believes the TOW is a partnership

• Ex-judge and lecturer Anthony Willy shows the TOW is not a ‘partnership’. The TOW does not state this. It is a myth.

• Māori acCvists, Eric Stanford, Chris Luxon believe it. There is no legal authority for this.

• The myth is based on the report from the ﬁve judges’ 77 page report in the State Owned Enterprises Case 1987. They someCmes used the term ‘partnership’ ﬁguraCvely, but none of them believed it was in the TOW. Willy’s analysis proves this.

• AcCvists have misread the report.

• Parliament can stop this myth. Seymour’s Bill deserves support, although Māori acCvists will kick up a storm.

• It stands to reason that Britain would have set up a partnership with a few low ranking tribes. This idea is backed by statements from Judge Willi, David Langey and Winston Peters.

• SeparaCon is the opposite of democracy. People in NZ are equal under the law, there cannot be one group with higher status than another.

• Tuki Morgan thinks the TOW is a partnership but says that Māori are superior and should have more status than other NZers.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 4

Jun 2024

• Luxon believes that TOW says the relaConship between Māori and Pākehā is a partnership or a cogovernance relaConship. Giving Māori a special status contradicts ArCcle 1 of the TOW.

QUIZ

1. Give two examples of how Luxon Māoriﬁed Air NZ.

2. What does Luxon believe will be the main advantage of co-governance?

3. Where in the TOW is co-governance menConed?

4. Luxon supports UNDRIP. Why is giving special rights to an ‘indigenous’ group incompaCble with democracy?

5. Why is the concept of co- governance inconsistent with Art.1 of the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• TV INTERVIEW: Moana & Chris Luxon

• Luxon has watched Moana’s show over the years. He does seem to be entranced with Māori

• When Luxon returned to NZ he Māoriﬁed Air NZ. He ‘went on a big journey, focused on Māori scholarships, allowed employees of to wear the moku and embraced Te Reo.

• Obviously believes the TOW is a partnership

• Despite being asked several Cmes Chris never deﬁnes co-governance. Complains that the government never deﬁned it and that it is essenCal to ‘bring people together’ around the TOW

• It is needed for iwi managing resources and for be]er Māori outcomes. DevoluCon allows for iwi control of local resources (beaches, DOC land etc), health, educaCon.

• Chris contradicts himself by saying we are all equal unCl the law.

• TOW does not menCon co-governance and is open to many diﬀerent interpretaCons [i.e. acCvist spin]

• Chris seems to be pro -co-governance. If Māori ceded sovereignty then this relaConship is impossible. He cannot give a deﬁniCon of co-governance because he would have to deny sovereignty.

• He thinks UNDRIP was ‘a good thing’. He does not understand that giving one subgroup special rights is unlawful in a democracy

• Chris is learning Te Reo and wished he had learned it earlier. He admires Kelvin Davis and Willi Jackson.

• Chris wants to befriend everyone, even opposiCon MPs. NZ needs a true leader.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 5

Jun 2024

• Luxon permits the wastage of taxpayer funds to support the Māori pracCce called rongoā. This contravenes the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907

QUIZ

1. What was rongoa?

2. Who was a tohunga?

3. Who pushed the Tohunga Suppression Act of 1907?

4. Which government corporaCon is supporCng the reintroducCon of rongoa?

5. What aspect of rongoa pracCce is likely to lead to negaCve eﬀects?

BULLET POINTS

• MĀORI HEALTH PRACTICES: RONGOA

• Pre-colonial Māori ‘medical’ pracCces were primiCve and not based on scienCﬁc rigour. Rongoā is akin to voodoo

• In the past tohungas held great power within the tribes

• The Tohunga Suppression Act 1907 was supported by Māori medical doctors and poliCcians

• In rongoā paCents & pracCcConers are related

• ACC supports and funds rongoā which contravenes the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907

• Since 2000 ACC has been oﬀering rongoā in more than 10,000 claims across 200 pracCConers. This covers 77,000 sessions

• 41% of people using rongoā are nonMāori

• Why is Luxon, who sets the standard for NaConal MPs, not stopping the waste of public f unds on the pracCce of rongoā?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 6

Jun 2024

• Luxon conCnues maintain separaCsm, apartheid and racism by allowing Māori business to pay low tax (17.5%) or no tax. This is unfair on other businesses and tax payers. Māori receive more in welfare than the provide inn tax.

QUIZ

1. What is the tax rate for Māori businesses compared to non -Maori businesses?

2. Is it desirable for NZ to have diﬀerenCal tax rates for diﬀerent ethnic groups?

3. Why do Māori corporaCons register as chariCes?

4. What is the diﬀerence between the cost of Māori welfare and the Māori tax take?

5. If some Māori businesses pay no tax and some pay a lower tax rate, who is covering the tax shoryall?

BULLET POINTS

• Inland Revenue Website: go to Businesses & OrganisaCons > Tax rates for businesses > Most businesses 28%, Māori businesses 17.5%

• Low tax rate for Māori businesses gives them an advantage and means they are not paying their fair shar of the tax burden.

• In 2011 Māori welfare exceeded the Māori tax take

• Māori corporaCons have bought up businesses and the government allows them to turn these businesses as chariCes to avoid paying tax.

• Thus NZ pays Māori corporaCons to take over the country

• Example: Ngai Tahu net worth was $1.27 billion in 2014. Tax free income was $157 million. $6.5 million was given to shareholders.

• Ngai Tahu se]lement in 1998 was $170 million. Bought ‘Go Bus’ for $1.3 billion and ran as a charity so paid no tax. Other companies cannot complete.

• Has 30 businesses paying no tax, so these are not paying their fair share of the cost of running NZ (Ref: NZ Centre for PoliCcal Research)

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 7

Jun 2024

• Luxon pushes Te Reo and MāoriﬁcaCon because he has an acCvist understanding of the TOW. He is naïve and does not realise that there is a Māori acCvist agenda to take over NZ by 2040.

QUIZ

1. What is the main objecCve of He Puapua?

2. What was the long term poliCcal goal of bilingual signage, teaching Te Reo and MāoriﬁcaCon in schools?

3. List some social staCsCcs that indicate Māori are not succeeding as much as Pākehā.

4. What is the largest ethnic/racial group in NZ?

5. What percentage of NZers are Māori and what fracCon of the group speak Te Reo?

BULLET POINTS

• He Puapua is a Māori plan to set up a dual government to take over NZ by 2040.

• According to the government CoaliCon Agreement work on He Puapua was to stop; this has not happened due to Luxon

• Luxon is moCvated by Māori acCvist misunderstandings of the TOW, i.e.

o TOW is a partnership

o ‘RangaCra- tanga’ means ‘chieﬂy authority’ not ‘ownership’

o ‘Taonga’ means ‘treasures’, not ‘property’

o ‘Kāwanatanga’ means ‘governorship’, not ‘sovereignty’

• Luxon is naïve and does not realise Māori acCvists (& Potaka) are pushing Te Reo as part of the grooming process towards tribal rule.

• Te Reo is used in EducaCon (via Pākehā teachers) to brainwash students into accepCng MāoriﬁcaCon culture/religion. (Te reo has limited use in the non-tribal world.) When at voCng age current children will vote more Māori into parliament for the takeover.

• ‘It is about Māori idenCty’ ‘so they stand out’. Māori already stand out in social staCsCcs i.e. unemployment, violent crime, drug use, welfare dependency etc. It would be be]er to improve these stats.

• By promoCng Te Reo Luxon does not realise he is pushing an idealogical agenda

• NZ has 19% Māori, but only 3% of the group speak Te Reo. There are now more Asians than Māori in NZ

• Luxon likes co-governance. Bilingual signs are idealogical. Bilingual naCons do not have a minority trying to take over.

• Before the 2023 elecCon NaConal promised to eliminate MāoriﬁcaCon and bilingualism. Luxon refuses to hold a referendum on Māori wards

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 8

Jun 2024

• Luxon and his government are funding apartheid, racism and separaCsm by giving Māori $800 million in the 2024 Budget. This contravenes the TOW.

QUIZ

1. What was the main objecCve of the Three Party CoaliCon Agreement of 2023?

2. What example of race-based iniCaCves appeared in the 2024 Budget?

3. Is the pay out of $80 million over 4 years for the Māori kapa haka programme jusCﬁable?

4. $800 million was allocated to Māori interests in the 2024 budget. Is any of this mandated by the TOW.

5. Why are the Māori acCvists so concerned about the Treaty Principles Bill?

• TreaCng Māori to special handouts is not in the TOW. People who cannot support themselves do need government help

• The CoaliCon Agreement pledged: ‘to improve outcomes for all NZers & not advance policies that seek to ascribe diﬀerent rights and responsibiliCes to NZers on the basis of their race or ancestry’.

• Race-based iniCaCves were funded in the 2024 Budget, breaking the CoaliCon Agreement (Ref: Muriel Newman)

• Māori received $800 million which is 7547 Cmes more than that received by other NZ cultures

• The CoaliCon has given Te MataCni $34 million over two years for a regional kapa haka programme and a further $48.7 million over three years from 2025. This is not jusCﬁed by the TOW

• There are 169 other cultural groups in NZ. These received a total of $17.886 million or $106,000 each per year while Māori get $0.5 billion per year

• Matariki gets $3 million

• NaConal supports bilingual signs

• From the Budget Māori received:

o $142 million for language

o $64 million for well-being

o $56 million for housing

o $48 million for assistance (????)

o $10 million to support tourism

o $182.3 for Whau ora which is exempt from the auditor general check

• Clearly NaConal is pushing co- governance and partnership. None are mandated in the TOW

• Māori acCvists fear the truth of the TOW being exposed by Seymour’s treaty Princ iples Bill

• The TOW sets up a parliamentary democracy; all NZers have the same rights

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

AcCvist Prime Minister Pt 9

Jun 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori acCvist. Māori acCvism. He is fuelling a freight train that is headed for disaster.

QUIZ

1. What were the 1840 English meanings for: Kawanatanga, RangaCratanga & Taonga?

2. What is the Māori acCvists’ interpretaCon of rangaCra-tanga and why is it signiﬁcant?

3. Why does Luxon not commit himself to one side of the ‘ceding sovereignty ’ discussion?

4. Why is it untrue to say that the TOW gave the Government power to rule over se]lers and not Māori?

5. What evidence does Rawiri WaiCC give to back up his asserCons?

BULLET POINTS

• TERMS ACTIVISTS HAVE TWISTED:

• ‘Kawanatanga’ means ‘sovereignty’ (lit. ‘governorship’). Modern acCvists say the TOW only gave the government authority to rule over se]lers. [This is contradicted by speeches of chiefs on 5 Feb 1840, Hobson’s instrucCons to pull out of NZ if sovereignty was not ceded etc.]

• ‘RangaCra -tanga’ was used to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’ in 1840. From 1989 acCvists say it means: ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’. They think the Queen gave Māori sovereignty over land for ever, even ajer it had been sold. Māori own all NZ, so can have their own government

• ‘Taonga’ originally meant ‘property’ or cha]els’ e.g. Cmber, ﬂax, pork, potatoes in 1840, i.e. property and land they owned. Modern acCvists say this means ‘treasure’ i.e. anything they like

• Luxon has an acCvist knowledge of the key words in the TOW.

• Luxon is unable to say whether Māori did or did not cede sovereignty for fear of losing votes from either side. Thus he has painted himself into a corner.

• RAWIRI WAITITI INTERVEW:

• Rawiri plays the vicCm card ajer Māori got $800 million in the 2024 budget

• Art 1: Māori did not cede sovereignty in the TOW. Māori gave permission to rule over se]lers only untrue.

• Art 2: Protected Māori exisCng rights parCally(?) untrue. Māori say government does not have sovereignty over Māori untrue. Treason. (Kohimarama resoluCon 1860 Queen had complete sovereignty.)

• Luxon’s understanding of the TOW is consistent with that of WaiCC

• Luxon’s freight train of ignorance is heading fast towards a train wreck

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 1

The Church leaders believe that Seymour’s Principles Bill will lead to racial division without giving any reasons. They seem to be ignorant of the fraud behind Māori claims.

• Le]er from 440 Church Leaders (CLs)telling MPs to vote against the Seymour Treaty Principles Bill

• Church leaders need to read the Busby’s ﬁnal English Draj from which the Māori translaCon was made

• CLs say Seymour’s Bill is creaCng racial division; to create peace the Bill should be dropped.

• However, if CLs side with the Māori acCvists a false peace will be achieved since the Māori acCvist claims are based on lies.

• NZ needs to expose the corrupCon behind the Māori elite and the poliCcians.

• In the CLs’ le]er no evidence is given that the BIll will create division. The Bill will create racial harmony.

• Where doe Seymour’s Principles Bill breach the Treaty?

• Bill Principle 1: The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders. This ﬁts TOW Art 1 where Māori ceded sovereignty.

• Bill Principle 2: The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiejainship of their land and all their property. This ﬁts TOW Art 2 sentence 1. In 1840 ‘property’ was translated into the Māori word ‘taonga’ which means literally property procured by the spear (i.e. through warfare). Property, including slaves, was more tribal than individuals at this Cme.

• In 1898 ‘taonga’ was translated as ‘treasures’. This is a mistranslaCon and a deceit and treaty fraud ramped up. E.g. Māori claimed the 5G cellphone network. Note the TOW does not agree to protect Te Reo.

• Maori want the government to pay for the preservaCon of their culture. Cultural preservaCon should be the responsibility of the cultural group. NZ’s other 169 cultures preserve their own cultures.

• The grievance industry is a racket. From 1974 the Māori acCvists have moved the goal posts.

• AcCvists fraudulently say the TOW promised Māori all land and resources in NZ. ‘RangaCratanga’ refers to tribally occupied land and possessions (i.e. cha]els) rather than ‘self-determinaCon’ etc as mistranslated in 1989

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 2

The Church leaders believe that Seymour’s Principles Bill will lead to racial division without giving any reasons. They inappropriately use Psalm 15 to just their claim based on historical ignorance.

• Le]er from 440 Church Leaders (CLs) quotes Psalm 15

• Are the CLs ‘blameless’? No, they have joined in with the corrupCon of Māori acCvists.

• Are the CLs ‘righteous’? No, making harmful accusaCons against Seymour is morally incorrect.

• Are the CLs ‘only speaking the truth’? No, They have made a series of untruths.

• Are the CLs ‘making no slander? No, they have slandered Seymour by accusing him of spreading division without any proof.

• Are the CLs ‘doing no wrong to a neighbour? No, they have been spreading Treaty misinformaCon to the public. E.g. the Bill is inconsistent with the Treaty, which is a lie. The spread the idea that the Treaty is a partnership between Crown and Māori. Spreading misinformaCon is not loving a neighbour.

• Are the CLs ‘casCng no slur on others’? No, they have insulted Seymour.

• Are the CLs ‘despising vile persons but honouring those who fear the Lord’? No, they do not appear to know right from wrong.

• Are the CLs able to ‘keep an oath when it hurts and do not change their mind’? No, they have insulted Seymour. Dr John Robinson’s recent book (Who Really Broke The Treaty?, 2024) shows that it is Māori rather than the Crown have breached the treaty, making virtually all se]lements frauds. It seems the CLs are history ignorant.

• Conclusion: The CLs use the quote ‘keep an oath when it hurts’ to jusCfy conCnued handouts for supposed injusCces. This is not borne out by history, yet they they believe the Bill should be stopped.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 3

While Church Leaders follow the Māori acCvists’ TOW interpretaCon, a careful study of the TOW shows the acCvist interpretaCon to be in error

BULLET POINTS

• TOW Preamble: If Māori cede sovereignty Britain would set aup a government to govern all the people of NZ

• TOW Art 1 :Māori cede sovereignty

• TOW Art 2 S1: Māori were to own their own tribal land. Māori sold 92% of their land. AcCvists say, incorrectly, Māori were to be given all the land and resources of NZ

• TOW Art 2 S2:Only the government could purchase Māori land

• Art 3: Granted Māori BriCsh ciCzenship. AcCvists say that Māori received the rights and responsibiliCes of BriCsh CiCzenship without being BriCsh ciCzens, which is ridiculous. Māori knew what they were signing

• The three principles in Seymour’s Bill perfectly align with the Treaty.

• AcCvists, and the church Leaders, believe Māori have superior rights, contrary to the Treaty. Both believe Māori are partners with the Crown. Britain would not have set this up

• Apirana Ngata (1922) conﬁrms that Māori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in the Treaty

• JusCce Willy conﬁrms that no partnership was involved in TOW

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 4

Church Leaders agree with acCvist Treaty interpretaCon and Government legislaCon that favours Māori acquisiCon of land and contracts.

BULLET POINTS

• Land can be reclassiﬁed (RMA) and the owner has no right to object.

• Māori can declare land wahi tapu, so the owner sells cheap to Māori.

• Government can buy large blocks of land and give to Māori as a Treaty se]lement. All such se]lements are fraud (See John Robinson, Who Broke the Treaty?, 2024.) Media do not usually report such deals

• Example: Government signed oﬀ police staCon contracts to Māori businesses rather than receiving tenders.

• The Church Leaders support this corrupCon, apartheid, and separaCsm.

• TOW Art 2 Sentence 1: ‘possession is translated as ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’. AcCvists say this means ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’. It just means ‘possession’. All Kiwis are chiefs over their possessions.

• ‘Taonga’ means ‘possession’ , rather than the late 20th Century meaning of ‘treasure’. All Kiwis have possessions which they treasure. The Bill aims to all NZers have ownership of their land and ‘treasure’.

• Art 2 was ﬁne unCl it was amended. By acCvist bureaucrats.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 5

The Church Leaders promote the falsehood that the Treaty was a partnership between Crown and Māori without giving any evidence.

• No reason is given for Syemour’s Bill not supporCng the Treaty

• CLs think Māori are partners with the Crown, but this is not in the Treaty

• CLs condemn the Bill without evidence. How does the Bill undermine the Treaty?

• Both courts and the Waitangi Tribunal are run by acCvists

• CLs say Bill distorts the Treaty without giving evidence

• CLs say Bill may destabilise and reduce cohesion without evidence

• The Cls’ version of is based on lies. Full and ﬁnal Treaty se]lements were made up unCl 1960.

• John Robinson says: “All Treaty se]lements are based on the Crown having broken the Treaty. Since that is not so [i.e. the Crown have not broken the Treaty], all such se]lements are a fraud. There is no jusCﬁcaCon for the conCnued existence of either se]lements or the Waitangi Tribunal.” (Who Really Broke The Treaty? Tross Publishing. 2024, p.65.)

• ColonisaCon has brought huge beneﬁts to Māori; brought from the gu]ermost to the u]ermost.

• The problem arises from land seller remorse. Land bought for a penny per acre is now worth thousands due to inﬂaCon and improvements. Māori beneﬁt from civic improvements

• CLs say the Treaty acts as a ‘moral and equitable compass for our democracy’. If one group (Māori) have superior rights over another (which is what CLs are promoCng then we are not living in a democracy we are living in an apartheid state. Obviously the BriCsh did not intend to set up an apartheid state in 1840.

• The le]er is bazar. The authors say the BriCsh set up an apartheid state. All the acCvists believe the same thing.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 6

Church Leaders agree with acCvist Treaty interpretaCon. While concerned with the BIll being divisive and spreading disinformaCon, they are spreading disinformaCon in the document. They give no evidence to back up arguments.

BULLET POINTS

Seymours’ original Principles: 1. The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders. 2. The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiejainship of their land and all their property. 3. All New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and duCes.

• Wellington bureaucrats changed Principle 2 so Māori have special rights–a fraudulent version of the Treaty (TOW) that maintains the corrupt status quo

• Church Leaders (CLs), acCvists, Luxon and Potaka are history ignorant.

• CLs say the Bill will lead to division, spread disinformaCon and hinder eﬀorts at healing and reconciliaCon. This is spin and no evidence is given

• Aotearoa, pushed by acCvists, is an incorrect name for NZ; Nu Crani was used in TOW.

• DisinformaCon comes from acCvists which the CLs agree with i.e. The Treaty

o is a partnership

o mandated a 2 Cer society

o mandated the formaCon of an apartheid state

o gave Māori special rights & privileges

o gave Māori the right to set up their own government

o allowed Māori to be appointed to governing roles (e.g. Māori wards)

o allowed Māori to be involved in the leadership of society, in all organisaCons, as of right.

o Is a sacred covenant. (God is not menConed.) It is a secular document.

o Is a living document and therefore the meaning can change

o Can only be understood by Māori language experts.

• 440 Church Leaders endorse this misinformaCon. ‘Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bi]er for sweet, and sweet for bi]er.’ Isiah 5:20

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 7

Church Leaders (CLs) oppose Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill because they are ignorant of the history of TOW and align with acCvist goals

BULLET POINTS

• AcCvist are in control of what the public knows about TOW and use it to ﬁt their goal to take over the country by 2040

• Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill has the potenCal to completely derail the Māori acCvist plan

• Māori acCvists employ 18 strategies to keep the takeover on track

• CLs are complicit with Māori acCvists in perpetuaCng the lie that TOW is a ‘sacred covenant’, when it is not. (It is clearly a secular document.)

• CLs think they are in a direct line to the missionaries who helped draj the TOW. Any resemblance is like chalk and cheese. Henry Williams said: ’That the naCves to whom I explained the nature of the Treaty understood the same I have no doubt.’ The chiefs knew there were many advantages for to Māori if Britain took control

• CLs say the chiefs did not sign up to BriCsh control.

• CLs are commi]ed to brainwashing their congregaCons with a false understanding of the TOW. They want: their ﬂocks to accept the acCvist understanding of TOW, not oppose the takeover of NZ and to join in with the Māori acCvist takeover of NZ.

• CLs want to pursue reconciliaCon, i.e. to keep cash and assets going to Māori acCvists and that NZ will ﬂourish under Māori tribal rule. This will result in fake unity.

• Cl’s should know the metaphor of a ‘house built on sand’

• Cl’s, through ignorance, want MPs to oppose Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill

• Let the evidence speak for itself

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Civil War is Coming Pt 1

Jul 2024

Luke Orbell is an example of a young Māori who has been radicalised will have social consequences.

QUIZ

1. What are the posiCve and negaCve consequences of colonisaCon on Māori?

2. Is Luke jusCﬁed in blaming the government for his ancestors not passing on ‘his culture’.

3. Beside colonisaCon what else could account for of the present shortcomings of Māori culture?

4. Luke imp lies that Māori land was stolen. How true is this?

5. According to the TOW, is the Government responsible for ‘maintaining Māori culture and language?

BULLET POINTS

• Luke Orbell, angry young person speaking in parliament, playing vicCm card, says:

o ColonisaCon is bad (This is CriCcal Race Theory doctrine)

o Pepeha (tribal sayings, proverbs) have been stolen from me because my forefathers did not pass on my culture

o It is the government’s job to pass on my culture

o The shortcomings of Māori culture is due to colonisaCon

o In South Auckland children have to leave school to support their families

o The educaCon system should be supporCng Māori culture

o Seabed mining should be banned.

o Give back our land, give back our language and our culture

• Māori sold 92% of their land

• It is not the government’s job to maintain Māori culture & language. Other cultures do this themselves without government support

• Luke has been radicalised, is history ignorant and will spread toxicity

• There will be social consequences from such radicalisaCon such as anarchy and civil war

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Civil War is Coming Pt 2 Jul 2024

By appoinCng Potaka and through his lack of acCon against MāoriﬁcaCon and cogovernance Luxon shows himself to be an acCvist who is helping move NZ towards civil war.

QUIZ

1. What did Luxon do for Air NZ that shows he has a soj spot for Māori culture?

2. What evidence do we have that Luxon as PM is conCnuing with MāoriﬁcaCon?

3. Give examples of Luxon’s acCons that are likely to fuel civil war?

4. In what ways has Luxon breached the CoaliCon Agreement.

5. Give two reasons that Luxon might use to jusCfy him blocking Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.

BULLET POINTS

• Many are angered that Luxon is taking the country further towards racism and apartheid. Radical Māori are angry; they want cash faster.

• Luxon is an acCvist and is fuelling civil war:

1. Despite the CoaliCon Agreement (CA) NaConal is reluctant to stop co-governance and MāoriﬁcaCon

2. Only 4 items are on the 90 day plan and He Puapua is sCll in progress

3. CA has 36 points to stop co-governance, without ACT this would be zero

4. He Māoriﬁed Air NZ

5. $800 of budget was given to Māori only

6. He is blocking Seymour’s Bill

7. He is furthering co-governance through FastTrack by involving iwi.

8. None of the items in the CA have been acConed.

9. He says nothing against MāoriﬁcaCon in parliamentary debates

10. He picked Potaka who is a Māori acCvist who holds a high posiCon and refuses to answer quesCons.

11. NaConal has done nothing to stop Ckanga

12. He has done nothing to stop the Marine and Coastal Act

• Luxon does not want to lose Māori votes, upset Māori acCvists, may be ignorant of Māori takeover, may be following UN UNDRIP agenda.

• Luxon has breached the CA

• Luxon is a stealth acCvist and is moving NZ to civil war.

VIDEO

NAME

Civil War is Coming Pt 3

Jul 2024

SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Chris Luxon is ignorant of NZ history and the Treaty. He has parallel beliefs to acCvist Rawiri WaiCC & so is an acCvist by stealth.

QUIZ

1. Does Luxon believe that Māori ceded sovereignty?

2. How does WaiCC think colonisaCon traumaCsed Māori?

3. How can ﬂora and fauna be considered intellectual property since the organisms were present before Māori arrived?

4. What was the 1840 meaning of kāwatanga’?

5. Is it fair that the Waitangi Tribunal can accept claims based on stories rather than more historically reliable evidence?

• Chris Luxon and Rawiri WaiCC believe the following:

• Māori did not cede sovereignty, TOW permi]ed government only of se]lers, Māori have the right to retain NZ resources, Māori can have a parallel government, Māori are indigenous, government should pay legal fees for Māori to sue government, colonisaCon traumaCsed Māori, Māori should receive special government funding, Māori must be appeased, poor Māori performance is society’s fault, Māori need special treatment (undemocraCc), ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’, Māori intellectual property includes ﬂora and fauna, Māori land was stolen, democracy must be tweaked to fund Māori, government should fund preservaCon of Te Reo, TOW supports ‘partnership’, ‘kāwatanga’ means ‘government’ rather than ‘sovereignty’, ‘rangaCratanga’ means ‘absolute authority’ rather than ‘ownership’ or ‘possession’, co-governance between Māori and Crown must be progressed by stealth rather than transparency, Māori do not have to use their own funds ($70 billion) for their growth and development, the Waitangi Tribunal (WT) must only hear Māori grievances against the government & not se]ler grievances against Māori, WT must accept claims based on stories etc rather than facts, only WT can say what the TOW means

• NaConal Party: can advance co- governance and MāoriﬁcaCon without campaigning for it, believes co-governance has worked well so should conCnue

• Luxon: thinks tribal rule is as good as democracy, works against equality (as per TOW Art 3) e.g. Fast Track Bill and $800 million to Māori in Budget, Te Reo is special, Ckanga is consistent with law, it is ﬁne for media to conCnue pushing acCvist propaganda, is Treaty and history ignorant,

• Luxon and WaiCC have similar beliefs. Luxon is an acCvist by stealth

• Majority of NZers are angry about the transfer of funds and assets to Māori acCvists. Civil war is a possibility

• AcCvists want more funds and power. Their appeCte is insaCable

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours Treaty Principle’s Bill. Now We Know Why Luxon Is Not SupporCng It

Nov 2024

Luxon is a closet AcCvist and believes in the Māori acCvist cause, partnership, co-governance and that Māori were tricked out of their land. This is counter to the beliefs of the voters.

QUIZ

1. Why does Luxon believe in cogovernance and partnership?

2. What was the reason that Luxon stopped Three Waters and Māori Health?

3. Do we know why Luxon will not support the Treaty Principles Bill?

4. Luxon believes Māori land was stolen. What evidence proves this is untrue?

5. What evidence is there that Luxon is a acCvist for Māori causes?

BULLET POINTS

• 11 Nov 2024 PM Press Conference, Sean Plunket

• Luxon is a closet ‘Māori’ AcCvist who believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. SupporCng the cause of acCvist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon cannot express these beliefs openly.

• Cracks in Luxons’ façade began to show.

• Pre-elecCon Luxon said he wanted to do the best for all NZers. Once in oﬃce it was obvious he wanted to build a robust economy based on the Big Four. Stopping Three Waters and Māori Health was for economic rather than ideological reasons.

• Sean Plunket stated and approved of the three principles in the bill. He asked Luxon which principles he liked or disliked.

• Luxon dislikes all 3 principles; ‘too simple to support’. He believes the Treaty has enabled Crown and Māori to work together and that it involves ‘diﬃcult and complex’ issues.

• Luxon would prefer to support the 2024 hikoi rather than support the Bill.

• Luxon supports the acCvist goals: dual government, special privileges for Māori and special status for Māori (two-Cer society).

• Plunket concludes that Luxon is happy with the status quo. Voters are unhappy with the status quo.

• Luxon is unable to jusCfy his reasons for opposing the BIll.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Gore – The Guinea Pig for the rest of us

Oct 2024

Gore District Council’s to underhandedly declare the area of land to contain locaCons of cultural signiﬁcance to Māori. Groundswell is developing opposiCon to the move.

QUIZ

1. How large was the culturally signiﬁcant area around Gore?

2. What features can be designated culturally signiﬁcant?

3. What happens to the land value when a site is decaled signiﬁcant to Māori?

4. What legislaCon can be used to challenge iwi declaring private land culturally signiﬁcant?

5. Is it fair that iwi can change the status of private land by declaring it culturally signiﬁcant?

BULLET POINTS

• Laurie Paterson of Groundswell, NZ

• Gore District Council for its long term plan has proclaimed 12,000 sq km of land around Gore to contains sites of cultural signiﬁcance to Māori e.g. land, water features and marae

• Groundswell has developed a pledge for locals to sign to oppose this.

• Councils around NZ have been propagandised and brainwashed by Māori acCvists.

• NaConal’s Potaka pushes this. He believes Māori in 1840 did not cede sovereignty.

• Gore is a test patch.

• The community was not consulted. This is happening by stealth and TOW misinform aCon.

• Dr Michael Basse] has wri]en an arCcle ‘Iwi Bandits at Work’.

• Through the RMA and landscapes or features can be declared of signiﬁcance to Māori. This reduces the land value and acCvists can buy the land cheaply. It is a giant scam.

• In the context of land designaCons, the term ‘appropriate consideraCons’ can be translated as ‘iwi will ﬁnd ways to shaj you’.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Luxon’s Coming Crisis Pt 1

Aug 2024

To educate the NZ public about Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill we are saturaCng the country with business cards that connect to the Stop CoGovernance YouTube site via a QR code

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• NZ is at a fork in the road, whether to conCnue turning towards tribalism or take the be]er route towards improving our democracy

• This means supporCng Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill

• To educate NZers a massive distribuCon of business cards is to be used.

• The QR code on the card takes the viewer to the Stop Co-governance YouTube Channel.

• Aware of the issues the viewer will likely support the Bill and wish to distribute cards.

• Cards cost 3c each plus postage i.e. about $38 for 1000.

• 70,000 cards went out in the ﬁrst week with 21 people delivering to many places in NZ

• Our Goal:

o 2000 people delivering

o No limit to the number of people delivering

o A card can be delivered several Cmes to a receiver

o Must cover all small towns

o Make a town or suburb ‘your patch’

o Remember you are ﬁghCng for your children or grandchildren

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Luxon’s Coming Crisis

Pt 2

Aug 2024

Luxon has said he will not support Seymour’s Treaty Bill beyond the ﬁrst reading to maintain Māori acCvist support. If enough people support the Bill Luxon may have to change his mind.

QUIZ

1. What number of submissions to the Treaty Bill is signiﬁcant and why?

2. What are the two poliCcal facCons that Luxon is trying to appease?

3. In future NZ can take one of two roads. What are the two alternaCve routes?

4. What was the diﬀerence in the percentage votes in the 2023 elecCon between NaConal, ACT and NZFirst and the rest?

5. If Luxon openly supported the Treaty Principles Bill, which party support would he lose?

BULLET POINTS

• NZ is at a fork in the road, whether to conCnue turning towards tribalism or take the be]er route towards improving our democracy

• Luxon is terriﬁed of Māori acCvists and will have to be resolute.

• Possible outcomes for Seymour’s Bill:

• Outcome 1: 300,000 plus public responses in support of the Bill mean that Luxon will have to change and support the Bill.

• Outcome 2: less than 300,000 plus public responses in support of the Bill means that Luxon will go with the Māori acCvists and tribal fraud will run rampant. However, he will have to deal with a large minority of 100,000+ angry voters.

• CalculaCon: Total votes in last elecCon =2,851,211. NaConal, NZ First and ACT received 52%. Greens, TPM and Labour 41%. The diﬀerence is 10.49% or c.300,000 voters.

• Luxon’s crises: (1) He rejects the bill and will be subject to the wrath of its supporter OR (2) He accepts the Bill and is subject to the wrath of Māori acCvists who will milk the crisis as an a]ack on Māori.

• Strategies: support the BIll, direct public to this website and distribute cards.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Mike Hosking on Our New race Based JusCce System

Oct 2024

Solicitor General (SG) has released new ProsecuCon Guidelines that direct prosecutors to go soj on Māori crime.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Solicitor General (SG) has released ProsecuCon Guidelines.

• From 1975 unCl now acCvists have released new policies, each containing a hidden agenda to mask what they are up to.

• SG directs to think carefully when Māori are being prosecuted. This suggests a sojening on dealing with Māori criminals which would result in more crime.

• This is race-based ideology proving that NaConal is not keeping to the coaliCon agreement. i.e. Luxon and Potaka are full steam ahead with MāoriﬁcaCon.

• The SG policy to make Māori crime staCsCcs appear be]er.

• If this policy is not race-based, how can it be explained

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty

Ignorance Costs (1)

Aug 2024

MPs accept decisions and misinformaCon from courts and the TOW due to ignorance, controversy, lack of Cme and lobbying by Māori acCvists.

QUIZ

1. What is the nature of the relaConship between the media and the Waitangi Tribunal and the Courts?

2. Some have proposed that Ckanga is NZ’s ﬁrst system of law. What are the possible shortcomings of following this asserCon?

3. Who said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’ and in what year?

4. What does Luxon think the relaConship is between Māori and the Crown based on TOW?

5. Why have poliCcians been the weak link between the Waitangi Tribunal and legislaCon?

BULLET POINTS

• Media treat Waitangi Tribunal (WT) and Courts as ‘gods’ whose judgements cannot be challenged. Both have been hijacked, ojen produce dogma rather than Truth & JusCce.

• Both propose Ckanga should be given the status as the ﬁrst NZ law. Gary Judd disagrees.

• The courts are about to give the beaches to iwi. This is not what Parliament intended. Courts overstep their mark. Judgements are someCmes ambiguous

• Luxon believes in partnership–Māori have authority over their ‘treasure’ and their land. He has misunderstood what JusCce Cooke said in 1987. Cooke said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. Judge Willy said Cooke never intended ‘partnership’.

• Luxon wants to Māorify NZ as he did with AirNZ. Instead of studying the TOW he has cherry-picked a court ruling and misinterpreted

• Under Luxon, MāoriﬁcaCon, separaCsm, apartheid, & racism are progressing at speed. Combining faulty & ambiguous court rulings with MP ignorance results in disaster and costly mistakes

• WT has been feeding MPs with misinformaCon e.g. ‘Māori did not cede sovereignty’. MPs should have TOW training so they can recognise when they are misled.

• In 1980s the TOW was reinterpreted. MPs: were ignorant, thought the topic too controversial so lej it to the courts, were too busy, were lobbied by Māori acCvists to appoint acCvist judges to courts & the WT. Parliament chooses not overrule decisions through MP ignorance.

• Judges are poliCcal appointments

• SoluCon is to vote for a strong prime minister

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty

Ignorance Costs (2)

The NaConal Government is pushing ahead with Te Mana o te Wai (Water Policy) as set up by Labour. Luxon and Potaka are forging ahead with cogovernance and MāoriﬁcaCon for water management

QUIZ

1. Did voters want NaConal to conCnue with Labour’s MāoriﬁcaCon 00policy?

2. Who are the NaConal Party’s main drivers of MāoriﬁcaCon?

3. Why is it dangerous for iwi to have say in council decisions on water use?

4. Does TOW mandate Te Mana o te Wai?

5. What are the advantages to Māori of pushing the belief that ’water has mana’ ?

BULLET POINTS

• Peter Williams Le]er

• NaConal was voted in to eliminate cogovernance but is acceleraCng it

• For Te Mana o te Wai (TMOTW) (part of 3 Waters) the government is conCnuing down Labour’s path.

• PoliCcians can stop iwi being involved with fresh water and instruct bureaucrats to follow direcCons with a signature.

• Luxon and Potaka are pushing co-governance and MāoriﬁcaCon and telling bureaucrats to conCnue Labourer’s TMOTW policy.

• Māori think water is a spiritual being and only they understand it

• Courts have been inﬁltrated with acCvist judges and their decisions must be regarded with suspicion.

• All freshwater and runoﬀ will be subject to TMOTW. Māori are making this up to harvest money the idea that water has mana is a modern invenCon. Iwi must give consent to change the race-based high water standards, which is what Labour wanted.

• Parliament is supreme and can reverse previous government statutes. However, Luxon and Potaka are overruling everything.

• David Parker’s statement allows Māori to be involved in decision making re freshwater values. This allows iwi to make up policy council to council. A scam. Māori will get their tentacles into all councils.

• Councils do not recognise how dangerous this government is, as iwi can overrule community needs and raise costs. Money could be be]er used for community projects. Rates increase and the community gets poorer.

• Judith Collins thinks TMOTW must go ahead due to the Treaty (TOW). This is wrong. She is TOW ignorant. All land, other than privately owned land, was given to Britain to govern. TOW guaranteed private property to all NZers.

• The le]er does not use speciﬁc points in TOW to support arguments.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty Ignorance Costs (3)

Treaty misinformaCon abounds. Luxon and Potaka are forging ahead with co-governance and MāoriﬁcaCon and controlling Judith Collins’ water management.

QUIZ

1. What ruse do acCvists use to confuse the public when they refer to the TOW?

2. Give some examples of misinformaCon acCvists spread about the TOW?

3. Where in the TOW does it say Crown must protect land, forest and ﬁsheries for Māori?

4. Apart from the Waitangi Tribunal what other establishments are the source of TOW misinformaCon that uses Kawharu’s translaCon?

5. Which ArCcle of the TOW is the best counter argument to Māori having the right to govern water resources?

BULLET POINTS

• AcCvists refer to TOW only generally and avoid speciﬁcs. Ojen this is to confuse the public

• EXAMPLES of TOW misinformaCon:

o Māori have special freshwater rights

o Crown must teach Māori culture in schools

o Crown is in partnership with Māori

o Crown must protect land, forest and ﬁsheries for Māori. (Art 2 says the Government will protect land, dwelling and property.)

o Māori must have full parCcipaCon in the running of the country.

• Public presumes what Māori acCvists say is true. Mostly it is not.

• Peter Williams Le]er Prt 2

• Judith Collins is protecCng Labour’s Mahuta’s co-governance policies. Probably due to Luxon’s direcCon as he is pro-co -governance

• Collins refuses to publicly release informaCon about water management.

• Courts also ojen make up what the TOW says, someCmes using Kawharu’s revisionist meanings for Māori words.

• Because they ceded sovereignty Māori have no right to govern water resources.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 1

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims

QUIZ

1. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

2. Who is responsible for checking the veracity of claims from the WT?

3. How many claims were unse]led by late in the 19th Century?

4. Approximately how many claims have yet to be se]led as at 2024?

5. Which group is the most powerful in determining the meaning of the arCcles in the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed by Sco]y Morrison ( ‘Marae’)

• Potaka’s thesis is an acCvist manifesto

• Paul Goldsmith is Minister for Treaty NegoCaCons.

• Waitangi Tribunal (WT) is corrupt and produces corrupt reports for government that are not fact checked for history. Mike Butler: (Twis2ng the Treaty) AcCvists undermine the TOW. PoliCcians are history ignorant or too busy to check veracity

• 10,000+ claims are sCll unse]led

• Bureaucrats in government are working with acCvists

• 1882: 9 claims to se]le; 2009: 2,034 to se]le; 2024: 10,000+ to se]le (each mulCmillion $)

• Only the WT, stacked with acCvists, is allowed to say what the TOW means.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 2

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims

QUIZ

1. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

2. For the years 19892019 what was the total sum of TOW se]lements in billions of $?

3. If the sum paid per claimant is $30 million. What would be the total for the current 10,000 claimants?

4. NZ’s GDP is about S550 Billion. IN the next few years is bankruptcy a likely outcome for NZ?

5. Who is ulCmately responsible for checking the veracity of WT claims but seldom do?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• Total Govt Treaty pay outs 1989-2019 = $4.3 billion. This is $30 million per claimant

• For 10,000 claimants the total is $300billion. This is 75% of NZ GDP in 2023 of $405billion. Eventually this will cause bankruptcy

• The Waitangi Tribunal (WT) claims are not fact checked, it is a racket. The WT must be closed

• WT is a giganCc racket since the T accepts stories, memories etc as facts. David Round (Canterbury University) says WT has to stop.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 3 Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• The government is to transfer the whole of the conservaCon estate to Tribal AuthoriCes, so visitors will have to pay a fee

• Ajer the Tūhoe Urewera Se]lement (2014) Tūhoe burned down the huts

• Privately zoned land can be made Wahi Tūpuna and given to iwi.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 4

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims

QUIZ

1. Why does the Māori Crown RelaCons Oﬃce have to be informed of land that is up for sale?

2. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

3. Who buys the land that is put into the NZ Land Bank?

4. Approximately how many properCes are currently in the NZ Land Bank?

5. What is the ulCmate fate of land that has been put in the land Bank?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• Se]lements involve Department of ConservaCon and LINZ

• According to the Treaty Se]lements Landbank and the Māori ProtecCon Mechanism the Māori Crown RelaCons Oﬃce has to be informed of surplus land and it is land banked for Māori.

• Much money is paid by government for land banking. This land belonged to New Zealanders but is used by government to give to Māori for se]lements

• There are 900 properCes in the land bank on the LINZ website which is managed by Toitū Te Whenua

• Māori can apply to the Waitangi Tribunal (WT) and this is approved by Potaka’s Crown RelaCons Oﬃce.

• In this way taxpayers pay for these properCes to be given to Māori.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 5 Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims

QUIZ

1. Who is currently supervising the movement of cash and assets to Māori?

2. What two Government organisaCon are acCvely involved in land dealing to achieve TOW se]lements?

3. Rather than appeasement of Māori acCvists, what approach should poliCcians take to WT claims?

4.In what year were full and ﬁnal se]lements paid out under the Sim Commission ruling?

5. How will non-acCvist New Zealanders react when they ﬁnd they have lost the beaches and DOC land?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• Potaka is secretly supervising the movement of cash and assets to Māori

• 10,000+ Se]lements involve Department of ConservaCon and LINZ

• Generous se]lements have not stopped Māori acCvist protests which conCnue. This is a pot of gold. Appeasement only encourages more se]lements. (Mike Butler)

• Se]lements were supposed to promote racial reconciliaCon, but racial ill feeling is now at boiling point.

• Treaty se]lements have rewri]en history as the claims are based on anecdotes and stories in place of facts. Waitangi Tribunal spins history.

• Most grievances were se]led by 1960 through the Judge Sim Commission. Full and ﬁnal payments were then paid out.

• There are 10,000+ claims to go

• Meanwhile we are losing beaches and Department of ConservaCon land

• History Ignorant MPS + Corrupt Waitangi Tribunal (WT) = Disaster

• The WT should be closed down. (Michael Basse] in 2004!) This involves all New Zealanders and there should be an open public debate.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 6 Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims.

QUIZ

1. In the TOW of what four things did the Government promise Māori?

2. Tino rangaCratanga appears in Art. 2 of the TOW. What did that mean in 1840?

3. What is the twisted late 20th Century meaning of Cno rangaCra-tanga?

4. Which arCcle of the TOW contradicts the modern meaning of Cno rangaCra-tanga?

5. What is the percentage of land that Māori have sold?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• AcCvists believe that the Treaty (TOW) jusCﬁes going beyond se]lements over Cme. i.e. there is no end to resCtuCons. This is a lie

• In the TOW Britain promised Māori:

o A government if sovereignty was ceded

o Ownership of their own land & property

o That the government would buy their land

o BriCsh ciCzenship

• Ajer ﬁnal se]lement a series of governments have been sucked in to give ‘top ups’ or inﬂaCon adjustments which are not in the TOW

• These are jusCﬁed by mistranslaCon or twisCng of words in the TOW

• E.g. ‘Possession’ or ‘ownership’ was given in the TOW as Cno rangaCra-tanga. The term was twisted to mean ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’ i.e. Māori did not cede sovereignty

• 540 chiefs ceded sovereignty in TOW, yet acCvists say ‘Honour the Treaty’.

• Potama is basing his ideas on a falsehood; Māori sold 92% of their land and thus lost sovereignty of their individual land as well.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 7

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is pushing 10,000+ se]lement claims including those for land Māori sold.

QUIZ

1. Use the second sentence of Art. 2 of the TOW to explain what the Government wanted to avoid when Māori sold their land?

2. Immigrants wanted land. Why were Māori so keen to sell their land?

3. What did Judge Sim say about the grievance se]lements in 1960?

4. How much more money has been paid to Māori claimants since 1960 because they claim their land was stolen?

5. In the claim process chain: Iwi > Waitangi Tribunal > PoliCcians > Parliament, which appears to be the least eﬀecCve link in breaking the chain?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• TOW Art 2: Government protects Māori ownership of their land unCl they sold their land.

• AcCvists say the Government promised Māori land whether they sold it or not, forever. This is a lie and ridiculous. When land is sold, ownership is transferred to the purchaser.

• PoliCcians, in ignorance, agreed with acCvists.

• ‘Māori were as keen to sell [land] as se]lers were to buy.’ (Bain A]wood (2022))

• Māori sold 92% of their land (Mike Butler. Land sold, not ‘lost’ BreakingViews.co.nz. 19 November 2023 )

• PoliCcians since 1975 have been sucked in by acCvists. Billions of dollars have been given away based on lies.

• Judge Sim Royal Commission 19271960 achieved full and ﬁnal se]lements by 1960.

• Nearly $5 billion in compensaCon has been paid out since 1960 for land Māori sold.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 8

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori acCvist and is supports se]lement claims and eventually a complete takeover of NZ

QUIZ

1. What Māori term do acCvists use to jusCfy Māori having ‘unqualiﬁed chiejainship’ over all NZ?

2. Why is this belief inconsistent with Art.1?

3. Māori acCvists believe precolonial NZ was a Māori paradise. What facts exist to show that this belief is false?

4. From the media and other organisaCons, such as schools, what local propaganda and MāoriﬁcaCon have you noCced?

5. Māori claim they are indigenous. How do beliefs about canoes and death indicate they were colonists?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Sco]y Morrison (Marae)

• Potaka thinks Māori have Cno rangaCratanga over all NZ and that TOW guaranteed Cno rangaCra- tanga over NZ for ever

• Māori acCvist propaganda campaigns have inﬁltrated many insCtuCons since 1975. People have been taught that colonists stole land and created emoConal damage to Māori resulCng in obesity, criminality, drug abuse, violence etc

• Māori acCvists believe precolonial NZ was a Māori paradise. There is no historical evidence for such; the opposite was in fact true

• Māori acCvists aim to capture parliament & therefore NZ.

• Example of propaganda in NZ schools: comic Te TiriC O Waitangi.

• Māori acCvists are using 18 psychological strategies. Refer book: The Psychological Takeover of NZ available at stopcogovernance.kiwi

• Māori acCvists claim Māori are indigenous but there is evidence they were not the ﬁrst se]lers

• Pre-1840 Britain acknowledged that NZ was a sovereign state and that Māori had sovereignty.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Seymour’s Bill: Does It Create Division or Not?

Sep 2024 Due to historical ignorance protestors think Seymour’s Bill will create racial division. Māori acCvists aided by the Big Six have been pushing MāoriﬁcaCon and co-governance since the 1960s.

QUIZ

1. By what year in the 20th Century were full and ﬁnal TOW se]lements thought to have been made?

2. What Act in what year changed the legal deﬁniCon of Māori?

3. What was the consequence of incorporaCng the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW into the 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act?

4. What documents in 2020 revealed Māori acCvists want to control NZ by 2040.

5. Who are the ‘Big Six’ and what has been their agenda?

BULLET POINTS

• Seymour at ACT meeCng in HasCngs

• Protestors believe Seymour is creaCng disharmony and is against the TOW. Security removed protestors while Police are inacCve.

• Full and ﬁnal Treaty se]lements had been made by 1960.

• In 1940s-1960s NZ was peaceful. Disharmony has been developed over the decades since

• 1974 Māori Purposes Act changed the legal deﬁniCon of Māori, sowing the ﬁrst seeds of resentment against Māori

• 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act. Rogue James Freeman English version allowed acCvists to say the TOW meant whatever they wanted. Treaty interpretaCons were unchallengeable

• 1975 Treaty Principles were introduced allowing more freedom of interpretaCon

• 1984 TOW claims were allowed back to 1840 which on-Māori saw as very unfair

• 1986 Kawharu made fraudulent TOW translaCons

• 2020 He Pua pua and MaCke Mai Aotearoa revealed Māori want to control NZ by 2040

• The gravy train conCnued and racial division increased through the decades

• MāoriﬁcaCon was driven by the Big Six: Māori Party, Māori academics, Māori MPs, the media, white woke bureaucrats and academics and history ignorant MPs. They fed NZ with misinformaCon to pit Māori against non-Māori

• Many ended up haCng non -Māori for what they perceive non-Māori have done to Māori in the past. Non-Māori resent the Big Six for what they perceive they are doing to NZ.

• Is Seymour’s Bill creaCng division? No. It is the Big Six. MPs could have stopped this

• [Churchill Analogy]

• Protestors think Seymour is against the TOW, Act have no mandate and a referendum would be divisive.

• Seymour’s Principles match TOW perfectly.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Madness of Te Mana O Te Wai

Aug 2024 Māori acCvists are working on controlling organisaCons in NZ in order to take over the country. To educate the public business cards are available for community distribuCon.

QUIZ

1. Name some enCCes or organisaCons that acCvist Māori now control or are working to control.

2. What is the jusCﬁcaCon for using the term ‘sophisCcated tribal coup’ to describe how acCvist Māori took or are taking control of these organisaCons?

3. What is the role of MP Tama Potaka in the CoaliCon Government?

4. What are the TWO goals of the Stop cogovernance movement?

5. What will be the result if these goals are achieved?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori acCvists are a]empCng or have taken control of:

o Water (To Man O Te Wai)

o Parliament bureaucracy

o Beaches

o The Waitangi Tribunal

o Real Estate

o Medical Centres

o DOC estates

o Local Councils

o The RMA

o The Health System

o ImmigraCon

o The Police

o The complicit and corrupt media

• This amounts to a sophisCcated Tribal Coup under the watch of an acCvist PM and his acCvist Māori advisor Potaka.

• Our Goals:

o To reach and acCvate NZers with the truth about the Treaty and to expose what acCvists are up to

o To stop co-governance and the MāoriﬁcaCon of NZ

• The Result: The restoraCon of democracy and the end of apartheid, racism and separaCsm.

• AcCon: inun daCng your local communiCes with business cards which have a QR to link the Stop-Co -governance website. Here cards may be purchased for 3c each and may be lej on car windscreens, le]erboxes etc or given to people during casual meeCngs.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Making A Submission For The Treaty Principles Bill Made Easy

Nov 2024

How to make a submission

QUIZ NA

• Steps in making a submission on the Principles Bill

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 1

Jul 2024

At least half of NZers do not understand what is involved in the Treaty Principles Bill. PM Ardern exhibits ignorance of TOW although she uses it to promote her socialist agenda.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• About 50% of voters say do not understand the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB), parCcularly in Canterbury. The Green and Māori ParCes believe they understand the TPB well.

• The so-called principles have been decided in secret so that the general public has remained ignorant of the ma]er.

• When asked PM Ardern was unable to recite the ArCcles of the Treaty (TOW) without prompCng.

• Ardern used the TOW as a Trojan Horse, to promote her communist ideas. For this deviousness she was known as ‘The Witch’.

• Ardern believes that school pupils are being well educated in the TOW. Evidence is that they are being brainwashed with TOW acCvism.

• Media collaborate with Māori acCvists to spread TOW misinformaCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt

Jul 2024

AcCvists say that Māori deserve compensaCon for the eﬀects of colonisaCon. They oppose all New Zealanders being treated equally and want Matarangi Māori to be in the science curriculum.

QUIZ

1. Does Art. 3 of the TOW provide special status for Māori?

2. Why is Māori culture inappropriate as part of a science curriculum?

3. What is the diﬀerence between Sir Apirana Ngata’s and Rawiri WaiCC’s understanding of the eﬀect of colonisaCon on Māori?

4. What social indicators prove that Māori society is not ﬂourishing?

5. What is the reacCon of non-Māori when Māori are observed receiving large Government handouts for perceived historical wrongs?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori think they are special, but Art 3 of TOW aﬃrms that all NZ ciCzens have equal status. This is what 540 chiefs wanted when they signed the TOW

• Rawiri WaiCC (Te PāC Māori MP) complains that Māori are not geÜng enough funding from the Government for Health and educaCon

• There has been a push to have Matarangi Māori (a modern word for Māori culture, myths etc) taught in NZ Science classes. This is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of Science. Truths in Science are global, not local.

• Sir Apirana Ngata would have disagreed with the current acCvist account: ‘Let me acknowledge ﬁrst that, in the whole of the world I doubt whether any naCve race has been so well treated by a European people as the Maori’.”

• WaiCC uses all the advantages of colonisaCon but thinks Māori have been traumaCsed by the advantages they have received.

• Social indicators show Māori are not ﬂourishing although WaiCC also thinks Māori need no help.

• Māori conCnue to complain to receive compensaCon for past perceived wrongs

• Funding Māori culture and not others leads to resentment and division

• For Māori acCvists the end game is not partnership; it is the takeover of New Zealand.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 3

Jul 2024

Māori acCvists feart the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB) because Māori language and culture will be a]acked and their takeover of NZ will be stalled. The public can be educated about this via brochures and ﬂiers.

QUIZ

1. What Dis-funcConal African country has been cited as a possible model for a future NZ?

2. Explain why Māori acCvists dislike the TP Bill when it ensures all NZers will be treated equally by the law?

3. Thomas Sowell said: ‘When people get used to preferenCal treatment, equal treatment seems like discriminaCon.’ How does this apply to Māori acCvists?

4. What eﬀect might the TP Bill have on the Māori acCvist plan to take over NZ by 2040?

5. Where does the idea that ‘Māori are special and should receive special treatment’ originate?

BULLET POINTS

• Without acceptance of the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB) NZ will be like Zimbawe

• DefeaCng corrupt informaCon from the Waitangi tribunal and Māori acCvists counterinformaCon can be spread to the general public via brochures and ﬂiers.

• Māori acCvists say the TPB breaches the TOW and will hurt Māori. ACT says everyone should be treated equally in a democracy as per the TOW.

• There is no point in consulCng with Māori radicals as their understanding is a long way oﬀ from what the TOW intended.

• Māori today think they are superior . Sir Apirana Ngata said: ’It was the first arCcle of the Treaty which transferred the chiefly authority of your ancestors, affecCng you and future generaCons forever’. The Treaty ‘made one law for the Māori and Pākehā. I you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.’

• Why are Māori so angry about having a clearer idea of what the TOW means? They think their culture is under a]ack because they may lose funds that are not given to other cultural groups. Other groups gain li]le government support to promote their language etc.

• Thomas Sowell: ‘When people get used to preferenCal treatment, equal treatment seems like discriminaCon.’

• AcCvists think that to review the TOW would curtail the Māori language.

• The real issue is that Māori do not want the MāoriﬁcaCon of NZ to stall as the takeover of NZ would also stall.

• A corrupt interpretaCon of the TOW spreads the idea that Māori are special and therefore should receive special treatment.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 4

Jul 2024

Tame’s programme is taxpayer funded to push TOW misinformaCon. Māori acCvists and protestors do not understand Seymour’s Bill. Luxon aligns with the Māori acCvists.

QUIZ

1. How much funding was paid out by the PIJ Fund in the last round?

2. Give two examples of lies that have been spread about the TOW by the media?

3. What evidence is there that John Tamahiri believes the TP Bill will rewrite the TOW?

4. What ability do Māori lack according to Alan Duﬀ?

5. What two ideas does Luxon hold that align him with Māori acCvists?

• Jack Tame‘s interview with David Seymour

• Tame’s programme is ﬁnanced by the Public Interest Journalist Fund (i.e.a bribe). This cost the taxpayers $834,000 in the last round. To receive this money you were required to support co -governance and MāoriﬁcaCon and spread the lie that Māori did not cede sovereignty in the TOW. It is obvious Jack is a faithful acCvist.

• Video of protestors & John Tamahiri: ‘We will not be erased’, ‘It will put Māori back to the dark ages’, ‘First protest is being Māori’, ‘Māori’ will not sit idly by while the TOW is meddled with’.

• These comments show Māori do not understand the Bill and ignore that the WT has been twisCng the treaty for decades. The government has treated Māori well over the years, as Sir Apirana Ngata has said.

• It is Cme for Māori to clean up their own life style deﬁciencies. Alan Duﬀ says: Māori lack the ability to self-evaluate. They cannot contemplate Pākehā success in posiCve terms because that would force them to selfevaluate themselves.

• Winston Peters: We now have Māori overrepresentaCon in parliament. Why protest?

• Luxon says the TOW is not being changed. He aligns with the acCvists, being in favour of cogovernance and MāoriﬁcaCon.

• Such comments are designed to give the impression that the majority, rather than a minority, is against Seymour. Opponents aim to isolate and discredit him.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 5

Jul 2024

DerivaCons of Principles from the TOW are confused because there are two extant English versions (Li]lewood & Freeman) and Kawharu’s ahistorical retranslaCons.

QUIZ

1. What is the name for and date of the ﬁnal English draj of TOW that was translated into Māori?

2. Who were the two translators of the TOW into Māori on the 4 th Feb 1840?

3. What did the Government promise to do in each of the TOW arCcles?

4. Which English version of the TOW has been falsely used to match to the Māori version?

5. In 1986 Kawharu changed the meaning of three words in the TOW. What were thethree words and what were the changes in the English meanings?

BULLET POINTS

• 9 copies of the TOW survive that were signed

• 8 Māori versions signed by 540 chiefs

• 1 English version signed by only 42 chiefs

• The English version is the rogue James Freeman version, cobbled together from notes ajer Waitangi by a clerk.

• The authenCc English version (kept n secret at Archives NZ) is the Li]lewood Draj. This was translated into Māori by Henry and Edward Williams on the evening of 4 Feb 1840

• Principles from the TOW are:

o Māori ceded sovereignty so the BriCsh could set up a democraCc government. (No parallel Māori government was intended.)

o Government would protect all peoples’ land and cha]els

o Māori were granted BriCsh ciCzenship without special rights.

• Any consideraCon about the meaning of the TOW should include the Preamble and AﬃrmaCon

• Modern translaCons are suspect because:

o They use the rogue Freeman English version instead of the authenCc Li]lewood English version

o In 1986, WT claimant Hugh Kawharu changed the 1840 meaning of:

§ kāwanatanga from ‘sovereignty’ to ‘governorship’

§ Cno rangaCra-tanga from ‘ownership’ to ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’

§ Taonga from ‘property procured by the spear’ to ‘treasures’

• Māori acCvist claim that only Māori translators (e.g. Melanie Nelson), who lack historical knowledge, understand the TOW

• Seymour’s Principles are an accurate summary of TOW, faithful to its true meaning and intent.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 6

Jul 2024

The ﬁnal draj of the TOW and the Māori translaCon were completed on 4 Feb. 1840. Next day discussion followed with the signing on 6 Feb. By Sep 1840 more than 500 chiefs’ signatures had been collected from 50 NZ sites.

QUIZ

1. Who were the two men who translated the English TOW into Māori.

2. Who was present and what happened at TiTi Marae in the ajernoon of 5th February?

3. How many chiefs signed the TOW on 6 Feb. 1840?

4. What was the eﬀect of the TOW on the document signed by the ConfederaCon of Chiefs?

5. Between Feb. and Sep. 1840, how many Treaty signing locaCons were visited and how many signatures were collected?

BULLET POINTS

• Jack Tame states the ﬁcCon of the diﬀerent English and Māori versions of TOW

• 29 Jan 1840 Hobson arrived

• A team had drajed the Busby signed English version of the Treaty by 4pm on 4th Feb.

• That evening Henry Williams translated the draj into Māori. He had arrived in 1823 and was accomplished in Māori and produced the ﬁrst Māori dicConary. His son Edward who was a ﬁrst rank Māori speaker, helped

• The Māori version was then transferred to dog skin. This was discussed with chiefs at TiTi Marae They understood clearly what they were signing. Williams said: ’There can be no doubt’.

• 6 February 52 chiefs signed TOW, 26 six had previously joined the ConfederaCon. The TOW cancelled the ConfederaCon document.

• 17 Feb 1840 Colenso printed 200 copies of the Māori version. There were 50 signing locaCons around the coast of NZ. From Feb to Sep 1840 500+ signatures were collected.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 7

Jul 2024

The Busby English and Māori versions of the TOW mirror each other. T he chiefs knew that they were ceding sovereignty and that Britain would protect them from the French.

QUIZ

1. What TWO features diﬀered between the ﬁnal English draj and the Māori translaCon?

2. Which European country did the Māori chiefs believe the BriCsh could prevent invading NZ?

3. What opinion did Rev. Samuel Warren have about the understanding of the chiefs at Waitangi?

4. What evidence is there from the BriCsh Parliament that Māori ceded sovereignty?

5. Why is it not possible to run a democracy when Māori acCvists do not believe their ancestors ceded sovereignty in 1840?

BULLET POINTS

• TOW

• 4 Feb ﬁnal English draj was completed and translated to Māori version. The diﬀerence between the versions was the date and the inserCon of the word ‘Māori’ in ArCcle 3 before the word ‘people’.

• Rev. Samuel Warren was at Waitangi for the signing. In 1863 he wrote: ’My impression at the Cme was that the naCves perfectly understood that, by signing the treaty, they became BriCsh subjects … and justly thought they had done a pre]y good stroke of business when they placed the BriCsh lion between themselves and the French eagle.’

• Did Māori cede sovereignty? According to historian Bain A]wood who has studied BriCsh parliamentary records ‘all persons [in NZ] lay within the BriCsh Crown.’ (Lord Stanley 1843).

• Māori acCvists are lying when they say Māori did not cede sovereignty. Britain established democracy, not apartheid.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 8

Aug 2024

English and Māori versions of the TOW are idenCcal. The issue is confused by the rogue James Freeman English version (JFRV). AcCvists use the JFRV for personal gain.

QUIZ

1. Why should the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW not be used in legislaCon?

2. Why was a copy of the JFRV used to collect signatures at Waikato Head?

3. Why was Lieutenant Governor Hobson unable to supervise all the Treaty signings?

4. What advantages are there for Māori acCvists in using the JFRV?

5. Why do acCvists criCcise the translaCon abiliCes of Henry and Edward Williams?

BULLET POINTS

• English and Māori versions of the TOW on 6 Feb 1840 were mirror images

• 1 Mar Hobson had a stroke. The original English draj was lost.

• Third class clerk, James Freeman (secretary) ‘played up’ and invented his own ﬂowery version of the TOW using discarded notes. Why this happened it not clear. His version (JFRV) did not match the original English draj.

• Rev. Maunsell used both Colenso’s printed version of the Māori Treaty to read to the chiefs when he was collecCng signatures at Waikato Head. Maunsell had to use the JFRV for the overﬂow of chief signatures. Chiefs believed they were signing the Māori version.

• The two versions were pinned together. The JFRV from Waikato Head was signed by Hobson who was very sick at the Cme.

• The JFRV should have been destroyed and only the Māori version used.

• Hobson said that the TOW was the Māori document signed on 6 Feb 1840 which was what all chief agreed to. Therefore the JFRV is irrelevant.

• The Māori acCvists pounced on the JFRV as the English version because it menCons forests and ﬁsheries, so there is more for Māori claimants to gain.

• The Waitangi Tribunal uses the JFRV to prove that Henry and Edward Williams were incompetent translators which is fraud.

VIDEO

NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 9

Aug 2024

The evidence shows that the Li]lewood English Draj of the TOW is genuine. It should replace the rogue James Freeman version which makes the current Waitangi Tribunal Act 1975 illegiCmate.

QUIZ

1. Where did the Li]lewood Treaty reappear in 1989?

2. What work was lawyer Henry Li]lewood engaged in in Waitangi in 1840?

3. What is the connecCon between the Li]lewood Treaty and US diplomat James Clendon?

4. Why did the discovery of the Li]lewood document cause panic among Māori acCvists and poliCcians?

5. What evidence is there that the Li]lewood Treaty is genuine?

BULLET POINTS

• Li]lewood draj (Pt 1)

• Went missing for 148 years

• In 1989 the Li]lewoods (Pukekoe) found an old envelop in a sideboard. It contained a handwri]en copy of the TOW in English.

• It was in James Busby’s wriCng. Busby had said he wrote the ﬁnal draj of the TOW.

• The connecCon is that in 1840 Henry Li]lewood, lawyer, was doing conveyancing work for US diplomat James Clendon who was based in Waitangi.

• The discovery of the document caused panic among Māori acCvists and alarm among poliCcians who did their best to play down the discovery.

• However, ajer the signing of the TOW copies of Busby’s English draj were sent by Clendon back to the USA. So other copies exist.

• The Li]lewood Treaty is genuine because:

o It is in Busby’s handwriCng

o It mirrors the Māori version

o It is dated 4 February 1840 which is too early for a back translaCon from the Māori version.

o The paper is watermarked W. Tucker 1833. This is a USA manufacturer, so the paper was probably supplied by diplomat James Clendon

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt

Also incorrectly labelled as

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 9

Aug 2024

The Treaty was carefully constructed following instrucCons from the BriCsh Government. The rogue English version the TOW has spread confusion and enabled acCvists to manipulate poliCcians. The discovery of the true ﬁnal English draj in 1989 was ignored by the WT and Māori acCvists.

QUIZ

1. Name the men involved in drajing the TOW?

2. Who wrote the ﬁnal English version of the TOW?

3. What two reasons made the Māori acCvists focus on the JFRV as being the English version of the TOW for the 1975 TOW Act?

4. When was Busby’s 4 Feb 1840 English version of the TOW rediscovered and by what name is it now known?

5. Where is the Li]lewood English Draj now kept and why is it so li]le publicised?

BULLET POINTS

• Li]lewood draj (Pt 2): Timeliine:

• Wed 29 Jan 1840 Hobson arrived.

• Thu 30 Jan –1 Feb. Treaty Drajing Team: Hobson, Busby, Cle ndon, Freeman and missionaries who followed Lord Normanby’s brief.

• Mon 3 Feb: Hobson wants ‘land, estates, forests, ﬁsheries’ excluded from Art 2 and ‘all people of NZ ‘ included in Art 2.

• Tue 4 Feb: Busby writes the ﬁnal English draj. At night Henry & Edward Williams translate the English draj into Māori.

• Wed 5 Feb: treaty was read in English and Māori to chiefs and discussed all night.

• Thu 6 Feb: Chiefs signed TOW

• There are two English versions of the TOW

o 4 Feb (Hobson’s Choice) went missing in NZ

o 3 Feb James Freeman Rogue Version (JFRV) was invented from 12 pages of notes

• Māori acCvists (and Bill Rowling) grabbed JFRV so they could say 1840 translators were poor and acCvists would receive more beneﬁts

• Māori acCvists ignored the T.E. Young Government back translaCon of 1869 because it was so close to the Māori version and they would receive no real beneﬁts

• 1989 the 4 Feb Busby Final English Draj was rediscovered (Li]lewood Treaty). This has been kept out of sight in Archives NZ

• AcCvists have distorted the TOW. Vague TOW principles give acCvists more wriggle room.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 11? What Luxon Must Do Before Its Too Late

Nov 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori acCvist and believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs. For the ﬁrst reading of the Treaty Principles Bill Luxon was absent and Paul Goldsmith stated NaConal’s erroneous TOW beliefs.

QUIZ

1. What are Luxon’s Big Four Driving beliefs?

2. What two beliefs do John Key and Luxon both hold about the TOW?

3. Where in the TOW does the word ‘partnership’ appear?

4. Is the TOW a ‘contract’, an ‘agreement’ or a partnership’?

5. How closely are Seymour’s 3 Treaty Principles aligned with the 3 ArCcles in the Li]lewood English Draj of the TOW?

• Luxon is a closet ‘Māori’ AcCvist who believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. SupporCng the cause of acCvist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon’s TOW silence before the elecCon was a red ﬂag. He met with a Māori advisor weekly. On Monday he let out his true beliefs.

• For the ﬁrst reading of the Bill, Paul Goldsmith had to smooth the waters.

• ParroCng Luxon, he said since the 1970s the principles have not been deﬁned. Partnership has gained acceptance with Cme.

• Both John Key and Luxon believe that the TOW is a partnership. The TOW is an agreement, not a contract and the word ‘partnership’ does not appear in TOW. To say that TOW is a partnership is a lie and as such will not stand.

• Goldsmith said it was appropriate to discuss the TOW’s meaning today and in the future.

• The TOW must be read using the 1840 meanings of the words, not the meanings given by the acCvists in the late 20th Century.

• Did Great Britain intend to set up a dual system of government in NZ in 1840? Deﬁnitely not.

• The NaConal Party need to say clearly what the TOW meant in 1840.

• The 3 TOW arCcles become Seymour’s 3 Treaty Principles:

o The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders.

o The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiejainship of their land and all their property.

o All New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and duCes.

• If ignored, the situaCon will deteriorate and the problem will be harder to ﬁx in future.

• By supporCng Seymour’s Bill Luxon would be honouring the TOW.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 12? Luxon, We Demand a Referendum

Nov 2024

Paul Goldsmith’s Speech on the Treaty Principles Bill. He says the meanings should be debated although he is concerned that the process is unsuited to the ‘delicate nature’ of the issues.

QUIZ

1. What is the diﬀerence between Luxon’s and Goldsmith’s aÜtude towards discussing the TP Bill?

2. What is the aÜtude of Luxon and Keys towards Māori acCvists?

3. How can Luxon’s not wanCng to discuss the Bill be explained?

4. Why does Goldsmith not want to hold a referendum?

5. If Parliament does not write the deﬁned principles into law, who will decide what the meanings of the principles are, and will there be consistency?

• Paul Goldsmith’s Speech 14 Nov 2024

• Said: Waitangi Tribunal (WT) TOW deﬁniCons for principles are not gospel i.e. can be debated. This conﬂicts with Luxon not wanCng a discussion.

• Luxon is hypocriCcal in not giving the NZ people a say. He was put in power by NZers to act on the TOW principles

• Luxon believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. SupporCng the cause of acCvist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon is afraid of Māori acCvists (‘Hikois from Hell), just like John Keys (who mentors him). Key fuelled the Māori acCvist cause by saying this. Luxon is similarly afraid of Māori extremist acCvists.

• Luxon supports Māori partnership and so dislikes the Bill

• Goldsmith has concerns about the process of determin ing the principles of the TOW and the holding of a referendum. ‘Issues are too delicate.’

• In contrast to Goldsmith most people want an open discussion, submissions and a referendum. Hopefully NZers will make hundreds of thousands of submissions.

• MPs should do the will of the people; Luxon is not. The NaConal Party may be unravelling. Luxon is unable to explain the Bill is divisive.

• Playorm Interview with Ewen McQueen, author of ‘One Sun in the Sky’. Supporters of the Māori acCvists do not use historical facts, just bare asserCons.

• It is the role of Parliament to decide the deﬁniCons of the principles of the TOW, not the WT or the courts.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 13? What The Hikoi is Really All about (Part 1) Nov 2024

Reasons driving the Hikoi of Tue 19 Nov 2024. Much taxpayer money is helping to drive the hikoi.

QUIZ NA

• The acCvist Hikoi 19 Nov 2024 demonstrates:

1. Purpose is to bully and inCmidate poliCcians.

2. It is a recruitment drive to get non-Māori to join the cult.

3. A move towards complete Māori takeover of NZ

4. TVNZ is a Māori AcCvist organisaCon

5. TVNZ has received millions to fund Māori takeover of NZ.

6. How NZ Police are joining with the acCvist movement.

7. That NaConal & NZFirst are doing nothing to stop 1 to 6.

8. NZ First has not come up with any alternaCves to Seymour’s Bill, so they must have an ulterior moCve.

9. How weak poliCcians are leÜng bureaucrats rule the roost.

10. That NaConal & NZFirst are encouraging the take over of NZ by not supporCng Seymour’s Bill.

• TVNZ Coverage of the Hikoi is biased 7 emoConal blackmail. Māori are poor due to colonisaCon (CRT) so non-Māori will join the cause.

• Tax Payer Union has exposed that Era KapaKingi, Hikoi Leader is on the Parliamentary Pay Roll. His comment ‘Beyond Parliament’ refers to 2040 goal to have a Māori Parliament with ﬁnal veto. (Ref: Jphn Robinson, ‘He Puapua’)

• Hikoi at Masterton. A Māori assault a nonMāori with a NZ ﬂag & dmadged the ﬂag. A nearby policeman did nothing. (Two-Cer policing.)

• TVNZ Coverage: ‘We will keep marching unCl we get ‘our sovereignty’.’ Woman crying = emoConal blackmail. Māori have been radicalised by acCvists to become sad vicCms. These acCvists are unaccountable.

• Song: ‘Looking for Love in all the Wrong Places’.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 14? Will Winston Do Be]er? Pt1

Nov 2024

NZ First have been quiet on the Treaty Bill. They plan to remove all references to TOW from legislaCon.

QUIZ

1. What progress has been made by NZFirst to remove ‘principles’ from exisCng legislaCon?

2. In ArCcle 2 of the TOW what did the Government promise to do for Māori?

3. John Robinson said: ‘the Crown did not break the Treaty ’. What eﬀect does this statement have on WT se]lements?

4. What are the chances that a binding referendum will be held and, if held, would it succeed?

5. What weaknesses in people or processes have been exposed by discussions of Seymour’s Bill?

BULLET POINTS

• Winston Peters & Shane Jones have been ‘missing in acCon’ re Treaty Principles Bill

• NZFirst Plan: ‘All references to TOW will be removed from legislaCon.’

• ‘NZFirst will conduct a comprehensive review of all legislaCon (except when it is related to or substanCve to exisCng and ﬁnal Treaty se]lements and includes “The principles of the TOW” and replace all such references with speciﬁc words relaCng to the relevance and applicaCon of the Treaty or repeal such references.’

• i.e. This will clarify what was meant or just dump the Treaty reference. Examples:

• Treaty Principle 1: Partnership: NZF has not said the TOW is not a partnership. This principle would have to be dumped. NZF lack historical knowledge.

• Treaty Principle 2: ProtecCon: Whatever Māori were interested in, the Government had to protect. Rewrite: the Crown has a duty to protect Māori interests in the same way as all ciCzens, since Māori were given ownership of their land, dwellings and property (taonga).

• Treaty Principle 3: Redress: ‘All Treaty se]lements are based on the Crown having broken the Treaty. Since all such se]lements are a fraud. There is no jusCﬁcaCon for the se]lements or the Waitangi Tribunal.’ (Ref: John Robinson, Who Really Broke The Treaty?, 2024.)

• Seymour hoped his Bill would end in a binding referendum, which can only be undone if 75% of Parliament agrees.

• Seymour’s Bill has begun a discussion and exposed Luxon, Te PaC Māori, 2 Cer policing and Brownlie’s lack of Parliamentary control.

• NZF changes can be reversed by the next Government.

• NaConal will be stuck with the NZF Bill which NaConal signed up for.

• QuesCons remain:

1. Do poliCcians have enough historical knowledge?

2. Does NZF understand what acCvists have been up to?

3. Can another Government undo NZF’s changes?

4. Why no menCon of NZF’s Bill in the media?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 15? Will Winston Do Be]er? Pt 2

Nov 2024

NZ First have been quiet on the Treaty Bill. They plan to remove all references to TOW from legislaCon or do they?

QUIZ

1. What was NZFirst’s plan to deal with the confused situaCon concerning TOW principles?

2. What does Goldsmith believe is the be]er way to handle the BIll than to go with what the majority of new Zealanders want?

3. What legislaCon will be excluded from NZFirst’s purging of TOW Principles from exisCng legislaCon?

4. What is the likely outcome of not purging some of the legislaCon?

5. What group or groups of people can be blamed for producing the present situaCon concerning the TP Bill?

BULLET POINTS

• NZ First Plan: ‘All references to TOW will be removed from legislaCon.’

• This sounds like a great purge but is not. NaConal is conCnuing what Jacinda started.

• Ministry of JusCce lead by Paul Goldsmith and Tama Potaka (Māori acCvist, so there is a conﬂict of interest).

• Goldsmith believes there is a wide variety of views on the Treaty. It may be be]er to follow the interests of the minority (Māori AciCvists ) to avoid conﬂict than going with what the majority of NZers want. Paul is terriﬁed of Māori. He should be reminded that the present crisis is due to similar poor poliCcian decision making in the past.

• PuÜng Goldsmith & Potama in charge will result in disaster.

• Some legislaCon will be excluded from the process: TOW Act, Public Finance Act, State Owned Enterprises Act.

• QuesCons for Winston to answer:

1. Why did you allow this?

2. We understood all legislaCon was going to be purged except where Treaty se]lements were already in place. Why are three Acts so special?

3. What is being protected by excluding three Acts?

4. Why did you not support David’s Bill as it was more comprehensive? (This will result in a half-done job .)

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 1

Jun 2024

Prior to 1840 Māori culture was lawless and disagreements were se]led violently. Tikanga is Māori lore. Ajer experiencing peaceful BriCsh culture, some Māori leaders asked the BriCsh to introduce their system of law.

QUIZ

1.What does ‘Ckanga’ mean?

2. How do we know from Māori behaviours prior to colonisaCon tahaÜkanga was a violent system?

3. Who recorded Māori had a ‘total lack of laws or system of law’?

4. Who recorded about Māori that ‘Their own rude law had been one of brute force’.

5. Plunder is an important aspect of Ckanga. How can this be related to the development of a warrior class?

BULLET POINTS

• MYTH: Prior to 1840 Māori had a system of law. When the BriCsh introduced their system of law it clashed with the Māori system

• TRUTH:

• Captain Cook: Māori are ‘without any se]led from of government’

• Samuel Marsden: Māori had a ‘total lack of laws or system of law’,. ‘SupersCCons served them’, which was regarded with ‘awful sacredness’.

• Wirimu Hau asked Marsden: ‘Sir will you give us a law?’ Wirimu gave a series of situaCons and asks what should a person do lawfully in each situaCon

• Rev James Buller: Re Māori: ‘Their own rude law had been one of brute force’. Great value was a]ached to possessions. Without law there was a temptaCon to plunder. ‘Every man as a natural consequence became a soldier

• Māori could see the beneﬁts of laws that the BriCsh had, ‘but their hatred of restraint causes them pracCcally to abhor and resist its full enforcement amongst themselves. F.E. Maning

• Māori needed a system of law

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 2

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law). It was unsystemaCc and unwri]en method for handling grievances based on emoCon rather than historical precedent.

Quiz

1.There is a movement among retribalist acCvists to incorporate Ckanga into NZ Law. What problems are likely to follow from this acCon?

2. How was property ownership decided using Ckanga?

3. What did the Chiefs at the Kohimarama Conference say was one of the advantages of ChrisCanity?

4. How were disputes handled before the introducCon of BriCsh Law?

5. Muru means plunder, robbing, thievery or payback. How could these Ckanga pracCces be incorporated into NZ Law?

BULLET POINTS

• Today Māori radicals are trying to inveigle aspects of Ckanga in the NZ legal system.

• Since there is no system of Ckanga common to all iwi this will be deﬁned as it goes along. It will only be interpreted by Māori. It is a ruse.

• Captain Hobson (1837): It was ‘impossible to enact laws because the tribes were disunited’. They were out of control.

• Pre 1840 NZ was in a state of anarchy. Reintroducing Ckanga will result in anarchy.

• Without common law there could not be property rights

• In tradiConal Ckanga the response to a wrong was: revenge or a warlike challenge or conCnuing an argumentaCve dispute.

• Te Whero Whero: ‘New law will save us from killing and robbing (Ckanga).

• Chiefs at the Kohimarama Conference (1860) said that ChrisCanity had put an end to cannibalism. ‘The Law put an end to our evils.’ ‘The Governor came with him bringing laws.’

• Sir Apirana Ngata: There was no law pre-1840 to decide who was right. Māori did not have a system of government.

• Today we need to resist Ckanga being forced onto all NZers. It is a trick. A ruse.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 3

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law) involving extreme acts of violence e.g. cannibalism. Māori acCvists have revised tradiConal Ckanga into something more harmless so it can be sneaked into the NZ legal system

QUIZ

1. How did early visitors to NZ describe the state of law among the Māori community?

2. Did the Māori tribes have a legal system prior to the establishment of the BriCsh legal system in NZ?

3. How did the Māori regard the peacefulness of the early BriCsh se]lements?

4. Māori propagandists say pre-1840 Māori life under Ckanga was wonderful. Does this idealisaCon ﬁt with the early Māori pracCces of utu and cannibalism?

5. What have Maori revisionists done to Ckanga pracCces so they might be inserted into a modern legal system?

BULLET POINTS

• Early visitors commented on the lack of lawfulness among Māori

• Charles Darwin (1835): ‘Proper laws are, of course, quite unknown’.

• Augustus Earle (1827): no ‘universal form of law’.

• Edward Jerningham Wakefield: The Māori ‘ regarded with admiraCon the peacefulness established by our habits of law and order, and displayed an almost unhoped for degree of good temper in yielding their assent to the new order of things, which forbade the inflicCon of summary punishment as vengeance by the offended party according to their former customs’.

• Quote from F.E. Maning [who has a tendency to exaggerate]

• It is u]erly false to say that Māori had a legal system prior to 1840

• Currently acCvist Māori propaganda lies that Ckanga is harmless and wonderful e.g. It is about: integrity, care & respect, family & relaConships, excellence (Ref: Downer website). This is a lie compared to pre-1840 pracCce e.g. utu & cannibalism

• Bolger says that what was passed in parliament years ago has been changed by acCvists.

• DecepCon and trickery has been used in this transformaCon.

• Violent pre-1840 Ckanga has been revised into something harmless for inserCon into NZ law courts

• Today Māori radicals are trying to inveigle Ckanga in the NZ legal system.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 4

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore(not law. Māori acCvists have revised tradiConal Ckanga into something harmless so it can enter the NZ Law through Parliament

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Tikanga = Māori lore, customs, religion, philosophy

• It is an error to try to introduce it into NZ Law

• Māori radicals, eliCsts &and retribalists try to make out it is innocent & innocuous and want to introduce it into Acts of Parliament which in Cme expand beyond the intenCon

• TOW Act 1975 was introduced for a few outstanding claims; The amended TOW Act 1986 allowed claims back to 1840 & claims grew to over 2000.

• Tikanga will probably be the same

• The Dormer company has been sucked in to believe Ckanga is something it is not and never was [i.e. Revisionism]

• Duplicity and trickery will be used in this transformaCon into NZ Law

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 5

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law). Māori acCvists have revised tradiConal Ckanga into something harmless so it can be sneaked into NZ Law. They believe Ckanga was NZ’s ﬁrst law despite it involving many illegal acCviCes e.g. cannibalism

QUIZ:

1. What are the names of the four courts in the NZ legal system?

2. Why is it inaccurate to say that the Māori system of ‘Ckanga was the ﬁrst law of NZ’?

3. Why did the TOW replace Ckanga?

4. What pre-1840 tribal Ckanga pracCces wou ld be considered illegal under NZ’s current legal system.

5. What organisaConal aspects of tribal Ckanga make it incompaCble with a modern legal system?

BULLET POINTS

• Tikanga = Māori lore, customs, religion, philosophy

• NZ Courts: District, High, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court (which, unfortunately, replaced the more independent Privy Council in London)

• Judges are appointed by the Governor General on the recommendaCon of the A]orney General. An acCvist at any stage can ensure Māori acCvist judges are appointed.

• Māori acCvist judge Susan Glazebrook says ‘Ckanga was the ﬁrst law of NZ.’ This is a silly lie as there was no legal system in NZ unCl ajer the TOW.

• Māori acCvist judge Joe Williams who served on the WT pushed the WAI 262 Report that insisted that NZ’s fauna & ﬂora were the property of Māori which is racist. Williams also stated ‘Ckanga was the ﬁrst law of NZ.’

• Pre-TOW Ckanga was dominated by utu (revenge), muru (plunder) & tapu (supersCCon). TOW pushed aside Ckanga because it involved illegal acCviCes

• TOW did not amalgamate Ckanga with BriCsh Law; such was impossible because they were mutually exclusive. Tikanga had no courts, cases, precedents, clarity, consistency, wri]en recording

• Tikanga diﬀered between tribes and through Cme.

• Hongi Hika (1825) said Ckanga stopped Māori giving up warfare.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 6

Jun 2024

Māori claim to have access to whalebone from stranded whales because of their religious beliefs about the role of whales in the sea. They share this access with DOC , unlike any other ethnic group.

QUIZ

1. How do Māori re-tribalists jusCfy the special rights they claim over other ethnic groups?

2. If it was once part of the ir tribal religion, Is it reasonable for one ethnic group to have the right of possession to what the sea washes up?

3. Other mammalian bones can be used for carving so why should Māori restrict their requirements to whale bone?

4. Why Is it inappropriate to use the word taonga to describe washed up whales?

5. What government Department is responsible for dealing with washed up whales?

BULLET POINTS

• MISSING JAWBONE OF STRANDED SPERM WHALE IN SOUTHLAND

UPSETS IWI

• What has a whale got to do with iwi? We seem to have a dual government, one half being iwi.

• DOC maintains removing parts of mammals contravenes Mammals

ProtecCon Act 1978

• According to Māori religion whales are the ‘chiefs of the sea’ and interacCng with them requires religious protocols: Prayers, karakia and a farewell address.

• Iwi carve whale bone and sell carvings on the internet.

• Māori interest in whalebone seems to be more commercial than sacred or religious.

• Whalebone can be referred to as a ‘taonga’ (‘property acquired by the spear’) which is is/was not. In 1989 Hugh Kawharu changed the meaning of ‘taonga’ to mean ‘treasure’ which is misleading.

• Māori, along with DOC, are given special dispensaCon to have access to stranded or deceased whales which is racist and divisive.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 7

Jul 2024

Radical Māori AcCvist Senior Judges are trying to incorporate Ckanga into NZ Law

QUIZ

1. Into which NZ legal case did acCvist judges introduce Ckanga?

2. What were the names of the two judges?

3. What is wrong with judges making up the law as they go along?

4. What was the result of Judge Peter Churchman ignoring and overruling parliament in the Edwards Case.

5. Why have the Waitangi Tribunal a]empted to introduce Ckanga into the grievance process?

BULLET POINTS

• Radical Judges Joe Williams and Susan Glazebrook have made the false asserCon that Ckanga was a system of law and introduced it into the Peter Ellis case.

• Robert Jones observed that this move was ‘the greatest disgrace in NZ’s legal history’.

• Waitangi tribunal has also a]empted to introduce Ckanga into grievance claims.

• ACT lawyer Stephen Franks stated without mandate from people judges now intend to rule and assume the right to make law.

• This is really a cou p, challenging the government.

• Tikanga was not a pre-1840 system of law.

• In the Edwards Case on the foreshore (Marine And Coastal Act), Judge Peter Churchman ignored and overruled Parliament by introducing Ckanga resulCng in 600 more claims being lodged.

• Māori are given $485,000 from the taxpayers to pursue each claim. Media ignore this.

• Brochures are available to hand out from stopcogovernance.kiwi

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 8

Jul 2024

AcCvist Senior Judges try to incorporate Ckanga into NZ Law by going against the laws set up by parliament.

QUIZ

1. What is Ckanga?

2. Is Ckanga ‘a system of law’ akin to Western Law? Why?

3. What is problems might occur if judges rather Parliament making up the law?

4. How has Judge Peter Churchman overruled parliament?

5. What might be the result from introducing Ckanga into the grievance process?

BULLET POINTS

• Edwards claim for the foreshore (Marine And Coastal Act) under Judge Peter Churchman.

• Claimants had to prove they had previously ﬁshed a site conCnuously since 1840 to be able to claim.

• Edwards falsely asserted that Ckanga was ‘a system of law’, which it is not.

• Tribes were unable to prove they used a ﬁshing site conCnuously. Edwards overruled Parliament by ignoring Western Law and using Ckanga.

• Churchman had been advised by two Māori whether he should award the claim according to Ckanga. Māori ‘experts’ invariably have an interest in the outcomes of such cases.

• Adding Ckanga to common law opens up the legal system to corrupCon since Ckanga has no wri]en record and is inconsistent between iwi.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 9

Jul 2024

AcCvist Senior Judges try to incorporate Ckanga into NZ Law by going against the laws set up by parliament.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• AcCvist judges sympatheCc to Māori sit on the NZ Supreme Court: Joe Williams, Chief JusCce Helen Winkle man, Susan Glazebrook.

• Biased Judge Grant Powell is an ex-lawyer for the Waitangi Tribunal. He ignored the MACA law and applied Ckanga, allowing a lower threshold than the common law. He believes he should favour indigenous people, contrary to the Act.

• The introducCon of Ckanga into NZ Law moves the country closer to what is proposed by He Puapua.

• Why are NZers so keen to hand over the government of the country to Māori acCvists?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 10 v2

Jul 2024

AcCvist Senior Judges have incorporate Ckanga into NZ Law. The Law Commission and Gary Judd have spoken out against this unlawful move.

QUIZ

1. What is Ckanga?

2. Is Ckanga a real or imagined challenge for law schools?

3. Which legal expert opposes Ckanga being taught in Law Schools?

4. In which modern law case was Ckanga introduced and declared as the ﬁrst law of NZ?

5 What is the Law Commission’s view of Ckanga?

BULLET POINTS

• Roger Partridge: The Tikanga Challenge for Law Schools, the rule of law and Parliament.

• Bringing Ckanga (Māori tribal lore) into NZ law is similar to incorporaCng voodoo. This threatens to turn NZ into a malfuncConal state like Zimbabwe.

• Gary Judd opposes Ckanga being taught in Law Schools.

• Winston Peters says that Ckanga is ‘woke’.

• Tikanga is a belief system, not a system of rule [law].

• Tikanga was used in the Peter Ellis case where Ckanga was declared as the ﬁrst law of NZ.

• This is a massive shij in our legal system.

• NZ is racing toward third world status.

• Gary Judd says: ‘A ﬂuid system should not be treated as law.’

• The Law Commission warns against using Ckanga.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi For

Newbies ArCcle 1 Part1

Aug 2024

Signiﬁcance of the ConfederaCon of Tribes and He Whakaputanga (1835)

QUIZ

1. What was the object of the ConfederaCon of Tribes’ DeclaraCon of Independence (He Whakaputanga)?

2. Who insCgated the ConfederaCon of Tribes and the DeclaraCon of Independence?

3. What is the opinion of historians on the signiﬁcance of He Whakaputanga?

4. How do we know the Treaty of Waitangi superseded the status of He Whakaputanga?

5. What was the ulCmate fate of the organisaCon called the ConfederaCon of Tribes?

BULLET POINTS

• Seymour’s Bill is at a fork in the road: NZ must choose Tribal Rule or Democracy

• Which road is mandated by the Treaty and which honours the Treaty?

• The English ArCcle 1 mirrors the Māori version.

• Busby invented the ConfederaCon of Tribes & the DeclaraCon of Independence (DI) in 1835 to stave oﬀ French interests in NZ

• Busby had 39 Northland chiefs sign the DI or He Whakaputanga (HW)

• Busby hoped this very local HW made NZ a sovereign naCon under Britain

• Historians B. A]wood and M. King conclude HW was insigniﬁcant

• Edward Gibbon Wakeﬁeld noted ‘no further meeCng [of the ConfederaCon] took place’

• Chiefs who signed HW also later signed the Treaty

• Thus the Treaty supersedes HW which is therefore redundant

• Some Māori acCvists think HW is valid

• PromoCng HW dishonours the TOW

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art1 Pt 2

Aug 2024

Evidence that Māori ceded sovereignty to the BriCsh as per ArCcle one of the Treaty.

QUIZ

1. Deﬁne the words ‘cede’ and ‘sovereignty’?

2. Why are ‘partnership’ and ‘sovereignty’ mutually exclusive concepts?

3. Where in the TOW does it say Māori can have their own government?

4. What facts prove that that Māori ceded sovereignty to Queen Victoria?

5. How well do David Seymour’s principles match the three ArCcles of the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Fork in the road: Tribal Rule or Democracy

• Which road is mandated in the Treaty, which honours the Treaty, does Seymour’s Bill honour the Treaty?

• Chiefs ceded sovereignty to the BriCsh.

• Cede means to give up or give someone absolute control

• Sovereignty means supreme authority

• Sovereignty and partnership are mutually exclusive

• Art 1 does not say: Māori can have their own government, or the Queen was in partnership with Māori or Māori can control resources other than what they owned or Māori only gave the BriCsh permission to rule over se]lers

• Humanitarian colonisaCon: the Queen did not want to seize NZ

• Normanby instructed Hobson to obtain free and intelligent consent from Māori, else BriCsh would leave NZ to the French

• 3 Proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty: (1) Britain conCnued colonising NZ ajer 1840, (2) Speeches of Chiefs on 5 Feb 1840 show they understood, (3) D. Lange, W. Peters, Judge A. Willi all conﬁrm sovereignty was ceded

• Seymour’s 3 Principles matches & honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 1 Pt 3

Sep 2024

Proof 3 that Māori ceded sovereignty: the Kohimarama Conference

QUIZ

1. When was the Kohimarama Conference held and how many chiefs a]ended?

2. What did the Kohimarama Conference unanimously state about the TOW?

3. What twisted reading of the TOW allows NZ Media and Māori acCvists to deny Māori ceded sovereignty.

4. What myth do Māori acCvists promote about land ownership and what % of land did Māori ulCmately sell?

5. What myth do Māori acCvists promote concerning self-determinaCon and how does it conﬂict with the statements of Sir Apirana Ngata concerning ArCcle 1?

BULLET POINTS

• Kohimarama Conference was held over a month in 1860

• 112 (at the start) chiefs a]ended, most of whom had signed the TOW 20 years earlier

• The Conference unanimously moved that: Māori had ceded sovereignty, the two races were united and that Māori would not break the TOW.

• AcCvists (e.g. Margaret Mutu, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, WaiCC & Willi Jackson) say that the TOW only gave the BriCsh sovereignty over the se]lers and not Māori.

• NZ media collaborate with Māori acCvists to say sovereignty was not ceded, while ignoring those who disagree such as Don Brash and 1Law4All.

• AcCvist Myth 1: NZ resources belong to Māori. In fact all NZers own NZ’s resources. Māori sold 92% of their land. Apirana Ngata: land was conﬁscated to punish some Māori for breaking laws. The Crown never broke the TOW, rebellious Māori did. (John Robinson, ‘Who Really Broke the Treaty’, 2024).

• AcCvist Myth 2: Māori have a right to self- determinaCon and their own Government. However, Sir Apirana Ngata: explains that ArCcle 1 records ‘the transfer by the Māori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever the Government of all their lands.’ (1922, p3).

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1 Pt 4

Sep 2024

What if Māori did not cede sovereignty? Proof 4 that they did.

QUIZ

1. What advantages would Māori receive if their ancestors did not cede sovereignty in 1840?

2. What disadvantages should all New Zealanders receive because the Māori Chiefs ceded sovereignty in 1840?

3. How are MPs eroding the concept of sovereignty being ceded in the TOW?

4. Does Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill honour the TOW?

5. What are 5 proofs that the Māori chiefs ceded sovereignty in the 1840 TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori radicals say Māori did not cede sovereignty in 1840.

• If Māori did not cede sovereignty:

1. NZ resources (ﬁsheries, forests etc) belong to Māori

2. Māori the right to rule and reign NZ

3. All non-Māori are guests and overstayers

4. Tribal rule replaces democracy

5. Māori are superior to the rest

6. Māori have special rights and privileges

7. BriCsh stole NZ from Māori

8. Te Reo should be the main language

• If Māori ceded sovereignty:

1. NZ resources belong to all

2. Māori have no right to be in control

3. Māori have no right to set up a parallel government

4. Māori are equal before the law

5. Māori must abide by democraCc principles

6. Māori are not enCtled to special rights and privileges

7. Māori legally handed over NZ to be managed by Britain

8. English will be the main language of NZ

9. Māori wards, partnership, customary rights etc are breaches of the Treaty

• Sovereignty is of crucial importance but is being eroded by MPs

• We must oppose the ‘reversalists’ because its honours the TOW and the ancestors who signed it

• Proofs of ceding sovereignty:

1. Normanby’s instrucCons to Hobson

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840

3. 540 chiefs signed TOW

4. Kohimarama Conference 1860

5. Records held by the BriCsh Parliament (See: Bain A]wood)

• Seymour’s 3 Principles honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1

Pt 5

Sep 2024

Reversalists deny that Māori ceded sovereignty and Proofs 5 and 6 (of 9) that they did.

QUIZ

1. What two processes does Luxon push concerning relaConships between Māori acCvists and the rest of the populaCon?

2. What is the reason Margaret Mutu believes Māori did not cede sovereignty?

3. How does Mutu’s belief demonstrate a lack of historical knowledge?

4. Why have Māori acCvists used the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW?

5. What proofs do TamaC Waka Nene & Apirana Ngata provide for Māori ceding sovereignty?

• Reversalists want to reverse the fact that Māori ceded sovereignty. They are not interested in truth but taking over NZ.

• Chris Luxon is not a reversalist but believes in MāorifcaCon and co-governance

• Chris Hipkins is a denialist

• Prof. Margaret Mutu believes Māori did not cede sovereignty because they outnumbered Pākehā. (‘Māori were in complete control of every corner of the country.’)

• Māori ceded sovereignty because they: were afraid of the French, were self-annihilaCng through intertribal warfare and wanted BriCsh goods and trade to improve their lives.

• The TOW is the Māori text

• The TOW Tribunal Act 1975 uses the illegiCmate rogue James Freeman English version. The ﬁnal English version of TOW of 4 Feb 1840, known as the Li]lewood Draj, is kept in Archives NZ.

• AcCvists in 1975 used the Freeman version so they could say it did not match the Māori version so that only Māori could back translate the TOW to say what it meant.

• Henry Williams ensured that on 5th Feb, 1840 the chiefs understood what kāwanatanga etc meant. The Treaty was read in both English and Māori.

• PROOF 5: High chief TamaC Waka Nene’s 1871 headstone records he was ‘The ﬁrst to welcome the Queen’s sovereignty in New Zealand’.

• PROOF 6: Sir Apirana Ngata wrote: ArCcle 1 records ‘the transfer by the Māori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever the Government of all their lands.’ (1922, p3).

• Previously menConed PROOFS of Māori ceding sovereignty:

1.Normanby’s instrucCons to Hobson

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840

3. 540 chiefs signed TOW

4. Kohimarama Conference 1860

5. Records held by the BriCsh Parliament (See: Bain A]wood)

• Seymour’s 3 Principles honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Dummies Art 1 Pt 6

Sep 2024

Māori ceded sovereignty: Proof 7

Rev Samuel Warren

QUIZ

1. What does the 1863 Diary of Samuel Warren inform us about Māori understanding of the TOW?

2. Were pre-colonial Māori horCculturalists or hunter gatherers?

3. What percentage of land have Māori sold?

4. What does Cno rangaCra-tanga mean in the TOW compared to the acCvist Māori interpretaCon?

5. In which years were Maori and non-Māori ﬁrst given the vote?

BULLET POINTS

• PROOF 7: Rev. Samuel Warren 1863 Diary

• Present at Waitangi and later at Hokianga

• ‘Great deal of talk by the naCves, principally on the subject of securing their proprietary right to the land, and their personal liberty ’… ‘Everything else they were only too happy to yield to the Queen’

• ‘They knew they could only be saved from the rule of other naCons by siÜng under the shadow of the Queen of England. In my hearing they frequently remarked, “Let us be one people. We had the gospel from England, let us have the law from England.” ‘

• ‘The ‘naCves perfectly understood that, by signing the treaty, they became BriCsh subjects.’ … ‘ The naCves were at the Cme in mortal fear of the French, and justly thought they had done a pre]y good stroke of business when they placed the BriCsh lion between themselves and the French eagle.’

• Prof. Parsonson ex. OU: Māori were hunter-gatherers in the early contact period. They owned no land.

• Māori became interested in land when they were able to sell it. They sold 92%. (Mike Butler. Land sold, not ‘lost 2024’.)

• Tino rangaCra-tanga means that Māori have authority over their property and land, not all NZ resources.

• Māori were given voCng in 1867, 11 years before Pākehā (1878)

• Māori acCvist spin today tells us:

o What they imagine happened

o Māori did not sign sovereignty

o Māori were peaceful and united and could easily have protected themselves from the BriCsh

o NZ in 1840 was the Shangri -La of the South Paciﬁc

o Land was stolen

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1

Pt 7

Oct 2024

Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) wants to say that Māori did not cede sovereignty but knows that this will conﬂict with Luxon.

Ten proofs show Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW.

QUIZ

Potama was asked ‘Did Māori cede sovereignty and when?’

1. What will be the poliCcal consequences if he answers ‘Yes’?

2. What will be the poliCcal consequences if he answers ‘No’?

3. What are some of the ploys

Potama uses to avoid answering the quesCon?

4. & 5. What are the proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty?

BULLET POINTS

• Interview of Tama Potaka Minister of Māori Development.

• Tama avoids answering the quesCons: Did Māori cede sovereignty? When did Māori cede sovereignty?

• Potaka is living in a paradoxical world: If he says Māori ceded sovereignty he is agreeing with Luxon and will upset his acCvist friends. If he says Māori did not cede sovereignty he is disagreeing with Luxon and but appeasing his acCvist friends.

• To avoid answering the quesCons Potaka uses a range of ploys:

o ‘It’s a debate that’s been going on for several decades.’

o ‘I’m not engaging in that debate the Crown is sovereign.’

o ‘I will support the PM.’

o ‘Tino RangaCratanga will be upheld.’

o ‘There are a number of diﬀerent views on that. A number of discussions on that.’

o ‘ That’s a long conversaCon.’

o MenCons He Whakaputanga but this was superceded by TOW

o Changes the subject to Māori Housing.

• Summary: 10 proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty at Waitangi on 6 Feb 1840.

1. Existence of the Treaty.

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840.

3. Kohimarama Conference 1860.

4. Records held by the BriCsh Parliament (See: Bain A]wood).

5. Headstone of TamaC Waka Nene.

6. The opinion of Sir Apirana Ngata.

7. Eye witness accounts of se]lers living with Māori.

8. Plaque at Waitangi: ‘On this spot … The Treaty of Waitangi under which New Zealand became part of the BriCsh Empire.

9. 16 Nov 1840 NZ became a Crown Colony separate from NSW

10. 1852 NZ ConsCtuCon Act passed by BriCsh Government.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 2

Pt 1

Oct 2024

Art 2 begins by guaranteeing protecCon of land and possessions. To make the system work land had to be surveyed and land Ctles issued.

QUIZ

1. From what English document was Te TiriC translated into Māori?

2. What are the two diﬀerences between Busby’s Final English draj and the Māori version of the TOW?

3. In ArCcle 2, ﬁrst sentence, what did the Queen of England guarantee ‘to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand’?

4. When chiefs sold their land to the Government what happened to the Government guarantee of protecCon of that land?

5. Why was surveying the land of such a high priority for the BriCsh?

BULLET POINTS

• The Māori version fo the TOW was translated from the Li]lewood Draj.

• There are two diﬀerences between them:

1. English Draj dated 4 Feb 1840 was translated by H. Williams to Māori and was dated 6 Feb 1840

2. The word māori was added to the Māori version on 5 Feb into Art 3.

Art 2, First Sentence: ‘ The Queen of England conﬁrms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’

• Hobson acted on the full authority of the Queen

• BriCsh thought Māori owned all the land, except that which they had sold prior to the TOW

• Britain promised to protect the ownership of their land and anything on it. The proviso was that if the chiefs sold their land the guarantee would pass on to the new owner.

• With say 540 chiefs, without surveying the land, establishing boundaries and issuing Ctles Britain could not protect each chief’s land.

• Surveying land was a high BriCsh priority. The pracCce of surveying land and issuing Ctles was described by Hobson’s superior, Lord Normanby, as ‘that system of sale in the anCcipaCon of buying land from Māori, which experience has proven the wisdom, and the disregard of which has been so fatal to the prosperity of other BriCsh Se]lements’.

• So important was surveying the land and issuing Ctles that Hobson took the Surveyor General, Mathew Fulton to NZ, to set up the new colony.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 2

Pt 2

Oct 2024

Art 2 is confused because of the diﬀerences between RJFV the Māori version. The Busby ﬁnal draj, which matches the Māori translaCon has been ignored. AcCvists deny sovereignty was ceded, but evidence proves the opposite.

QUIZ

1. What historical importunity caused the origin of Te TiriC being a bad translaCon?

2. Why was the discovery of the Li]lewood Draj in 1989 ignored by Treatyists?

3. How much land had been sold by Māori (i) by 1840, (ii) by c.2020?

4. What source indicates how much land Māori had sold by 1840?

5. In Art 2, sentence 1, of the TOW, the Government oﬀered to guarantee protecCon of what three things?

BULLET POINTS

• A major problem with any Treaty discussion is that the Rogue James Freeman Version (RJFV) is being used by the Māori acCvists since 1975. This allows acCvists to spread the ‘bad translaCon’ lie.

• In 1989 The TOW ﬁnal English draj by Busby (called ‘Li]lewood’) was found but ignored by Treatyists as it did not match their agenda.

• 1840 Māori sovereignty of NZ was undisputed by Lord Normanby. However, Māori did not run NZ as a coordinated state.

• By 1840 Māori had sold about one third of their land. (See Turton Land Records.) Eventually 92% of NZ was sold by Māori.

• Māori relinquished sovereignty o By the TOW o By selling land

• Māori acCvists make use of the fake sovereignty claims of ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’ and ‘mana motuhake’

• PM Luxon reluctantly states: ‘Māori ceded sovereignty in 1840’.

• Chiefs were anxious not to lose more land.

• Art 2, ﬁrst sentence: ‘… all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property ’. This meant everyone, both Māori and se]lers. BriCsh se]lers already had BriCsh ciCzenship.

• The Government oﬀered to guarantee Māori protecCon of the ir land, dwellings and property.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 2

Pt 3

Oct 2024

The TOW promised all NZers the possession of their lands, dwellings and property. In Common Law beaches etc are for all ciCzens to use The WT gave Māori special rights to NZ’s water resources.

QUIZ

1. What resources determined the area of land that a tribe owned?

2. Why did Māori tribes carefully mark out their ﬁshing spots?

3. How far out to sea did Māori ﬁsh?

4. What resources in the rogue James Freeman version were pounced upon?

5. According to the BriCsh Law Of Commons, who do the beaches belong to?

BULLET POINTS

• Review: Li]lewood English Draj is crucial. Māori acCvists use the RJFV so they can say Henry Williams was a poor translator.

• Art 2 Sentence 1: ‘ The Queen of England conﬁrms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’

• The BriCsh surveyed the land each of 540 chiefs owned their 1 cm2 squares on a map of NZ.

• If a chief ’s land had a coastal element, Māori could sCll ﬁsh those waters and gather their seafood. (Prof. Gordon S. Parsonson)

• Each tribe had carefully marked out ﬁshing spots that were 'no go' areas for other tribes.

• However, Maori did not 'own' the beach or coastline on the boarder of their land.

• No menCon of ﬁshing areas extending kilometres out to seas in Art 2. The rogue James Freeman version promises ‘full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries’ which is what the WT uses.

• According to The BriCsh law of The Law Of Commons, the beaches belonged to all the ciCzens of the country.

• And since Maori had ceded sovereignty (ArCcle 1) and become BriCsh ciCzens (ArCcle 3), this law applied to them as well.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 2 Pt 5

Oct 2024

Māori were keen to sell their land. From 1840-3 Māori could only sell to the Government.

In response to Māori violaCng legal authority Government conﬁscated Māori land.

QUIZ

1. Who could Māori sell land to ajer the TOW?

2. What TWO problems slowed Māori land sales to Government?

3. Why were Māori so keen to sell land?

4. How much land had Māori sold by 1840?

5. From what year were Māori able to sell their land to people other than Government agents?

• Art 2 Sentence 2: ‘ The chiefs of the ConfederaCon and the other chiefs grant to the Queen the exclusive right of purchasing such land as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to sell at such prices as shall be agreed upon between them and the persons appointed by the Queen to purchase from them.’

• 3 AcCvist Myths:

o Māori were tricked out of their land

o Māori were forced to sell their land

o Land was unlawfully conﬁscated

• Prior to 1840 Māori vigorously sold their land. Records show Māori sold at least one third of their land (H.H.Turton). Māori sold land several Cmes on the same day.

• Māori could only sell land to the government; they had to want to sell land and could not be bullied. (Normanby’s instrucCons to Hobson.) George Clarke was appointed Protector of Aborigines to supervise land sales. Government made money from reselling land to se]lers.

• Māori complained the Government was too slow to buy land. Due to pressure by 1843 Māori could sell to anyone. Communal ownership slowed sales. Conquered land had to be held for 10 years before selling.

• Māori were keen to sell so they buy European goods & stock etc as status symbols. They produced ﬂax and potatoes for trade.

• Land conﬁscaCons. ‘ The Government placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the sovereignty and the authority to make laws. Some secCons of the Maori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operaCon and land was taken in payment. This itself is a Maori custom—revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The conﬁscaCons cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty. (Sir Apirana Ngata, p.15-16)

• Ref. J. Robinson, ’Who Really Broke The Treaty?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 2

Pt 4

Oct 2024

In 1989 Hugh Kawharu changed the meaning of the original Māori words in the TOW. This resulted in confusion e.g. partnership and an explosion in TOW fraud.

QUIZ

1. Legally, why was the 1835 DeclaraCon of Independence superseded by the TOW?

2. What is the simple version of Art. 2 Sentence 1?

3. What was the 1831 meaning of ‘taonga’?

4. What was the modern meaning of ‘toanga’ that was invented by Kawharu in 1989?

5. Māori acCvists claim the Seabed and Foreshore due to the RJFV of the TOW. What BriCsh Law does Māori Seabed and Foreshore ownership breach?

• Review: see previous video

• Art 2 Sentence 1

• The DeclaraCon of Independence 1835 was superceded by TOW because the 39 chiefs involved signed both (Dr Ma]hew Wright

• Williams translated ‘property’ in TOW as ‘taonga’. 1820 Maori dicConary gives ‘taonga’ as ‘property procured by the spear – tao’. In 1831 ‘taonga’ meant ‘possessions’. i.e. cha]les

• Simple version of sentence 1: ‘The Queen guarantees to protect … Māori land, houses, and contents.’

• Kawharu 1989: TOW guaranteed Māori the right to be chiefs over all New Zealand forever. However, Māori sold 92% of their land. Also, ‘Property meant ‘treasures’ and included material and non-material aspects of a tribe’s estate e.g. customs and folklore.

• Treaty fraud exploded and acCvists pushed nonTOW concepts: Māori did not cede sovereignty, business partnership between Māori & Crown. Result: confusion

• Partnership & democracy are mutually exclusive

• Tuku Morgan believes TOW is a partnership. All NZers are not equal which is based on racism

• Māori received part of 5G spectrum band and $57million. TOW does not promise to promote Māori language. Seabed and Foreshore under BriCsh Law of Commons belong to all NZ ciCzens

• Māori can preserve their language and customs (as 159 NZ cultures do) with the excepCon of: human sacriﬁce, cannibalism infanCcide and slavery.

• Art 2 Sentence 1: means: ‘We’ll protect your ownership of your land, dwellings, and property, but the beaches belong to everyone.’

• David Seymour’s original draj of TOW Principles Bill is a perfect match for ArCcle 2

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi For Newbies

Preamble

Aug 2024

A discussion of the TOW Preamble and the reasons Māori wanted Britain to set up a government.

QUIZ

1. What three groups in 1840 had interests in the TOW?

2. In the TOW Preamble did the BriCsh say the would forcibly take Māori land?

3. What are the reasons that Māori wanted the BriCsh to set up a lawful government?

4. AcCvists & academics say that Māori did not cede sovereignty because Māori outnumbered the BriCsh in 1840. What is wrong with this argument?

5. What did the BriCsh intend to do if the Māori did not cede sovereignty?

• The Treaty consists of ﬁve parts: Preamble, ArCcles 1,2 and 3 and AﬃrmaCon

• PREAMBLE

o Hobson has been sent by the Queen and is wriCng on her behalf as the governor of NZ

o Three groups have interest in the Treaty: nonMāori se]lers, Māori chiefs and tribes and the Queen (represenCng the BriCsh Government)

o What applies to Māori applies to all people in NZ.

o The Queen acknowledged that Māori own land in NZ and that the BriCsh will not forcibly take their land.

• Māori needed the BriCsh to set up a lawful government because Māori o were drunk with warfare and their populaCon was falling

o lore of Ckanga was inadequate to serve the changing and diverse culture

o were in mortal fear of the French returning

o wanted the beneﬁts of trade to move from poverty to prosperity

• QuesCon asked by acCvists and some academics: Why would thousands of Māori given away their country to a small group of recent arrivals? This is deliberate spin, lies or possibly the result of historical ignorance.

• Māori told the BriCsh they wanted peace and order in NZ. They wanted protecCon from bad European elements e.g. convicts, as well as from tribes. Some Māori a]acked se]lers

• Many BriCsh se]lers had arrived and they needed a democraCc government

• Democracy means: 1 vote per person, all votes are equal, voCng gives MPs right to govern

• Hobson was appointed to NZ, to install a democracy and to install a government with infrastructure. To do this The BriCsh needed the permission of the Māori, otherwise they would leave.

• Which road is mandated by the Treaty and which honours the Treaty? Both do.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treason Pt 1

Jul 2024

Rawiri WaiCC makes exorbitant claims for more money to be paid to Māōri and Māori selfgovernment

QUIZ

1. What year was the deﬁniCon of ‘Māori’ changed to ‘any descendant’?

2. What did David Lange mean by: ‘Democracy and indigenous sovereignty cannot co-exist’?

3. What explains why 52% of the prison populaCon is Māori?

4. What ﬁnancial advantages do Māori have in NZ?

5. Why is the call for a separate Māori government treason?

BULLET POINTS

• Rawiri WaiCC in parliament says:

o There’s no menCon of Māori [in the Budget]

o One in ﬁve are Māori (exaggeraCon)

o Wants $80 billion per year for Māori

o 52% of the prison populaCon is Māori, thus Māori should get that % of the Budget

o Our land was stolen (lie)

• Māori are going to act independently

• NZ Asian populaCon is now greater than Māori populaCon

• 1974 Act: Any descendant of a Māori can be self-designated Māori to increase numbers. Iwi leaders should not be involved in Census staCsCcs

• Democracy and indigenous sovereignty cannot co-exist David Lange

• Māori have not oﬀered soluCons for the high prison numbers and for the h igh number of Māori children in state care, except more cash.

• Welfare paid to Māori exceeds tax paid by Māori

• Māori pay 17% corporate tax, only some Māōri pay rates

• Māori sold 92% of their land

• The call for a separate government is treason

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treason Pt 2

Jul 2024

Rawiri WaiCC makes exorbitant claims for more money to be paid to Māōri and that Māori were traumaCsed by colonisaCon without evidence.

QUIZ

1. What advantages did colonisaCon bring for Māori?

2. Why do Māori not show graCtude for the grievance se]lements?

3. Why should Mataurangi Māori not be introduced into NZ Science curriculums?

Clue: Science is global.

4. What change occurred to Māori life expectancy ajer 1840?

5. What USA academic theory says ‘colonisaCon always produces trauma for indigenous people’?

• Rawiri WaiCC in parliament says:

o There’s no menCon of Māori [in the Budget]

o No menCon of Māori in Health and EducaCon [in the Budget]

o $15million is not enough for MataCni (Māori dance fesCval)

o Māori have been traumaCsed by colonisaCon

• Mataurangi Māori is being pushed for NZ Science programmes rather than Religious Studies. Richard Dawkins disagrees as Science is universal.

• ColonisaCon brought many advances (listed) to Māori e.g. life expectancy increased from mid-twenCes in 1840 to mid-sevenCes in late 20th century

• Colonial trauma of Māori is a myth; no evidence. [This concept is derived from dubious USA CriCcal Race ‘Theory’]

• Social indicaCons show that despite huge handouts Māori are not ﬂourishing.

• Māori acCvist use complaining as a weapon.

• Māori show no graCtude for handouts.

• Endgame is complete dominance.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 1

Oct 2024

How NZ is inching towards tribal rule evidenced by numerous examples of Māori privilege QUIZ

1. What examples of legislaCon show that NZ is a ‘two Cer naCon’?

2. What is the target year for Māori tribal control of NZ?

3. In what ways are Māori favoured within EducaCon?

4. In what ways are Māori favoured within Land and ConservaCon Law?

5. In what ways are Māori favoured within NaConal & Local Government?

• NZ is a two Cer naCon due to the extent of Māori privilege that started in the 1970 to atone for supposed injusCces

• The injusCces are not supported by historical evidence. (Ref: John Robinson “Who Really Stole The Treaty’, 2024, Tross Publishing)

• 2040 is the target for Māori tribal control of NZ

• Māori privileges result in reverse apartheid/racism so many want Māori privileges to be eradicated. Thus David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill

• Ref: NZCPR Blog, Geoﬀ Parker, 11 April 2024

• Lists of Māori privileges follow:

• EDUCATION:

o Māori Schools, propaganda enters home

o PromoCon of MāoriﬁcaCon in the school curriculum (Te Ao Vision) e.g. Te TiriC comic

o Compulsory Treaty/Language courses for all ﬁrst year students at A.U. from 2025

o Special travel grants for Māori & Pasiﬁka researchers

o Special Māori & Pasiﬁka study areas at uni.

• HEALTH:

o Māori only health iniCaCves & expenditure

o Percentage of medical university places reserved for Māori

o Priority access to care based on race (2024 CoaliCon changed this to ‘based on need’).

• HOUSING/WELFARE (159 cultures miss out)

o Māori- only housing projects

o Māori- only welfare programmes

• LAW & JUSTICE SYSTEM

o Supreme court approval for wider use of Tikanga (Māori tribal lore) as Law and equal in status to the Common Law

o Tikanga compulsory subject in Law Schools

o Waitangi Tribunal (advisory status) must have a Māori majority

o Māori Law Society (restricted membership)

o Treaty se]lements to extend to Hapu as well as Iwi (e.g. 2024 Nga Puhi negoCaCons)

o Māori- only prisoner programmes

o A]empt by Solicitor-General to give special treatment to Māori oﬀenders in public prosecuCon guideline (withdrawal ordered by A]orney General Collins)

o Lenient policing & sentencing for Māori oﬀenders

• PUBLIC SERVICE

o Māori- only employment/consultants in government agencies

o ConCnued priority of Māori names for ministries despite coaliCon law to use English

• LAND & CONSERVATION

o Māori- only consultaCon under the RMA & Fast Track Approvals Bill currently progressing through parliament

o Māori- only judges appointed to the Māori Land Court

o Māori- only co -management/control of NaConal Parks, rivers, lakes, coastline

o Māori- only claims to the country’s harbours, estuaries, foreshore, seabed and territorial waters (& the air above) with obligatory taxpayer funding for associated legal & research costs

o Māori- only ﬁshing areas in the Hauraki Gulf

• TAX & BANKING

o A special Māori Authority tax code of 17.5%

o A special Māori-only exempCon to allow blood relaCons to beneﬁt from a business’s tax-free charitable status

o Diversity appointment policy for the Reserve Bank Board

• NATONAL & LOCAL GOVERNMENT

o Māori- only seats on local councils

o Māori- only appointments to powerful local government commi]ees

o Māori- only regional Statuary Boards

o Māori- only seats in parliament

o Local council designaCon of all land as Māori cultural sites without ratepayer approval (e.g. Gore District Council 2024)

o A percentage of Government & Council suppliers to be Māori only

• LANUAGAGE, MEDIA , ARTS

o Māori language funding

o Public funding for Māori radio/TV & Māori journalist training

o Extensive funding for Māori arCsts/writers in the performing arts

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 2

Oct 2024 NZ came closer to a 2 Cer naCon through the 1974 Māori Aﬀairs

Amendment Bill

QUIZ NA

• MaCu Rata ws responsible for the 1974 Māori Aﬀairs Amendment Bill

• This provided new principles and beneﬁts for Māori

• Māori status was changed legally from 50% or more Māori blood to ‘a person of the Māori race or a descendant of the race

• This increased the number of people who idenCﬁed themselves as Māori resulCng in:

o More Māori seats in parliament

o More funds for Māori

o Target educaCon etc for Māori

• This Māori recruitment was very successful and draws NZ closer to a Māori takeover.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 3

Oct 2024

NZ came closer to a 2 Cer naCon through the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act which opened the way for a cascade of Māori privileges.

QUIZ

1. Why can conﬁscaCons of Māori land not be objected to because of the TOW?

2. Which MP was responsible for the 1975 TOW Act?

3. What evidence indicates that the Waitangi Tribunal has indulged in fraud?

4. How many million dollars does the WT cost each year?

5. What types of evidence is allowed by the Waitangi Tribunal?

• TOW records that the Chiefs ceded sovereignty to the Queen. In return the new government would protect Māori possessions. They could only sell their land to the government. All people would have the rights and responsibiliCes of BriCsh ciCzens. Chiefs understood this.

• Early in the 20th century some Māori complained about their land loss. Apirana Ngata said: The chiefs place in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some secCons of the Māori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operaCon and land was taken in payment. This itself is a Māori custom revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The conﬁscaCons cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the treaty.1

• Māori acCvists looked for ways to cancel the decisions of their ancestors including the sale of 92% of their land. They plo]ed & planned to exploit MP weaknesses.

• MaCu Rata was responsible for the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act (TOW Act) which was set up to invite corrupCon and fraud:

1. The legislaCon menCon ‘principles’ but these are undeﬁned leading to corrupCon

2. The Act used the Freeman English version. It was imputed that the translaCon was faulty and only Māori could say what the true meaning was.

3. Claims took the form of old stories, memories & verbal accounts, the veracity of which was not allowed to be challenged. In 2014 the WT said the chiefs did not cede sovereignty

4. Meanings of words could be given 20th century translaCons to suit claimants.

• Waitangi Tribunal cost NZ taxpayers $21 million per year. Many people were involved in producing huge reports that used Māori words to confuse history-ignorant poliCcians.

• The TOW Act caused Māori privileges to bloom.

• Lack of opposiCon from Non -Māori allows Māori to conCnue asking for TOW Act handouts.

1 A.T. Ngata, Te Tiriti o Waitangi: an Explanation, 1922, p.12.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 4

Nov 2024 TOW Amendment Act (1975) 1984 allowed claims back to 1840 and over 2000 claims were made. In 2024 the number of claims had risen to 10,000.

QUIZ

1. It what year was the TOW Amendment Act passed that allowed claims back to 1840?

2. How does the number of claims to the WT exemplify the ‘Camel in the Tent’ fable?

3. Does the TOW support the claims being made to the WT?

4. What is the overall role of the 60 people who work at the WT?

5. What are the possible reasons that poliCcians prefer to appease Māori claims?

• NZ is a 2 Cer apartheid state

• The Government sancCons this by paying Māori acCvists to sue the Government. Government legislaCon is pushed by Māori acCvists.

• Earlier videos covered: Māori Aﬀairs Amendment Act 1974 (Video 2), Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (Video 3)

• TOW AMENDMENT ACT (1975) 1984 allowed claims back to 1840

• About control

• Camel in the Tent Classic Fable small harmless acts can result in huge repercussions i.e. takeover by stealth or gradualism

o TOW Act 1975 = nose in the tent, 5 Treaty claims

o TOW Amendment Act 1984 = head & neck in the tent, 2034 Treaty claims

o 2024 = body in the tent, 10,000 Treaty claims registered according to Potaka

• TOW does not support any of these claims. These late 20th century claims should not have been passed.

• If this claiming process conCnues all NZ will belong top Māori acCvists according to He Puapua.

• 60 people work at the Waitangi Tribunal, cosCng the taxpayer $21 million per year. Their role is to transfer cash/assets/land from public to Māori ownership.

• When complete the camel will be in the tent, i.e. Māori will have taken over and the rest will be outside the tent.

• Māori acCvists put pressure on poliCcians who appease Māori and the process conCnues.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 5

Nov 2024

State Owned Enterprises Case of 1987 invented the concept that the TOW was a partnership between Queen Victoria & Māori. Local Councils are giving funds to iwi without making the transacCons visible.

QUIZ

1. What is the relevance of the State Owned Enterprises Case 1987 to the Treaty Principles Bill?

2. What did Chief Judge Robin Cooke say in a 77 page report that further clouded the meaning of the TOW?

3. Who said that ‘there is no legal basis for the idea that the TOW is a partnership’?

4. Which poliCcians sCll believe that the TOW is a partnership?

5. Why is Michael Lawes’ concerned about the millions of dollars being paid to Ngai Tahu by the Otago Regional Council?

BULLET POINTS

• THE STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES CASE OF 1987

• Between the NaConal Māori Council and the NZ Government.

• The 5 judges had to decide what principles can be drawn from the TOW that are relevant to race relaCons today.

• They produced a 77 page report. Chief Judge Robin Cooke said that ‘ the treaty is an enduring relaConship of a ﬁduciary nature akin to a partnership, each party accepCng a posiCve duty to act in good faith, fairly and reasonably, and honourably towards the other.’ Each judge gave an opinion on what the principles should be.

• JusCce Anthony Willy observed that none of the judges said the TOW was a partnership between Queen Victoria and the Māori inhabitants of NZ. There is no legal basis for the idea; it is nonsense.

• Māori acCvists are delusional to believe the partnership concept, but it explains why they and poliCcians (Erica Stanford, Chris Luxon) think that NZ’s resources need to be shared out 50:50. MPs feel obliged to appease Māori acCvists.

• Note: In a partnership both partners are obliged to pay the costs of running the enterprise. Māori, if they were true partners , would pay half.

• MICHAEL LAWES IVESTIGATION: REGIONAL COUNCILS AND THE MĀORI PARTNERSHIP

• Councils give funds to local iwi because they believe the TOW mandates they are in a partnership. This is incorrect. These funds are not recorded in budgets or plans.

• Otago Regional Council gives funds to Ngai Tahu (a commercial enCty). This council has paid $3.5. million for contracts plus $1.8 million for the last ﬁnancial year. Exorbitant koha. No records exist.

• Michael is ﬁnding out what is happening in other councils.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

What’s So Very Wrong

With Tuku Morgan

Sep 2024

Tuku Morgan misunderstands Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill and considers that Government handed to Māori are ‘Māori achievements’.

QUIZ

1. Does the Treaty Principles Bill take away Māori rights, language, idenCty and right to selfdeterminaCon?

2. Tuku thinks ‘ACT policy will homogenise us all into one culture.’ How likely is this to happen?

3. Why does Tuku want more Māori on the Māori Roll? 4. Is it fair to blame the Government for ‘Māori underachievement, poor health and poor prison staCsCcs’?

5. Thomas Sowell said: ‘When people get used to preferenCal treatment, equal treatment seems like discriminaCon.’ How does this statement apply to the Māori reacCon to the TP Bill?

• Tuku Morgan (T) shouts that Seymour wants to remove TOW and take away ‘our’ rights

• Apirana Ngata: Art 1 Māori ceded sovereignty

• 1840 Māori celebrated TOW

• T: Seymour is taking away our rights, language, idenCty and right to self-determinaCon. Refers to Don Brash as a dog as he is alerCng the public. Jim Bolger lit the ﬁres of appeasement, Helen Clarke did not.

• T: ‘We can celebrate an ‘enduring partnership’ (which the TOW is not). Judge Cooke said TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. It is oxymoronic to say the TOW is a partnership.

• T: TOW should be honoured. Chiefs know ‘Hobson’s’ word was his bond. Māori, not government, broke the TOW. (See Robinson, ‘Who Really Broke The Treaty?’, 2024.)

• T: Government is a wrecking ball as it has dismantled everything meaningful to Māori such as Tamariki SecCon 7AA, Māori Health Authority, Te Reo signage, Three Waters, (MACA) Seabed and Foreshore. [None of these changes exclude Māori parCcipaCon.]

• T: ‘We thought there was honour in the Crown.’ ‘ACT policy will homogenise us all into one culture.’

• Fact: Seymour wants to: honour TOW, make people equal, have one standard of ciCzenship, treat all cultures equally and preserve democracy.

• T believes there are 1 million with Māori ancestry.

• Fact: Brainwashing in schools; e.g. history syllabus, comic Te TiriC o Waitangi.

• T: ‘Government have thrown Māori under the bus, then run over them.

• T: ‘you’ve got to consult Māori. Iwi have to unite. Have to get more people on Māori Roll, so we can determine the nature of the next government. We want less government and more Māori control. We must se]le grievances and move on. Ministries have done a poor job.’ T liked the Labour Government.

• T blames government for Māori underachievement, poor health and poor prison

staCsCcs. Support and help has been rare and infrequent.’

• ‘When people get used to preferenCal treatment, equal treatment seems like discriminaCon.’ Thomas Sowell

• T: ‘This is a watershed moment for us. The government has a long way to go to restore faith and honour between the Crown and iwi. Twenty nine years ago we started the journey of recovery, 23% of the total land that was taken from Waikato, 1.2 million acres at the hand of a gun. [Lie] We’re a billion dollar corporaCon. We don’t need your money. We need you to listen to us because ﬁghCng for our people is serious business.’

• Summary: In his rant Tuku: catastrophises, plays the vicCm card (blames others), lied, spun, misinformed, uses guilt and shame, shouted, inCmidated, asks for more funds, wants Māori to control parliament, wants more Māori on the electoral roll, believes Māori achievement will be controlling the country. In this speech T dishonours the TOW and the elders who signed, reinforces that Māori are vicCms and dependant on others which reinforces a culture of grievance.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Whats right and whats wrong with the Treaty

Principle’s Bill

Nov 2024

Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill originally reflected the Treaty closely. Luxon’s modificaCons reflect the WT approach to preserve the status quo.

Quiz

1. How well do Seymour’s original principles reﬂect the TOW?

2. Does the second revised sentence of Principle 2 give Māori special privileges?

3. Does the second revised sentence of Principle 2 set any boundaries on what privileges can be given to Māori?

4. Is there a contradicCon between Principle 2 and Principle 3?

5. Does the revised Principle 2 support the original TOW or the post- 1975 status quo?

BULLET POINTS

• David Seymour is calling the country back to the original intenCon and meaning of the Treaty. His original 3 principles:

o NZ Government has the right to govern all NZers;

o NZ Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiejainship of their land and all their property;

o NZers are equal under the law with the same rights and duCes.

• Seymour was forced by Luxon to change these. These are the Revised Principles:

• Principle 1: acknowledges that in 1840 the Maori chiefs ceded sovereignty to the BriCsh. All land, rivers, lakes, mountains etc i.e. common land was to be managed by the Government. (Ref: Hugh Barr) Māori owned land was protected unCl they sold it, as were pegged ﬁshing sites. Māori sold 92% of their land

• Principle 2: The Crown respects and protects the rights that hapū and iwi had when they signed the Treaty.

• Principle 2, sentence 2 says “However; if those rights diﬀer from the rights of everyone, sub- clause (1) applies only if those rights are agreed in the se]lement of a historical treaty claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975."

• This does this mean that if the Waitangi Tribunal advises the government to grant Maori some special privilege the government can reject or accept it.

• Up unCl now, Maori have been able to claim many rights, "as of right”, via the Treaty. This Bill would end special Maori rights "as of right.”

• However, Māori can sCll be given special privileges and rights.

• Principle 3: "Everyone is equal before the law. Everyone is en2tled, without discrimina2on, to (a) the equal protec2on and equal beneﬁt of the law; and (b) the equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights."

• This contradicts Principle 2 because Luxon wants to please everyone.

• The Bill contains contradicCons and conCnues the status quo.

• Responses: make submissions; trigger a ciCzens’ iniCated referendum.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours Treaty Principle’s Bill. What the Hikoi Has to Tell Us.

29 Nov 2024

A hikoi against the Treaty Principles Bill ended outside Parliament. The reasons for the event are discussed.

QUIZ

1. What organisaCon organised the hikoi?

2. What appears to have been a hidden agenda for the hikoi?

3. How many people a]ended the hikoi?

4. Did people on the hikoi understand its purpose?

5. Who was the organiser of the Hikoi employed by?

BULLET POINTS

• Hikoi was organised as a Te PaC Māori fundraiser, by a man on the Parliamentary payroll who worked for Te PaC Māori.

• The hikoi purpose was to harvest more Māori onto the Māori Electoral Roll to increase Māori representaCon in Parliament. Currently most Māori are on the General Electoral Roll.

• MP Winston Peters said: It was more of a carpoi to make proﬁts for an incorporated company. The organisers did not ask any MPs to speak at it. It was a stunt. ParCcipants had various reasons to a]end the hikoi.

• Independent reporter Sean Plunket of The Playorm said: About 40,000 to 50,000 marchers a]ended. Most people were there under false pretences as they had been lied to about the Bill. Te PaC Māori had carefully crajed poliCcal theatre.

• NZ has been subject to serious radicalisaCon, including young school children.

• Labour is collaboraCng with Te PaC Māori.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours

Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame and Jim Bolger?

2 Dec 2024

AlternaCve:

Why Ngai Tahu Have No Right To South Island Water

21 Feb 2025

Jim Bolger gave away 90% of the South Island in 1998. Records show Māori sold most of the Island by 1864.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• Revealed that in the Ngai Tahu Claims Se]lement Act 1998 Jim Bolger gave ‘chieﬂy authority’ [rangaCratanga] 90% of the South Island to Ngai Tahu.

• David Seymour said his Bill would not interfere with the se]lement.

• Historical records show Ngai Tahu virtually all the South Island by 1864:

o Ōtākou Block sold for £2,400, 1844- 64.

o Kemp Purchase (Otago, Canterbury, Westland) sold for £2,000.

o Port Cooper & Port Levi: £200 & £300.

o Murihiku (Southland): £2,600.

o Disputed Claim in Nelson area 1856: Sorted by JusCce Sim in Breaches of the Treaty Royal Commission, JusCce Sim.

o North Canterbury: £500.

o Kaikoura Coast: £300.

o West Coast: £300.

o Rakiura (Stewart Is): £6,000.

• Why did Jim Bolger give away 90% of the South Island in 1998 when it had been sold by 1864?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymour’s Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame?

5 Dec 2024

Jack Tame holds an acCvist understanding of the TOW and has been misleading New Zealanders.

QUIZ

1. What does Jack Tame ‘CnorangaCratanga’ means?

2. How are acCvists able to maintain that Rev. William Williams was a poor translator?

3. Did the BriCsh promise in the TOW to protect all New Zealand for Māori or just the land that Māōri occupied?

4. How much of New Zealand did Māori eventually sell?

5. Why was William Spain appointed Land Commissioner in 1840?

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• Is Jack Tame deceiving or is he history ignorant?

• David says his Bill does not interfere with any previous claims.

• Tame thinks Cno- rangaCratanga means ‘sovereignty’.

• The Final English Draj of the Treaty (4 Feb 1940), known as the Li]lewood draj tells us the BriCsh intended Cno- rangaCratanga to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’.

• AcCvists use the rogue James Freeman Version which is very diﬀerent to the Māori version. This allowed acCvists to say that Rev. William Williams was an incompetent translator, so acCvists use their ‘improved’ back translaCon.

• The Li]lewood Draj Art 2 S1 says: ‘ The Queen of England conﬁrms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’ So Cno-rangaCratanga means ‘possession’. i.e. The BriCsh promised to protect Māori lan d with their house and cha]els. This did not include all the land in NZ.

• Following 1840, Māori went on to sell 92% of their land (Ref: Mike Butler).

• Prior to the Treaty Māori had sold about 33% of the land to se]lers. (Ref: H.H. Turton).

• Following the TOW William Spain was appointed Land Commissioner to invesCgate pre-1840 land sales. Some sales were disqualiﬁed. Some se]lers lost money. Māori could sell a piece of land more than once.

• When land is sold sovereignty is transferred from the seller to the buyer.

• How could Bolger give sovereignty of 90% of the South Island to Ngai Tahu? Is Tame being ignorant or deceiyul?

• Why did Seymour not pick Tame up? Seymour is history ignorant as are all MPs. Tame holds an acCvist understanding of the TOW so has been misleading New Zealanders.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymour’s Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame? (Part Two)

10 Dec 2024

David Seymour is Treaty ignorant. Jack Tame is an acCvist and has been misleading New Zealanders re the TWO. Māori reversalists have visited Cuban communists and acCvists overseas. Luxon goes with the Māori ﬂow.

QUIZ QUESTIONS

1. Why is the TOW an agreement and not a contract?

2. Name two proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW.

3. Which ArCcle of the TOW makes Māori BriCsh CiCzens?

4. What is a Māori reversalist?

5. What strategies have Māori reversalists used to accomplish the takeover of NZ?

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview Sat 23 Nov: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• David confuses the Treaty with a contract.

• Jack thinks TOW was a binding agreement between the Crown and iwi. [It was an agreement between ‘Queen Victoria’ (not a Crown corporaCon) and the chiefs and tribes and ‘all the people of New Zealand’.]

• Māori ceded sovereignty i.e. gave up complete power to govern to the BriCsh, so Jack’s premise is false.

• Government has every right to interpret the Treaty because of ArCcle 1. CiCzens can vote & protest if they object.

• Sir Apirana Ngata said the Treaty ‘made one law for the Māori and Pākehā. If you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.’

• Is Jack Tame history ignorant or is he trying to mislead?

• Māori did cede sovereignty. (See 10 proofs.) Ref: Bain A]wood ‘incontroverCble that all of NZ & all persons lay within the power of the crown.’

• Art. 3. Māori were made BriCsh ciCzens. They were made equal before the law. If Māori are given privileges that breaks Art. 3.

• Muriel Newman: In 1979 Māori reversalists visited Cuba & collaborated with the PalesCne LiberaCon Front about how to take over NZ. 2 Ripeka Evans, Deputy Chair TVNZ was on the Cuban Trip.

• Māori reversalists used (1) biculturalism to prioriCse Māori language & culture in insCtuCons & (2) embed acCvists in government service. Reversalists pushed ‘partnership’ and ‘co-governance’.

• Luxon will not confront breaches of TOW. He is TOW ignorant, history ignorant, afraid of Māori and pushes MāoriﬁcaCon and co- governance.

• Government needs to set up a Se]ler tribunal.

2 Muriel Newman, Capturing a Country, nzcpr.com, 1 Dec 2024.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Reverse The MACA. Are you Aware?

We are about to lose our beaches

11 Dec 2024

The Rogue James Freeman Version of TOW was used in the 1975 Act and allows Māori to take over the coasts.

QUIZ

1. What is the diﬀerence in Māori ﬁshing rights between the Freeman and Busby versions of TOW?

2. Which Treaty version was incorporated into the 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act?

3. Which poliCcian blocked Māori having customary ﬁshing rights in 2004?

4. Which poliCcians allowed Māori ﬁshing rights?

5. What are some of the disadvantages for non-Māori NZers when Māori own large secCons of the coast.

BULLET POINTS

• Rogue James Freeman Version (RJFV) of TOW: ‘Her Majesty the Queen of England conﬁrms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respecCve families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properCes which they may collecCvely or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession …’

• The James Busby English Version (JBEV) says: ‘ The Queen of England conﬁrms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their properly.’ i.e. coastline belongs to all NZers. Same in Māori version. No beaches.

• 1975 the RJFV was inserted into the Waitangi Tribunal Act.

• 2004 Māori wanted customary ﬁshing rights, but Helen Clark refused.

• History ignorant MPs Chris Finlayson, John Key & Turiana Turia allowed ﬁshing rights as long as they were conCnuous and exclusive.

• This was thought to only apply to <10% of the coast but acCvist judges used a low bar and there were 100s of claims.

• Tribal coastline owners can issue ﬁnes up to $5000 to trespassers, lease coast to mining interests, block resource consent etc.

• E.g. Meridian paid South Island iwi $180 million for hydro resource consent.

• Each claimant can be given up to $458,000 to ﬁle a claim in court. We are paying for Māori to take over coast.

• ACTION: Inform MPs that Ckanga must be outlawed and that we must return to the 2004 Act.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Co-governance

Video Made In 2002 about What was Coming To New Zealand in 2023 2002

A ﬁcConal but predicCve vision from 2002 of New Zealand in 2050.

• Audio refers to a failed referendum re a separate Māori parliament and 0.5 million in a street protest, Māori will make billions over ﬁsheries etc., ﬁrebomb etc. Tribal land becomes exclusive zones.

• 2050: NZ a republic of Aotearoa. Maori have absolute sovereignty. One upper house, two houses of representaCves Māori & Pākehā. Māori have separate Health, Welfare, EducaCon & JusCce services with separate tax systems.

• PopulaCon is 20% Maori, 30% Polynesian, & 50% Asian & Pākehā.

• Famiies are mixed race & bilingual.

• Māori have self-determinaCon (CnorangaCratanga).

• Tribes would further subdivide the country into tribal controlled areas and control tourist movement with fees.

• 2050 Māori only 20% populaCon.

• If farmer’s land is threatened they will take up land as in Zimbabwe.

• Māori need access to money and resources.

• Fishing will involve fees, catch conﬁscaCon..

• Two or three systems would involve more bureaucracy and cost more.

• Could be intertribal rugby compeCCons. [A combinaCon of tribal and colonial culture.]

• NaConal anthem [actually a hymn] sung in Te Reo.

• Bilingual NaCon. [Tribal languages are very limited.] Māori companies will be bilingual.

• Paciﬁc Island a]ack on iwi headquarters.NZ is mulCcultural.

• PosiCve discriminaCon. Māori will have no university fees. EducaCon will be can be on a race basis.

• Privileging a group based race is dangerous.

• Regional revitalisaCon due to local Māori input.

• SeparaCsm will help improve the status of Māori.

• Māori think that poor health staCsCcs etc have been inﬂicted on them.

• Need to act now to prevent conﬂict.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Le]er of The Maoris to King Charles. What is it really all about?

17 Dec 2024

Māori acCvists have a sent a le]er to King Charles. He has no power to act. Eight complaints are all asserCons without any evidence and all are easy to rebut.

QUIZ

1. What power does King Charles have to intervene in NZ poliCcal aﬀairs?

2. Why is it be]er for the Government to deﬁne Treaty principles rather than the courts and WT?

3. Where in the TOW are Māori given exclusive rights to NZ’s mineral and energy resources?

4. Do the revised principles reduce Māori access to poliCcal posiCons?

5. What facts does the le]er quote to jusCfy the asserCons?

BULLET POINTS

• King Charles III is only a ceremonial head of NZ; same for governor-general.

• Aim of the le]er is to shame and embarrass the Government. Like children telling tales.

• Luxon will react by appeasing acCvists.

• COMPLAINTS:

1. Government is a]acking Māori rights in the TOW. Māori have no special rights in the TOW [apart from being able to sell land to the Govt]. AcCvists want a dual government which is treason.

2. Govt is redefining the TOW principles. These have neve been defined by government but need to be. Current principles from courts and WT do not reflect the TOW.

3. Careless mining of land and seabed. Māori play at conservaCon but the historic record shows 35 species when exCnct prior to Europeans arrived.

4. Denial of property and resource rights minerals, geothermal and water. TOW protected what Māori owned in 1840. TOW does not give Māori rights to all resources.

5. Government has power to take abused children from families. 88% of children in state care are Māori. Māori are twice as likely to be abused in Māori homes. Māori children were put in state care because of child abuse.

6. Changes will make it more diﬃcult for Māori to enter professions. 30% of admissions to Medical School are reserved for Māori & Pasiﬁka students.

7. Government is prevenCng Te Reo use. There is no law against Te Reo. It is being used to groom non-Māori to accept Māori take over.

8. Reducing Māori access to local/central Government. Not true. Māori want the pay & say without the eﬀort of geÜng elected.

• SUMMARY: No facts, just asserCons & opinions in the le]er. Luxon will appease Māori as a result.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Our New Zealand Nurses. How They Are Being Targeted For IndoctrinaCon

19 Dec 2024

Updated Registered Nurse Standards of Competence (RNSC) criCques by American scienCst Jerry Coyne. QUIZ

1. What is meant by ‘cultural safety’?

2. What ‘power imbalances’ exist in the NZ health system that might aﬀect Māori?

3. Does the inserCon of Māori terms within the English text (called Manglish) improve communicaCon?

4. Do the terms ‘hospitality’ and ‘respect’ have diﬀerent meanings in Pāakehā and Māori culture?

5. What is the long term reason behind introducing Māori concepts into Western Medicine?

BULLET POINTS

• USA Biologist JERRY COYNE: “The latest from the asylum”: New Zealand nurses directed to foster, accept, and prioriCze indigenous culture, including specious “ways of healing”

• Registered Nurse Standards of Competence (RNSC). Updated

• This has come from a mental asylum as Māori are a minority will sow seeds of apartheid.

• Requires nurses to demonstrate kawa whakaruruhau (Māori cultural safety) by addressing power imbalances in healthcare. Nurses have to work towards equitable health outcomes for Māori

• Māori have access to the same health care so there are no power imbalances. Māori health outcomes depend on lifestyle as well.

• Nurses ‘must also recognise the importance of whanaungatanga (building relaConships) and manaakitanga (hospitality and respect) in fostering collecCve wellbeing.’ Nurses have always done this. Māori terms are used for control. Pre1840 Māori controlled slaves.

• Nurses must incorporaCng cultural, spiritual, physical, and mental health into whakapapacentred care (focused on family and ancestors). This recruits nurses into Māori religion with prayers and chants. Ancestral connecCons with the dead is very tribal.

• Nurses need to ‘describe the impact of colonisaCon and social determinants on health and wellbeing.’ A Very negaCve approach.

• None of this is mandated in TOW.

• Nurses must say no because this is: indoctrinaCon in Māori religion, brainwashing, about control and dominaCon, being told what to think, threatening to job security, making nurses responsible for health outcomes.

• This is another step in the long march to put Māori in full control of NZ by 2040.

• Luxon is an acCvist and refuses to stop this.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

4 Reasons Why Maori Think They Deserve Special Rights

29 Dec 2024

Māori incorrectly believe: they are indigenous, did not cede sovereignty, are in a partnership and that the Treaty mandates partnership.

QUIZ:

1. What does the acronym SIPP mean?

2. What evidence do we have that Māori were colonists and are not indigenous to NZ?

3. What proofs exist that Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW?

4. Why do Māori acCvists believe that the TOW was a partnership?

5. Why did David Lange say that ‘Queen Victoria was not that sort of person’?

POINTS

• Tuku Morgan think Māori, among 160 cultures within NZ, have special rights.

• The ‘special rights’ delusion has 4 foundaConal beliefs:

1. INDIGENUITY:

• Māori acCvists believe they are indigenous. i.e. ‘inhabiCng or exisCng in a land from earliest Cmes’. They are not indigenous.

• AcCvists have corrupted the meaning of the word by adding ‘or from before the arrival of colonists’. [Māori came from other Paciifc Islands & are themselves colonists.] Ref: John Aldworth: Evidence of an earlier culture living in New Zealand.

2. DID NOT CEDE SOVEREIGNTY IN TOW

• Māori c hiefs did cede sovereignty. (Art.1) See: 12 Proofs that Māo ri ceded Sovereignty.

• In TOW Māori handed over to the BriCsh the right to manage & govern NZ’s resources.

• The government agreed to protect Māori ‘land, dwellings and property’. (Art. 2)

• Māori acCvists say that: they have the right to govern NZ, that NZ was stolen, the resources belong to Māori and they want NZ back.

3. TOW IS A PARTNERSHIP

• Not true, but Luxon believes this. JusCce Cooke in 1987 said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. Judge Anthony Willy has checked the 77 page document as says that the partnership concept is invalid.

• A partnership concept conﬂicts with Art 1.

4. TOW MANDATES SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR MĀORI

• In 1840 ‘Cno rangiCratanga’ meant ‘possession’. Ajer TOW all Māori, including slaves, could own possessions. (Art2.)

• Hugh Kawharu mistranslated it as ‘unqualiﬁed exercise of chiejainship’ in 1989.

• AcCvists believe Māori own the resources and land of NZ and want them back and that they have the right to be chiefs over all of NZ.

• David Lange said you can either have a democraCc government or indigenous sovereignty but not both.

VIDEO

NAME SYNOPSIS

The Great Lie Maori AcCvists Use To Try And Fool The Public

2 Jan 2025

Two Māori acCvists state the Great Lie which a]empts to back up the Māori did not cede sovereignty argument. Ten facts are discussed disproving the Great Lie hypothesis. QUIZ

1. What is the Great Lie?

2. Why do Māori acCvists put so much emphasis on the Great Lie?

3. What characterisCcs of BriCsh Culture appealed to Māori?

4. What do Māori acCvists believe life was like for Māori prior to the TOW?

5. What BriCsh technology prior to the TOW did Māori Chiefs value highest?

BULLET POINTS

• The Great Lie: It was illogical for 100,000 Māori to give up NZ in 1840 to 2,000 se]lers from the other side of the world and did not speak their language. i.e. Māori did not cede sovereignty.

• VIDEO: Two Māori acCvists state the Great Lie: Hemut Modik, and Margaret Mutu.

• AcCvists believe Māori in 1840 were united, had their own government and were peaceful and ﬂourishing as a naCon. The BriCsh interrupted the idyllic lifestyle. If this were true, ceding sovereignty would obviously seem ridiculous

• FACTS: Māori chiefs wanted the BriCsh to take over because Māori wanted:

1. BriCsh power and they recognised King William as a great chief. They had witnessed BriCsh ships and technologies.

2. Trade with the BriCsh. More se]lers meant more trade.

3. BriCsh technology & goods. Māori valued sheep, ca]le, horses, iron tools, medical equipment, clothing & texCles, ploughs, wheels, muskets etc

4. A pathway from poverty. Aligning with Britain could raise Māori to a be]er lifestyle without warfare.

5. ChrisCanity was be]er than Ckanga (revenge & plunder). The church could improve literacy, health & sanitary pracCce.

6. BriCsh Law and JusCce to replace violent Ckanga.

7. ProtecCon from the French following the Du Fresne incident.

8. ProtecCon from the Portuguese, Spanish and Americans looking for new colonies.

9. PreservaCon of their land from invading tribes. The TOW meant the Government could protect all land ownership and maintain BriCsh civil law.

10. To end self-annihilaCon. About 50,000 Māori were killed by Māori in the Musket Wars.

• Eight of these FACTS occur in the 1831 le]er to King William from 13 Nga Puhi chiefs.

• AcCvists who say ceding sovereignty is illogical show ignorance of Māori and BriCsh history before 1840 or are intenConally lying. READ: ‘What is the soluCon for Māori’

How

Equity For Maori Is Causing Apartheid, Racism, And Racial Division

4 Jan 2025

Discussion about equality and equity within the NZ Health Ministry prompted by a Waikato Heath Authority Oﬃce noCce to Māori paCents. QUIZ

1. What is the diﬀerence between equity and equality?

2. What factors, other than racism, can aﬀect how successful people are in life?

3. Other than geneCcs, what is the major factor aﬀecCng people’s health?

4. What is an argument against racism being the cause of Māori in remote parts having poorer health care?

5. Why is equity the thief of human potenCal?

• Waikato Heath Authority Oﬃce noCce favours Māori paCents over other ethniciCes.

• Māori are not the vicCms in the NZ health system; Non -Māori are.

• Equity means equality of outcome. Equality means equal opportunity.

• If person A is lazy they tend to have a bad outcome, while a hardworking person B tends to have a be]er outcome in life.

• According to CriCcal Race Theory (CRT) diﬀerent outcomes in life are due to racism.

• A poor lifestyle tends to result in poor health outcomes, while acCvists say the bad results are due to injusCce and colonialism (i.e. CRT).

• The call for equity cuts out compeCCon and promotes vicCm mentality which is cruel.

• According to CRT lack of equity is when people do not achieve the same desirable outcomes.

• Māori can achieve the same standard of health care as anyone else.

• All people who live in remote areas have more diﬃculty accessing health care, not just Māori. No racism is involved. [All rural people can apply for travel assistance.]

• USA philosopher Thomas Sowell said: ‘Equity is the thief of human potenCal.’ People are told society is ﬁxed, so why try to improve.

• Medical School entry reserves 30% for Māori & Pasiﬁka. Non-Māori are thus limited.

• Māori corporaCon pay less tax, so other taxpayers pay for Māori privilege.

• Equality means a level playng ﬁeld for all.

• Luxon & Peters agreed to eliminate diﬀerent rights for diﬀerent ethniciCes but have not followed through.

• Health Minister Shane ReC has lost control.

• Dr Laurie Knight believes life style has a major eﬀect on Māori health, rather than colonisaCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Very Dark Side of Maori Calls For Equity

7 Jan 2025

The advantages of equality of opportunity and disadvantages of equity are explained across Māori and nonMāori cultures.

Quiz

1. What is the diﬀerence between equality and equity?

2. Where in the TOW is ‘equity’ mandated?

3. What are the disadvantages of ‘equity’?

4. Why do acCvist Māori push the communist concept of ‘equity’.

5. TOW Art. 3 says ‘all people’… ‘are granted the rights and privileges of BriCsh subjects’. Is this a statement about equity or equality?

BULLET POINTS

• This image is used in an acCvist video:

It shows three boys sneaking a look at the game.

• AcCvist asserts: government has been undermining Māori since European arrival. Also asserts ‘equality is bad and the TOW mandates equity’.

• Kiwis are kind and will help those who need a hand up. i.e. a rich person must give to a poor person.

• Equality: equality of opportunity. In the image all people have opportunity of going to see the game. It is democraCc.

• Equity: equality of outcome. The short boy is given a short box so he can see as well as the others.

• AcCvists say equity is good i.e. perks must be given to Māori.

• Equity: jusCﬁes separaCon & apartheid, destroys talent & ability, results in vicCm mentality.

• AcCvists say equality is bad because not all receive the same beneﬁcial outcome.

• Equality is in the TOW, while equity is not.

• Equity is a communist ideal, where no one owns property.

• TOW Art. 3 says ‘all people’… are granted the rights and privileges of BriCsh subjects.

• VIDEO: Māori opposing Seymour’s treaty Principles Bill; Mike Peno says there needs to be one law for all.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty principles Submissions. How we’ve all been sCtched up.

13 Jan 2025

The process of collecCon submissions for Treaty Principles Bill appears to have been corrupt. There is a suspicion that this was planned so submissions would favour rejecCng the Bill.

QUIZ:

1. What is a ‘real person’ veriﬁcaCon?

2. How could a person using mulCple email addresses subvert the submission process?

3. What is a bot and what could it do to the submission process?*

4. What methods could have been used to ensure the submission process was fair?

5. In the case of this Bill, to whose advantage would it likely be to have a biased submission process?

BULLET POINTS

• 300,000+ submissions caused the Parliamentary computer system crashed on the last day. The deadline was extended to a week later.

• It was relaCvely easy for a person to make mulCple submissions.

• Alias email addresses are easy to make.

• There was no ‘real person’ veriﬁcaCon, thus bots could make submissions. Rik Roberts: There is a high chance that many submissions were from bots which could have overloaded the parliamentary website.

• RecommendaCons: Submission

• Could have been restricted to those on the electoral roll.

• Could have been veriﬁed by river’s licence or passport.

• Names should not have been published as this precluded those who feared losing their job by submiÜng, e.g. doctors.

• It appears that the submission process was engineered against the Bill.

• Debbie Ngarewa-Packer (MP), pushed Māori submissions against the Bill.

• Māori health organised 20,000 submissions.

• The select commi]ee will publish numbers for and against: if ‘against’ wins, Luxon will be happy to have Māori on his side, if ‘for’ wins, Luxon will have non -Māori on his side.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Why the Treaty Principles Select Commi]ee Process was engineered to Favour Luxon (Part2)

AKA Jordan Peterson. How New Zealand Is Headed For Civil War

15 Jan 2025

Peterson says idenCty poliCcs leads to tribalism which leads to separaCsm and violence. A shared idenCty leads to democracy. Luxon favouring ‘a partnership’ is pushing NZ towards civil war.

QUIZ

1. What does Peterson believe is endangering western civilisaCon?

2. What is needed for a people to have peace?

3. In a word, what does Luxon think is the nature of the relaConship in the TOW?

4. Give some examples of how the government is pushing separaCsm and therefore tribalism?

5. What posiCve government democraCc acCon could possibly avoid civil war?

BULLET POINTS

• Submission has sparked discussion on the TOW & how a referendum is needed.

• The longer this is delayed the more separaCsm and tribalism develops so we inch towards civil war.

• Jordan Peterson: idenCty poliCcs is endangering civilisaCon in the west.

• Māori demanding self-determinaCon, autonomy and self-government is idenCty poliCcs.

• Regression from democracy to tribalism inevitably results in violence.

• Peace results from a people having a shared idenCty.

• Prior to 1840 Māori were divided into tribes of diminishing size resulCng in conCnuous warfare.

• Civil war is certain. NZ is in crisis.

• Luxon and NaConal thinks the TOW is a partnership which fuels tribalism leading to civil war.

• Luxon: TOW made a relaConship between Crown [actually Queen Victoria, not a corporate enCty] and iwi. It was a partnership [incorrect] with obligaCons. Challenge is good.

• Anthony Willy: TOW is not a partnership.

• Luxon is strengthening tribalism e.g. $800 million to Māori in last budget.

• Hamilton Health Centre, ﬁshing areas, Māori wards, Māori seats. Waitangi Tribunal, all feed the movement towards civil war.

• AlternaCve to tribalism is a shared idenCty, or democracy. Seymour’s Bill does this.

• Need to hold a referendum where the words have been decided by Seymour.

• Cards, booklets, brochures, bumper sCckers are available from stopcogovernance.kiwi

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Three Reasons

Why David Seymour Has Not Caved In AKA

What Seymour And Jordan Peterson Have In Common

18 Jan 2025

Seymour’s determined stance on his Bill is admirable. He understands who opposes him, including Luxon. An acCvist submiÜng to the parliamentary commi]ee exposes several tacCcs typical of tribalism as outlined by Peterson and in the booklet 19 Strategies Māori Ac2vists are Using.

QUIZ

1. What are the two groups of people opposing Seymour’s Bill?

2. Why should voters admire Seymour’s stance in the face of opposiCon?

3. Why is the presence of the Māori Sovereignty ﬂag an example pf the ‘Camel in the tent’ strategy?

4. What strategies did the submi]er use to increase her power status?

5. What ﬁrm evidence is there that NaConal is losing voter support?

BULLET POINTS

• VIDEO: David Seymour being interviewed.

• David Seymour should be admired because he:

o Refuses to be inCmidated.

o Knows the true meaning of the TOW.

o Knows that the meaning of the TOW has been manipulated and become a religious cause pushed by a small group of acCvists.

• Those who oppose the Bill are:

o AcCvist Māori

o Pākehā who begin their communicaCons to David ‘As a Pākehā …’. These [woke] people see the Māori acCvist cause as a religious one & believe belonging to group is more important than the truth.

• The NaConal government is supporCng the Māori acCvist cause.

• VIDEO: Māori Woman making a submission.

• Breaks Parliamentary submission rules. She has a Māori ﬂag emblem on her hat and jacket. i.e. has no respect for authority, treasonous. Refers to Crimes Act 1961 concerning ‘obtaining by decepCon’ (irony?). Distracted with humour. Member of Commi]ee raise point that she is not under Parliamentary privilege and could be sued for allegaCons she made. Submi]er argues that she needs more Cme, but has wasted much. (Māori Sovereignty ﬂag in the background in Parliament! An e.g. of ‘Camel in the Tent’ from 19 Strategies Māori Ac2vists are Using to Take Over the Country [SCG Booklet].) Submi]er ‘I love you all ‘ at the end. Submi]er uses bullying & manipulaCon techniques.

• Jordan Peterson says these techniques exh ibit tribalism.

• NaConal supports Māori acCvism. Le]er a once naConal supporter says he is shijing to ACT next elecCon. ‘Relook at your stance’ on the Bill.

• Taxpayers Union says NaConal is tanking in the polls. [Polls show 2/3s NaConal, 2/3s ACT, 2/3s NZ First and 2/3s Labour voters support the Bill.]

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Submissions Outcome. What Luxon Fears Most.

AKA

The treaty principles Bill. More corrupCon is Inevitable. Here’s why.

21 Jan 2025

There are too many Principles Bill oral submi]ers so selecCon will have to be made which introduces bias and corrupCon.

QUIZ

1. What are the main constraints on how many oral submissions can be heard?

2. Suggest how more oral submissions could be heard within 4 weeks.

3. What government spending can be cut to provide more funds for hearing submissions?

4. According to Muriel Newman and Michael Laws, what is the historical reason that Government bureaucrats will be biased against the Bill?

5. List any other reasons, not already menConed, that the submission process might be likely to fail.

BULLET POINTS

• Too many Principles Bill submi]ers have request oral submissions for the commi]ee to hear. A selecCon will need to be made.

• The commi]ee will hear 80hrs of oral submissions across 4 weeks. (Herald)

• Because public interest is so high more funds should have been allocated to the task.

• Funds have been wasted on supporCng unnecessary university research, e.g. $1 million to study eﬀect of racism on Māori, $0.861 million into why Māori linked stars to death.

• Luxon hopes for the result that people do not support Seymour’s Bill.*

• To cope with the response parCes will select 25 submissions each, which is open to corrupCon. The oﬃce of the Clark of the House (Dr David Wilson, [a known ‘lejy’] ) will process submissions to give to parCes.

• The concern is that rather than poliCcians, bureaucrats are running the country and sCll follow Ardern’s policies. (Muriel Newman)

• Michael Laws says bureaucrats have been driving the ‘retribalist’ agenda and are enemies of democracy and want to keep running the country in their ‘woke’ departments.

• We can expect the submissions process to fail because: there was no formal idenCﬁcaCon, mulCple submissions were possible, bots may have been used, Luxon needs a negaCve result, if too many supported the BIll a referendum would be needed and Luxon does not want that, the bureaucrats will select the submissions the parCes prefer, MPs will select what they want to hear, most parCes (5/6) oppose the Bill, funds limit the number that can be heard, naConal wants to rig the result.

• Conclusion: the process looks rigged to go against the Bill.

• Where are the MPs who want to know what voters want?

*[Surveys of National, NZ First, ACT and Labour voters show that within each party a majority support the Bill.]

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Why Wanganui Is In Big Trouble And Why Your Town Could Be Next

25 Jan 2025

Bell Curve of awareness of NZers of cogovernance. Why Māori Wards in Wanganui is undemocraCc.

QUIZ

1. What percentage of New Zealanders are oblivious to the Māori takeover of NZ?

2. Which poliCcian made Māori Wards compulsory for councils, bypassing the need for referenda?

3. Why is having Māori Wards undemocraCc and unfair to nonMāori council candidates?

4. Why is the general populaCon upset about the way Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka are handling the Wanganui Council situaCon.

5. Why does the outlook for NaConal in the 2026 elecCon appear bleak?

• A bell curve describes the percentages of NZers who are: unconvertable, converted, on the way to being converted, on the way to being radicalised, 60% oblivious to the Māori takeover.

• A Māori Ward represents Māori (Māori Electoral Roll) on a local council. Set up by Helen Clarke in 2002. Needed a referendum to iniCate. Only 3 /24 councils established them.

• 2020 Manaia Mahuta forced councils to have a Māori Ward. Māori Wards need fewer votes than main electoral roll councillors.

• They are not in the TOW. Māori privilege annoys non-Māori. Why are they needed?

• Simeon Brown reintroduced the idea of a referendum, but NaConal have reversed this.

• Māori se]lements are conCnuing out of sight. Currently Potaka says 10,000 se]lement claims are sCll outstanding.

• One se]lement is with Wanganui Māori and is organised in secret by the duplicitous Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka.

• When asked repeatedly when Māori ceded sovereignty Potaka refused to answer! In Parliament Luxon had to admit Māori ceded sovereignty.

• NaConal are deceiyul and non-transparent. They did not campaign on co -governance and MāoriﬁcaCon.

• Luxon will please no one and be voted out

• Wanganui Group chairman, Ken Mair, thinks the BriCsh stole Māori land.

• The Wanganui deal uses the deceiyul ‘Camel in the Tent’ strategy. This strategy was used in the 1975 TOW Act wh ich allowed claims from 1975. Ajer 9 claims were registered in 1984, the Act was amended to allow claims back to 1840 and 2034 claims appeared.

• PredicCon is that all posiCons on the Wanganui Council will be Māori. Mayor Tripe, a disgrace and ‘woke’, has been set up by Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka.

• The Māori acCvists have created a monster with tentacles in all NZ insCtuCons.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Now We Know

The Real Reason Maori Oppose The Bill

29 Jan 2025

Oral submissions to Seymour’s TP Bill by Māori acCvists reveal why they are against the principles. QUIZ

1. What are the two opposing views on the Treaty Principles Bill?

2. What was the eﬀect of Te PaC Māori haka in Parliament on NZ’s internaConal reputaCon as a funcConal democracy?

3. Why are acCvists concerned about leaving out the words ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’ from the TP Bill?

4. Why does Ma] Walsh advise on stopping payments and apologies to indigenous groups and what should such groups do to recognise the advantages of colonisaCon?

5. What are the main recommendaCons of the He Puapua Report?

BULLET POINTS

• ExplanaCon of ‘Where are You?’ on the bellshaped curve.

• FIVE THINGS THE ORAL SUBMISSIONS TELL US

• Will the Treaty Principles Bill will it ‘oppress Māori’ or will it ‘ease NZ’s anxiety over the Treaty’ [abuse]?

• The Bill says: 1. The Government has the right to govern, 2. The Government will honour all New Zealanders and the chiejainship of their land and their property, 3. All New Zealanders are equal under the law.

• What do Māori acCvists object to the discussion?

• MATT WALSH VIDEO: NZ is a laughing stock because of the ‘prehistoric grunCng’ of the haka in Parliament. Cringeworthy. One million views. Seymour had laid out the Bill clearly. Willy Jackson ad hominin a]ack on Seymour. Māori have no argument. Equal treatment is an unknown own concept by Māori. Māori colonised NZ, musket wars, severed heads, cannibalism, TOW protected Māori rights, 1975 TOW was recognised. New bill clariﬁes that all are enCtled to the full protecCon of land. Māori are not a naCon within a naCon. NZ provides repatriaCon and apologies. This will conCnue for ever.

• NZ TV: AcCvists are concerned there is no menCon of ‘Cno rangaCra-tanga’. Māori acCvists do not want a vote on this. Pagan chants are repayment for what Māori have received from colonisaCon. Māori should be apologising for past brutality. There is an a]empt to obfuscate the past. They revolt against any a]empt at equality for all.

• Sir Apirana Ngata: ‘Māori were well treated.’

• John Robinson: ‘The Crown never broke the Treaty’. Assets and cash given by Government are not appropriate.

• TVNZ: Tross Publishing hit job.

• MATT WALSH: Indigenous groups should: apologise ﬁrst and not be hypocriCcal and aﬃrm the greatness of Western CivilizaCon which negates the guilt merchants.

• WHY DO MĀORI OBJECT TO THESE BASIC RIGHTS?

• HE PUA PUA REPORT: (Breaking the poliCcal and societal norms.) Wri]en in secret. Exposed in 2021. This says ‘no’ to one government, ‘no’ to property rights, ‘no’ to equality. Māori believe all land was stolen. They sold 92%. Māori can place Wahi Tūpuna on any land (R.M.A.). This was allowed by Māori-loving bureaucrats and MPs out of touch with reality. Proposes a separate Māori parliament and a Māori veto on all legislaCon. Power must go to Māori by 2040.

• MAITIKI AOTEAROA: Māori want 3/4 power. This is a coup. This explains why Māori acCvists are upset by the TP Bill. Their response to the Bill lacks clarity and is irraConal.

• Māori acCvist oral submissions lack reason and raConality. If the gravy train ends then there is no money for a coup. This explains why they are against three basic rights. Since 1975 poliCcians have not realised what Māori are actually doing.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Now We Know

The Real Reason Maori

Oppose Seymour’s Bill (Part 2)

1 Feb 2025

Māori oppose the Bill because they want to be the Government, want loose property rights and special treatment to conCnue.

QUIZ

1. By what year do Māori acCvists want to take over NZ? Why that year?

2. Seymour says ‘the Government has the right to govern’ but acCvists object. Why?

3. The Oﬃce of Treaty Se]lements engages in ‘land banking’. Explain the signiﬁcance of this?

4. What do the acronyms RMA and SASM mean?

5. How many grievance claims are sCll in the pipeline according to Potaka?

Each Principle from Seymour’s Bill is discussed. PRINCIPLE 1. The government has the right to govern.

• Māori acCvists want to take over the government of the country by 2040.

• Evidence for this: He Pua Pua and MaCki Mai

• The MaCki Mai website has a countdown clock.

• Māori want to be the government. ‘We will keep marching unCl we get our sovereignty’.

PRINCIPLE 2. The government will honour all New Zealanders and the chiejainship of their land and their property.

• Māori do not want land rights to be Cghtened. They want land and assets to conCnue to ﬂow to them.

• While they claim land was taken from them, 92% of it was sold legiCmately by the chiefs.

• Through the Regional Management Act 1991 Māori can claim rights to any land by declaring it Wahi Tūpuna.

• Through Sites and Areas of Signiﬁcance to Māori (SASM) can be claimed by Māori. The Gore area was recently declared an SASM. (Ref: Groundswell)

• Government buys up land, holds it (land banking) unCl it can be used in a later se]lement. Di]o for surplus land.

• Grievance se]lements allow government to transfer assets and land to Māori.

• Oﬃce of Treaty Se]lements buys the land.

• WT (Waitangi Tribunal) contrive grievances and history ignorant poliCcians take advice of acCvist bureaucrats to sign oﬀ se]lements.

• MPs are oblivious or complicit e.g. Luxon, Potaka and Goldsmith should be in charge.

• Problem is huge. Crown poryolio has over 10,000 claims in the pipeline.

• Se]lements are not really se]lements at all because they conCnue into the future.

• Michael Basse] says: Radical Māori have go]en away with murder over the last 2o years they have made up what the WT is supposed to do, even though it is clearly explained in law.

PRINCIPLE 3. All New Zealanders are equal under the law.

• Māori want special rights to conCnue. They oppose the same rights for all.

• In the 2024 Budget they received $800 million.

• Some Māori acCvists think Māori are superior.

• Tuku Morgan ‘You can’t give the same rights to an immigrant to NZ’.

• Māori have special ﬁshing rights, be]er access to medicine, nil or lower council rates, iwi have their own jusCce system, Māori and Pasiﬁka get free counselling etc.

• The $26 million Punakaiki Visitor centre was given to Māori, but visitors have to pay to enter.

• Why would Māori accept equality when they have so many advantages?

GENERAL

• New Zealand is an apartheid state and few people object.

• Māori need funds to take over NZ by 2040, which the Government under Luxon, Potaka and Goldsmith are providing.

• Seymour’s Principles align with the TOW.

• If Māori were treated equally they would lose the gravy train.

• Māori complaints are not really about honouring the TOW, they are really about Māori wanCng to take over the country, both Government and land with conCnued special rights.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Wanganui. Why It's Become NZ's Big Problem City (PART 2)

6 Feb 2025

A proposal to create a partnership between a Māori Trust and the Wanganui City Council shines a light on what successive governments have been doing secretly for decades.

QUIZ

1. What is a mandate strategy?

2. What are some corrupCon techniques that Māori acCvists use?

3. What sort of properCes will Wanganui lose in the Se]lement?

4. What strategies does the Government use to hide movement of funds from the general public?

5. What are two components of wisdom?

• The Wanganui Land Se]lement NegoCaCon Trust had a mandate strategy endorsed by the Crown in 2016.

• A mandate strategy is a strategy to secure a an approval to acCon via general consent.

• Three enCCes were involved: Chris Finlayson, City Council and a Māori Trust.

• Several meeCngs were held and 500+ a]ended, (possibly 4,500). Few Māori were involved.

• Māori corrupCon techniques: proxy voCng, hiring friends, having several similarly named trusts, stealing from the trusts, moving funds from iwi trusts to investment.

• The Wanganui Se]lement deal includes the right to purchase: Lismore Hill & Forestry land, Intermediate School, ProbaCon Service Centre, Police StaCon, 49 land bank properCes.

• The Government uses to funnels funds to Māori via the back door. The se]lement has no dollar amounts to hide how much money is involved. Allows iwi to move into and take over.

• Under this arrangement all Council decisions must involve the tribe; conﬂicts of interest.

• Has this been approved of democraCcally?

• In future arrangements for Queen’s Park, Gonville, Kai Iwi Beach, Lake Wiritoa and airport land to be transferred to the tribe will be made.

• Residents need to become involved to stop this. LegislaCon favours the tribe, so court challenges will be diﬃcult. Agreements cannot be broken.

• These se]lements are not mandated in the TOW. Se]lements are ﬂuid.

• Māori acCvists have inﬁltrated all insCtuCons using the ‘Camel in the Tent’ method.

• Our poliCcians lack wisdom (common sense & foresight).

• Contact councillors. Get lawyers involved.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Julian Batchelor's Death Threat. What It Means For New Zealand 11 Jan 2025

Julian relates the death threat he received to tribalism and Māori behavioural characterisCcs. There is discussion of how the cycle of violence can be broken.

QUIZ

1. What is the common response of Māori acCvists to people who express opposing views to them?

2. What is the appropriate response to a Māori acCvist who calls a person names for staCng facts?

3. Why were Māori self-annihilaCng between 1800 and 1840?

4. What percentage of prison beds are occupied by Māori and how is the percentage of Māori in the NZ populaCon diﬀerent to this?

5. What behaviours should Māori parents be teaching their children so the cycle of violence is broken and the children do not grow up to be criminals?

BULLET POINTS

• Julian describes the death threat and the damage his house has suﬀered.

• Māori acCvists try to close down opposing views using threatening behaviour such as name calling and personal verbal a]acks.

• ShuÜng down free speech is the beginning of censorship that gradually grows worse.

• In parliament Willi Jackson abused David Seymour, but cannot explain why he opposes the Bill.

• When abused the response is to ask what is incorrect in the informaCon or facts given.

• AcCvists do not debate.

• When Free Speech is shut down through threats and violence it indicates that tribal rule is next.

• Pre-1840, NZ was dominated by tribal rule. Utu/revenge was the cornerstone of Māori culture and life. This why Māori were selfannihilaCng between 1800 and 1840.

• We need to decide: tribal rule or democracy. Democracy will have to be fought for.

• Utu/revenge is sCll a big part of Māori culture. Thus they occupy 52% of prison beds.

• Māori accuse police of racial proﬁling in Hamilton and courts for picking on Māori because of skin colour. [CRT]

• VIDEO: Dr Newbolt refutes this. High numbers of Māori in prison is due to one factor: Māori culture is a culture of violence. Māori are highly overrepresented in violence staCsCcs; 60% of people in prison are for crimes of violence and 50% of prison inmates are Māori

• Children brought up with violence, alcohol abuse etc grow up to be the future oﬀenders. It is a cop out to blame the police or courts.

• When rocks, eggs and bo]les were thrown at Julian’s house, it was obvious that the young people were put up to it by their parents. Parents know they cannot get away with such behaviour bit children can do their dirty work for them without consequences in the legal system.

• Parents are thus training their children to be criminals, so the high crime rate will conCnue.

Poor Māori parents are to blame because children learn to disrespect property and people with diﬀerent views, not take responsibility for their acCons, vandalism is ﬁne, bullying and inCmidaCon are to be applauded.

• Parents do not have their children’s best interests at heart. When children grow up they say their parents encouraged them to do criminal acts, so they turn on their parents producing more disfuncCon. Parents need to be held to account.

• VIDEO Willi Jackson & Jack Tame: Jackson: Cogovernance is very beneﬁcial.’ ‘We want to close the gap between Māori and Pakēhā in many areas’. [i.e. more gravy train]

• What is the answer for Māori? Check out the online ﬂip book here.

• Where are the good Māori parents

o Helping to break the cycle?

o Teaching children to argue with facts?

o Teaching how to respect property?

o Teaching children how to respect people with diﬀerent views?

• What is the punishment for issuing a death threat? Crimes Act 1961 says threatening to kill is a crime with a maximum of seven years in prison.

• Why is Julian the subject of Māori acCvist death threats? Is he telling lies? No. No one is challenging the 100 + videos. The truth is that Māori acCvists do not want New Zealanders to be told the truth about the current poliCcal situaCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Julian Batchelor Treaty Principles Bill Oral Submission With Extras 13 Feb 2025

Edited Version: Five Basic Treaty Facts Every Kiwi Should Know

Julian Batchelor’s Treaty Bill Submission Transcript at issue.com

QUIZ

1. What error has caused the misalignment of the English and Māori versions of the TOW?

2. What is the key idea of the TOW Preamble?

3. What is the key idea in ArCcle 1 of the TOW?

4. What are the two key ideas in ArCcle 2 of the TOW?

5. Where is ‘partnership’ menConed in the TOW?

6. Why are ‘partnership’ and ‘sovereignty’ mutually exclusive ideas?

BULLET POINTS

• The 1975 TOW Act uses the wrong English version by James Freeman, which explains the diﬀerences between the English and Māori translaCon.

• This has given rise to the need to invent Principles to reconcile the diﬀerences.

• Busby’s draj and the Māori version are a perfect match and makes the meaning of the Māori translaCon clear.

• The Principles Problem disappears if the Act is amended to include the Final English Draj.

SUMMARY OF THE TOW:

• Preamble: The BriCsh would establish a democraCc Government. There would be one government, private property security an equal ciCzenship for all.

• ArCcle 1: Māori ceded sovereignty of the whole country for ever. In 1843 the BriCsh Parliament conﬁrmed that Māori had ceded sovereignty and that the fact was ‘incontroverCble’.

• ArCcle 2: Government guarantees everyone ownership of properCes and possessions. Chiefs must sell land to the Government.

• ArCcle 3: All New Zealanders have equal rights and responsibiliCes.

• AﬃrmaCon: The chiefs understood what they signed.

• TOW does not menCon partnership or that the BriCsh would only rule over se]lers; these are modern invenCons. Partnership and sovereignty are mutually exclusive concepts.

• The idea that the TOW is a partnership is the greatest lie ever to came from the judges of N.Z. Judges are fallible and can be corrupted.

• The original three principles honour the TOW in every respect.

• If the Government is sincere, wants to be faithful to the tow and wants to stop insulCng the intelligence of the BriCsh and the intelligence of all New Zealanders they would not hesitate to make Seymour’s Bill law.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treason. Why Maori AcCvists (And Some PoliCcians) Should Be Charged

17 Feb 2025

• What happened when Julian Batchelor submi]ed to the select commi]ee on the Treaty Principles Bill, Kiri Tamihiere-WaiCC’s vicCm rant and an explanaCon of treason.

QUIZ

1. What behaviour is to be expected from select commi]ee members when on is making a submission to parliament?

2. What is treason and what is the maximum prison term in NZ?

3. What two documents outline the Māori acCvist plan to take over NZ?

4. Kiri TamihiereWaiCC makes a case for Māori being vicCms. Why could what she says be classiﬁed as treason.

5. Maui Solomon uses the big lie that Māori did not cede sovereignty. How does he jusCfy this and what is evidence that Māori did cede sovereignty?

BULLET POINTS

• AcCvist lawyer Geoﬀrey Palmer and Willi Jackson were videoed. Chairman James Meager was texCng during the submission. The lack of interest by the commi]ee was of concern.

• 1st principle: Māori ceded sovereignty for ever.

• 3rd Principle: All NZers are equal with the same rights & privileges. Māori state that they are superior.

• Māori acCvists who talk o f a dual government are breaking the TOW. That was not what the chief agreed to. AcCvists should be charged with treason.

• TREASON: the most serious crime in common law, involving betrayal of one’s country through such acCviCes as espionage or a]empts to overthrow the government.

• He Puapua Report by 2040 Māori acCvists plan a dual government with separate Māori and non-Māori Houses of Parliament and a Māori veto on all legislaCon. Tribal companies will have the ﬁnal say on what passes.

• Māori acCvists are not even ashamed of this treason. PoliCcians do nothing, but watch their country being stolen. This is a criminal oﬀence.

• The proposal in MaCke Mai Aotearoa gives iwi leadership 75% of the power to rule the country. This is the blueprint to take over the country and is treason.

• Kiri Tamihiere-WaiCC makes an undigniﬁed vicCm rant. Thinks Māori are treated as second class ciCzens by the ‘system’. We are not geÜng closer to Mana Motuhake (Māori self- rule and self-determinaCon.) We need to stop taking about Cno rangaCra-tanga and sovereignty. We need to be on the same page for our Māori mokopuna. Can you imagine the might and the power we would have? We could overthrow any government. We could do whatever we wanted. This is plainly treason.

• Michael Laws & Chris Tro]er comment on what Tamihiere-WaiCC said.

• Documents He Pua Pua and MaCke Mai Aotearoa plus the speeches of any Māori leader who suggest overthrowing the government should be charged with treason. This does not happen.

• Treason has a 14 year maximum jail sentence. This is what the government did with the Kingitanga movement. Today foolish governments are supporCng the Māori acCvist cause.

• In educaCon children are being brainwashed or groomed daily to accept all things Māori. (Ref: Rodney Hyde’s ArCcle) This has happened in many organisaCons. This is treason by stealth; the goal is takeover by 2040.

• During Julian’s submission to the select commi]ee on the Treaty Principles Bill WaiCC did not look up. Submi]er Maui Solomon (lawyer) used the old argument that Māori did not cede sovereignty because they outnumbered the BriCsh. One of the great lies. Māori acCvists use opinions rather than facts

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Are Māori Really ConservaConists?

20 Feb 2025

Māori have a poor conservaCon record. The disastrous result of the lack of conservaCon maintenance in the Ureweras since being handed over to Tuhoi (and an ongoing annual grant of $2 million for conservaCon) is discussed.

QUIZ

1. What evidence is there of Māori conservaCon pracCces prior to colonisaCon?

2. What is there is ArCcle 2 of the TOW that could jusCfy Māori hunCng food species that may possibly be endangered?

3. What government department managed the Urewera NaConal Park prior to 2014 and what species were they concentraCng on conserving?

4. What evidence from the Urewera situaCon could be used to decide if Māori governance of NaConal Parks is should be promoted?

BULLET POINTS

• Before colonisaCon NZ was 80% forest. Māori burned 6.7 million hectares to ﬂush out food species. By 1840 35 species of birds & animals were exCnct. No obvious knowledge of conservaCon. [Protein was a priority.]

• Matarangi Māori & KaiCakitanga [guardianship & conservaCon] seems to have been inﬂuenced by non -Māori sources.

• Nga Puhi leader Sonny Tao was caught with 5 dead kereru at the airport. Said it was ‘a mistake’. Nga Puhi leader David Rankins said was permissible because of Art. 2 of the TOW. Some Māori think conservaCon is ‘just white man’s law.’

THE UREWERA DISASTER

• Pre 2014 the Urewera NaConal Park of 221,000 hectares was managed by DOC.

• Chris Finlayson gijed the Urewera NP to Tuhoi. Wri]en about Finlayson:’ When tens of thousands of concerned NZers … joined together to try to prevent thej and radicalisaCon of the beaches, the architect of thej, Chris Finlayson with his trademark arrogance and rudeness dismissed them as clowns, rather than discuss the issues, that this greatest ever swindle in NZ history involved.’ (Ref: Twis2ng The Treaty). Finlayson should have been charged with treason.

• In the Urewera deal the government paid Tuhoi $2 million dollars annually to maintain the conservaCon programme.

• Post 2014 many huts have been burned down and conservaCon has stopped.

• VIDEO: Ex-ranger Peter Shaw: Kōkako protecCon had good numbers 1991- 2. Since 2014 most pest control has stopped and possum numbers are increasing rapidly.

• Where are the passionate Māori conservaConists? What has happened to the $2million dollars per year? Tuhoi have not provided any data.

• Dan Lodge: Obvious signs of no maintenance: traps have not been checked, they are covered in moss and dead bodies are hanging out of them.

5. Willi Jackson thinks cogovernance is desirable where natural resources are involved. What examples exist that would support his claim?

• VIDEO: Ex-ranger Peter Shaw: Tuhoi have switched oﬀ 20,000 hectares of pest control. Possums are everywhere and eat kōkako females, chicks and eggs. As a result kōkako numbers are dwindling. Pest control in a kiwi sanctuary at Lake Waikaremoana has also lapsed.

• Private volunteer conservaConists have been refused permits by Te Urewera Trust (TUT) to proceed.

• VIDEO: Willi Jackson ‘Co- governance has been very beneﬁcial, parCcularly in the natural resources area.’

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Judge David Harvey's Treaty Bill Oral Submission. Where Was He Right? And Wrong?

25 Feb 2025

ReCred Judge David Harvey’s principles Bill Submission

QUIZ

1. How much land was sold by Māori by (a) 1840 and by (b) 2000?

2. What is the idea behind Seymour’s Principle 1?

3. What term is the main point of confusion in Harvey’s submission?

4. Give some advantages of running a referendum?

5. In the TOW ‘rangiCratanga’ meant ‘possession’. What is the late 20th Century meaning that has been given to this word?

BULLET POINTS

• Harvey supports Seymours’ Bill and suggests it be put to the voters as a referendum. He does not support the Law Society’s submission.

• Advantages of a referendum: it is direct democracy (people feel they are not being listened to), the country is divided but the proporCons are unknown, a referendum is like a compass, NZ has declined to due to MāoriﬁcaCon, $billions have been given to Māori (the gravy train is out of control) and people are afraid to express themselves.

• It appears Luxon does not want to know the ‘will of the people’.

• Harvey agrees with Seymour’s principle 1 about government having the right to rule NZ.

• Harvey is vague on Principle 2 as it is not clear what he understands by the term ‘rangiCratanga’. (RangiCra means chief.) In Art 2 of the TOW it meant ‘possession’ according to Busbys’ ﬁnal draj.

• The TOW allows chiefs to conCnue ownership of their property and in so doing gave Māori the same rights as the BriCsh, i.e. homes and possessions were protected. However, the BriCsh could not protect land unless it had been surveyed.

• 504 chiefs signed the TOW, owned land as well as the tribes ‘stuﬀ’. Māori sold 92% of the land. (Ref: Butler). 33% of the land was sold by 1840. (Ref: Turton Records.)

• When land is sold the sovereignty is transferred to the buyer.

• We cannot know what Harvey actually thinks about the land issue.

• Māori acCvists say even if Māori sold land, they can sCll claim ownership!

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Judge David Harvey's Oral Submission.

Where Was He Right? And Wrong? (2)

26 Feb 2025

Discussion of David Harvey’s Submission on Principle 3, in parCcular the lack of equal jusCce between Māori and non-Māori.

QUIZ

1. What is the basic idea behind Seymour’s Treaty Principle 3?

2. Why does Harvey support Seymour’s Treaty Principle 3?

3. Ojen the legislaCon lumps Māori and Pasiﬁka together. What is the jusCﬁcaCon for this?

4. Is it fair for Māori to have ﬁshing rights in the Hauraki Gulf while other ethniciCes are excluded?

5. What is the total of all the million dollar amounts menConed in the video? (Answer below)

BULLET POINTS

• Harvey supports Principle 3; equality before the law, so that everyone is treated equally.

• Currently this is not so in NZ, since Māori get special treatment

EXAMPLES OF UNEQUAL TREATMENT follow:

• 12 new protecCon areas in Hauraki Gulf.Only Māori are allowed to ﬁsh. (i.e. race based ﬁshing zones)

• Health NZ (Te Whatu Ora) uses taxpayer funding for Māori and Pasièa to receive free advice, medicines and management for certain condiCons.

• Government Amendment Act 2021 allows reduced or removed rates for Māori landowners.

• S26 million Punakaiki Visitor Centre was given to iwi who charge for entry.

• New Pharmac guidelines reveal ‘Māori are the new priority populaCon’. Māori will be guaranteed priority of treatment ahead of others with greater health needs.

• Iwi are allowed their own jusCce system which favours the oﬀenders over the vicCms.

• Auckland surgeons have to give priority to Māori and Pasiﬁka paCents. (Contrary to the Human Rights Act 1993.)

• Only Māori and Pasiﬁka paCents are allowed GP referrals for free counselling.

• NZ health Strategy 2023 menCons ‘Māori’ 169 Cmes while ‘European’ is menConed only 4 Cmes.

• Department of Internal Aﬀairs wants to censor online free speech. Māori are given elevated status in co-governing and can ‘express themselves freely’, while others cannot. Māori have more power to make decision about NZ free speech.

• Government agencies have to ensure at least 8% of contracts go to Māori businesses. Only Māori ca apply for all government contracts.

• $438 million has been given to upgrade private marae (510 projects & 358 marae).

Total = $1352 or $1353 million

• ConservaCon Department workers get paid $3500 to a]end a Māori language course.

• If Māori and Pasiﬁka paCents make up half of a GP ’s clients there is an increase in funding.

• $7.75 million for truancy issues with Māori and Pasiﬁka students.

• Māori get funding for claiming Seabed and Foreshore. Non-Māori have to fund their own legal costs.

• $7.3 million for free cervical screening for Māori and Pasiﬁka. Others pay &40 -$60.

• Government funded $107,280 for a racist stage show about murdering Captain Cook with pig hunCng knives.

• Staﬀ must take into account student ethnicity when awarding grades. Meritocracy is gone.

• Free Bowel cancer screening for 55+ year old Māori.

• $12 million to Māori landowners to invest in growing sheep milk industry.

• Tourism Recovery Minister funded all Māori tourism businesses including those that did not meet the overall standard.

• $825 million to Māori in the 2023 budget. Virtually nil to other cultures.

• 2023 Budget Te MataCni (performing Arts fesCval) allowance was increased from $2.9 million per year to $34 million over the next two years.

CONCLUSION

• There are many examples of separaCsm or apartheid in NZ.

• We are deﬁnitely not equal under the law as Harvey supposes.

• Luxon could have stopped all this but chooses to ignore it, so he must shoulder the responsibility.

• NZ needs a Trump-like person to sort out the corrupCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Judge David Harvey Treaty Bill Oral Submission. Where Was He Right? And Wrong? (3) 27 Feb 2025

Discussion of David Harvey’s Submission on Seymour’s Principle Bill. Harvey tries to synchronise the Bill with the faulty idea that the TOW is a partnership.

QUIZ

1. Where in the TOW is the concept of partnership menConed?

2. Who originated the idea that the TOW was a partnership and when?

3. What evidence did Harvey cite that the TOW was a partnership?

4. What did Anthony Willy prove in his paper?

5. What jusCﬁcaCons exist that the TOW was a partnership between Māori and Queen Victoria?

BULLET POINTS

• Principle 1 Government has a right to govern.

• Harvey thinks this implies a partnership between Crown and Māori.

• Harvey is not aware that compensaCon for se]lements is now being contested.

• John Robinson maintains that none of the se]lements are jusCﬁed. ‘All Treaty se]lements are based on the Crown having broken the Treaty. Since that is not so, all such se]lements are a fraud.’ (Ref: Who Really Broke the Treaty (2024))

• Harvey adds to the confusion by NOT saying the TOW is NOT a partnership. This unwiÜngly strengths the acCvists rhetoric that the Treaty is exclusively a Crown-Māori arrangement.

• He could have said the TOW is a partnership between all NZ ciCzens and the Crown.

• There is no menCon of a partnership in the TOW.

• Harvey has taken the incorrect view of the WT and the misguided judges that the TOW is a partnership ‘and make good of it’. You cannot make right out of wrong.

• Another Judge, Anthony Willy has discussed the 1987 Land Case where JusCce Cooke said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. The acCvists jumped on this and milked it to death.

• Willy’s paper and the English version of the TOW are in the YouTube video descripCon.

• Harvey confuses the issue by using the false partnership idea.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Willy Jackson. Why He's Parliament's Most Notorious Liar.

28 Feb 2025

Willy Jackson quesCons David Harvey’s Treaty Principles Submission revealing major untruths that are explained.

QUIZ

1. What were the four lies that Jackson used to support his own views.

2. What did Allan Duﬀ say about Doug Graham?

3. What did Geoﬀrey Palmer do that put more onus on the NZ Tax payer?

4. Why did Chris Finlayson’s give away to iwi?

5. Why was Chris Finlayson’s role in Treaty negoCaCons compromised?

BULLET POINTS

• Ajer Harvey’s submission Willy Jackson said that Harvey ‘was out of synch with the best legal minds in the country’.

• In fact only 40 KCs signed a le]er to kill the Bill and life appointments of 364 KCs since 1907, were made, mostly in the last 30 years. None were made in 40 years. There could sCll be several hundred alive today.

• Yet Jackson says the KCs ‘are (almost) unanimous in their opposiCon to the Bill’.

• Jackson’s statements must be fact checked.

• Jackson says that Harvey is out of sync with the ‘crème de la crème’ of MPs and names Doug Graham, Chris Finlayson and Geoﬀrey Palmer.

• These three MPS have been widely criCcised for their abysmal record in handling TOW issues.

• Allan Duﬀ on Doug Graham: ‘He’ll be remembered as the white man who sold out his fellow New Zealanders, Māori and NonMāori, to a bunch of brown gangsters and their pale brown thugs.’

• Geoﬀrey Palmer: Changed TOW claims back to 1840. (TOW Amendment Act 1985) Before 1985 there were less than ten claims, by 2009 there were 2,034. Mike Butler: Palmer ‘must shoulder a greater part of the blame for the out-ofcontrol Treaty industry’… He should be stripped of all the perks that he currently receives from the taxpayer as an ex-Prime Minister’.

• Chris Finlayson: ‘was the master-mind behind the thej of New Zealand’s priceless foreshore and seabed from public ownership so as to make it available for his iwi friends and exclients to claim.’… ‘He is unﬁt to hold any public oﬃce poliCcal, judicial or otherwise.’

• CONCLUSION

• Jackson did not tell the truth about the JCs.

• Jackson referred to MPs who are ‘the bo]om of the barrel’ in TOW issues.

• Jackson must be the biggest liar in Parliament.

• David Harvey stood up to Jackson’s quesCons.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

You'd Never Guess What Just Turned Up At Hu] Hospital!

2 Mar 2025

Comments on an acCvist, treasonous poster that appeared in Hu] Hospital.

QUIZ

1. What is the Māori acCvist interpretaCon of the DOI 1835?

2. What is the historical interpretaCon of the DOI 1835?

3. How can we be sure that the TOW superceded the DOI?

BULLET POINTS

• POSTER:’ Learn about the DeclaraCon of Independence (DOI) & Te TiriC O Waitangi (TOW).’

• Poster authors want New Zealanders to learn the acCvist interpretaCon of these two documents.

• TRUTH: DOI (1835) was superceded by the TOW (1840).

• PROOF: All the chiefs who signed the DOI were sought out by the BriCsh and they all signed the TOW 1840. i.e. the TOW cancelled out the 1835 DOI.

• If Māori had gained sovereignty in the DOI 1835, they gave it away in TOW (Art. 1) 1840. (Ref: Dr Ma]hew Wright)

• Yet Māori acCvists treasonously conCnue to push the DOI 1835 claiming that Māori have sovereignty over all NZ.

• The acCvist interpretaCon of the DOI is baseless.

• EXTRA INFROMATION: The ﬂag shown (white background, verCcal & horizontal red cross with four stars in the upper lej square) was invented by missionary Henry Williams for Māori ships trading with Sydney. It was accepted by some chiefs in 1834 and then ignored by Māori. It was used by shipping line Shaw, Savill and Albion unCl 1970. The ﬂag was adopted in 2010 by Tuhoe for poliCcal purposes.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Finlayson Proudly Displays His Treaty Ignorance For All To See (Part 1)

4 Mar 2025

Chris Finlayson demonstrates his TOW ignorance during his Treaty Principles submission.

QUIZ (see next page)

BULLET POINTS

• Finlayson says ‘Above all the Bill is misconceived because it endeavours to raise a number of principles that do not reﬂect the relaConship of the TOW between the Crown and Tangata Whenua (i.e.Māori)’.

• His submission is on behalf of the Law Society (Bar AssociaCon) of 10,000 members.

• Finlayson: ‘Davis Seymour’s 3 Treaty Principles don’t reﬂect what the Treaty meant to both parCes in 1840.’ This is untrue. He is either ignorant or lying or both.

• Seymour’s original 3 principles summarise the TOW with remarkable accuracy.

THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

THE TRUTH

Treaty Preamble The Bri\sh agreed to set up a government for Māori and NonMāori

Ar\cle 1 Māori ceded sovereignty

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 1 The Bri\sh promised to protect Māori in the ownership of their land, dwellings, and property as long as they owned them.

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 2

The Bri\sh would buy land from the chiefs.

Ar\cle 3 Māori became Bri\sh ci\zens, thus equal before the law with all other ci\zens.

Aﬃrma\on The chiefs understood and agreed to all that they were signing up to.

THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

THE TRUTH

Treaty Preamble

The Bri\sh agreed to set up a government for Māori and NonMāori

WHAT ACTIVISTS WANT YOU TO BELIEVE

The Bri\sh agreed that Māori would govern themselves & the Bri\sh only the Bri\sh.

Māori did not cede sovereignty

The Bri\sh promised to protect Māori in the ownership of their land, dwellings, and property for ever. (i.e. \no-rang\ratanga)

The Bri\sh would buy land from the chiefs.

Māori were given all the rights of Bri\sh Ci\zenship but didn’t actually become Bri\sh ci\zens.

The chiefs didn’t understand what they were signing up to.

SEYMOUR’S ORIGINAL 3 PRINCIPLES

1. That the Government has the right to govern for all New Zealanders.

Ar\cle 1 Māori ceded sovereignty —

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 1

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 2

The Bri\sh promised to protect Māori in the ownership of their land, dwellings, and property as long as they owned them.

The Bri\sh would buy land from the chiefs.

Ar\cle 3 Māori became Bri\sh ci\zens, thus equal before the law with all other ci\zens.

Aﬃrma\on The chiefs understood and agreed to all that they were signing up to.

2. That the Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiedainship of their land and all their property.

3. That all New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and du\es.

QUIZ

1. What is wrong with the statement that the TOW was ‘between the Crown and Tangata Whenua’.

2. List 3 of the 5 falsehoods that acCvists have developed from the TOW?

3. What TOW details did Finlayson quote to prove that Seymour’s principles do not accurately reﬂect the TOW?

4. What evidence is there that Finlayson’s posiCon as an MP during the TOW negoCaCons was compromised?

5. What did Key’s government do that allowed Ardern’s Government to promote more racist legislaCon?

• CONCLUSION: Finlayson is lying.

• Each of Seymour’s Principles matches the original intenCon of the TOW.

• Finlayson is completely wrong and is lying to the people of NZ and the Select Commi]ee.

• Finlayson was in charge of the Treaty Se]lements in the Key Government of 20082017 and gave away billions of dollars in cash and assets to Māori based on his wrong understanding of the TOW.

• Many MPS today are just as ignorant,

• When Finlayson was a Minister he was also a lawyer helping iwi to gain se]lements. John Key should not have allowed that. This is corrupCon.

• Finlayson is now working with Ngai Tahu trying to secure the rights to all South Island water.

• Michael Laws (The Playorm)comments: John Key was a bad prime minister is that he refused to ﬁx problems e.g. race relaCons, and allowed the following Ardern Labour AcCvist Government to push through divisive racial legislaCon. Key’s advice to the present NaConal Government was tone down the race relaCon because Māori are Treaty partners. i.e. just give in to Māori acCvists. He was behind UNDRIP.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

One Thing

Chris Finlayson

Does Not Know

6 Mar 2025

Finlayson demonstrates his preference to give NZ assets to Māori, and believes lawyers are above Parliament. Luxon has the power to intervene but does nothing.

QUIZ

1. Do the quesCons of the commi]ee indicate they have any depth of understanding about the role of Parliament versus the role of lawyers?

2. Was the Rongowhakaata Claims Se]lement Act fair for the NZ taxpayers?

3. What is Finlayson’s understanding of the status of Parliament as compared to the Courts and why is it to his personal advantage?

4.How does the concept of Treatry ‘partnership’ indicate legal incompetence?

5. Why does Luxon not intervene and sort out TOW problems?

BULLET POINTS

• Covers quesCons at the end of the oral submission.

• Chris Finlayson is a push over as far as giving money to claimants is concerned.

• Duncan Webb fauns over Finlayson and does not realise the damage he has done to NZ.

• Massacre at Matawhero in 1868: Te KooC and 1000 Hauhau savages killed 33 Europeans and 37 friendly Māori. In 2012, Finlayson was the author of the Rongowhakaata Claims Se]lement Act. He rewarded the Te Kooto descendants with a Crown apology for the ‘sCgmaCzaCon of Te KooC’, vested the Matatwhero reserve in the tribe’s name and gave the $250,000 of taxpayer’s money. Finlayson seems to have wanted to plunder NZ.

• Chris Finlayson does not understand the rela\onship between Parliament and the courts.

• He believes Parliament is sovereign, but not ‘omnipotent’. He wants courts to have more power than Parliament

• Being a lawyer he wants to be able to push Parliament around. He is the lawyer for Ngai Tahu who want to control all South Island water. If he wins he is rewarded handsomely.

• Commi]ee quesConers do not understand what Findlay is up to and do not challenge him.

• He argues that Parliament cannot change the Treaty but lawyers can. He suggests that Seymour’s Bill is changing the TOW. This is not true.

• Lawyers incorrected concluded that the TOW was a partnership. The lawyers were incompetent.

• Luxon is weak. He should step up and sort out the TOW issues once and for all.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Waitangi Tribunal

ResignaCon.

Julian Batchelor

Interviews

Richard Prebble.

8 Mar 2025

Julian Batchelor asks Richard Prebble, ex MP, a series of quesCons about the TOW and the Waitangi Tribunal.

QUIZ

1. What are the names of the three English versions of the TOW?

2. What illegal tacCcs have people used to develop a case to take to the WT?

3. Why are the expenses and fees so high for TOW claims?

4. What appears to be the main reason for the same claims being se]led three Cmes?

5. What are Prebble’s three terms that sum up the TOW? (Clue: S, PRs, C.)

BULLET POINTS

• You were part of the Cabinet that allowed the reinves\ga\on of grievances back to 1840. Do you s\ll stand by that decision?

• Prebble: ‘ Yes I do There were breaches of the TOW.’

• Some of the Principles include: Partnership, AcCve protecCon and Redress. There is massive contenCon about Redress. Some say Redress is vital. Some say full and ﬁnal were reached by 1960. Some say there never should have been any redress. [Ref: John Robinson, Who Really Broke the Treaty?, Māori did, not the Government. Se]lements are a fraud.]

• Prebble: ‘The breaches were sCll causing anguish. We have made a reasonable fist of it…. We can make reparaCons. I am proud that we had a go at fixing things. … In its first 40 years the WT played a construcCve role in bringing the two people together.’

• What is the possibility that these claims are specious … and the WT is an ATM machine?

• Prebble: ‘You have to be careful it does not turn into a gravy train. There are lawyers who have made a very good living out of bringing grievance claims, some they have thought up themselves and looked up people to sign onto it.’

• Quote: ‘The se]lements process has created a new and disCnct industry. .. 120 government workers’ … plus a whole host of others contracted to perform various tasks.’

…’Lawyers, researchers, iwi representaCves, and meeCng organisers for the 2 008 “Treelords” deal racked up $57 million in fees and expenses’… ‘$20 million went to tribal representaCves to meet and negoCate among themselves!’. ‘Part of the $57 million went to lawyers and consultants.’ Etc etc. Claimants can claim legal aid. [Ref: ‘Twis2ng The Treaty’.]

• Prebble: ‘One claimant collected signatures from on old peoples.’

• At any \me, were you aware that tribal historical grievances had been addressed by full and ﬁnal seklements in the 1940s?

• Prebble: ‘I most certainly was.’ … ‘Some disputes have been se]led three Cmes’.

• Public is angered by revisiCng ‘se]lements’. Se]lements are never full & ﬁnal. They are one of a series of never ending payments. As per Pavlovian Theory, Māori have been trained to come back for more. It is easy money. The monster is out of control.

• NZers are seeing this drain of funds when the country is short of money. Eventually NZ will belong to Māori only.

• Prebble: ‘This will conCnue for generaCons.’

• The poliCcians are responsible. Strong leadership is needed.

• Prebble: ‘There are only two major claims to be se]led.’ Potama said there are 10,000 claims in waiCng. One is Ngapuhi who are sCll arguing among themselves. Each claim involves giving extra payments to previously se]led claimants.

• Ngapuhi think mulCple payments to subgroups may eventuate.

• Māori have only been successful because of non-Māori running their organisaCons ajer se]lements have been paid out.

• Prebble: ‘There are many Māori who have done well’.

• Why do Māori leaders keep going on about Māori being low socially and economically?

• Prebble: ‘This is one of the Government challenges. People should be treated by need, not by race.’…’One cause is solo parenCng. … The Māori family is in really great trouble…. Personal responsibility is important.’

• You were also part of the Cabinet that invited Sir Hugh Kawharu to re-translate the treaty from Māori to English. Do you s\ll stand by that decision?

• Prebble:’ I can see no harm.’ [He then goes on a rant about languages changing through Cme.]

‘Every generaCon rewrites history.’ ‘We need to look at contemporary records.’

• Today revisionism driven by CRT changes history. AcCvists twist history to suit themselves.

• To ﬁnd out the meanings in the Māori version of the TOW go to the Busby ﬁnal English draj.

THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

WHAT IT SAYS (SUMMARISED)

Treaty Preamble The Bri\sh agreed to set up a government for Māori and NonMāori

• Prebble talks about situaCon when a contract becomes void due to error. [The TOW is not a contract.]

• Henry Williams et al discussed the meanings of the words in the TOW on 5 Feb 1840. AcCvists dismiss Williams as a bad translator.

• When were you aware that Hugh Kawharu’s redeﬁni\on of the words ‘kawangatanga’ and ‘ranga\ratanga’ were being used to jus\fy Māori sovereignty aspira\ons?

• Prebble: ‘I knew this was gong on.’ ... ‘Tribunal called Parihaka a holocaust’. The TOW Strategic Plan I was given. ‘I decided I was not going to be a part of this and resigned.’ Early on principles were discussed, but it never made it to legislaCon. The original TOW is clear enough.’

• If you were the PM what would you do to ﬁx it?

• Prebble: ‘Set the principles: One country. One Treaty. One ciCzenship.’ Refers to Lange about Queen Victoria quotes. ‘The TOW issue scares the present PM.’ Half the WT work comes from inter iwi disagreements. It is unsustainable to keep changing what the TOW means. TOW needs to be reconsCtuted. A line needs to be drawn, a cut- oﬀ date.

• 2008 cut-oﬀ date is a joke.

• AcCvists believe all NZers being should be economically equal regardless of eﬀort. [i.e. equity, a communist idea.]

• Do you support a referendum on the TOW?

• Prebble: No.

WHAT IT MEANS

The chiefs in 1840 gave the Bri\sh the right to govern for all New Zealanders

Ar\cle 1 Māori ceded sovereignty Māori gave up the right to govern the country completely and forever

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 1

The Bri\sh promised to protect Māori in the ownership of their land, dwellings, and

All New Zealanders would have property rights and security

property as long as they owned them.

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 2 The Bri\sh would buy land from the chiefs.

Ar\cle 3 Māori became Bri\sh ci\zens, thus equal before the law with all other ci\zens.

Aﬃrma\on The chiefs understood and agreed to all that they were signing up to.

The chiefs would sell land exclusively to the Bri\sh Crown

All New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and du\es

The chiefs understood and agreed to all that they were signing up to

• In summary, according to Prebble, the three TOW ‘non-negoCables’ are: Sovereignty, Property Rights, CiCzenship.

• Prebble: the other so-called principles should go into a Bill of Rights

• Prebble: ‘The TOW is a fact.’

• The ﬁnal English Draj is the key to understanding.

• The TOW is simple, clear and unambiguous. It’s meaning is incontroverCble.

• If the Government does not show leadership on this, do you see civil war?

• Prebble: ‘No.’ (The trouble makers are a small group.) … ‘I fear that the young people will go to Australia.’

• There is an unhealthy cocktail brewing.

• What can everyday kiwis do to aﬀect change?

• Prebble’s Herald arCcle has had a huge response.

• The cyclone is intensifying. We need to push back.

• Who could take Luxon’s place?

• Prebble: ‘I cannot say. He is avoiding the topic in the hope it will blow over.’

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Why Treaty Se]lements Will Never End.

10 Mar 2025

The role of MPs, lawyers and journalists in the conCnuing and never ending cycle of Māori complaints, appeasement and se]lements is explained.

QUIZ

1. What is the dicConary deﬁniCon of the word ‘se]lement’?

2. (a) What is the main reason tribes use the same grievance more than once? (b) What is the main argument against the ‘not enough’ complaint?

3. Why do MPs give in to Māori se]lements so easily?

4. Who is to blame for allowing the conCnuance of these se]lements cycles.

5. Who is the person who has the power to put an end to the se]lements cycles?

BULLET POINTS

• Many tribes have been paid out mulCple Cmes for the same se]lement.

• The dicConary says ‘se]lement’ is ’an oﬃcial agreement intended to resolve a dispute or conﬂict’.

• EXAMPLE:

• In a se]lement made to a tribe in 1870 both Māori and the Crown think the se]lement is full and ﬁnal. I.e. the grievance was successfully cleared up.

• Time moves on and a new set of Māori leaders are in charge of the tribe and a new set of MPs are in Parliament. Let’s say it is 1920. The tribe has spent all the 1 870 money and they want more.

• They start complaining that the 1870 se]lement was not enough and begin inCmidaCng MPs demanding more. The new MPS don’t like conﬂict and protest, and they are afraid of the Māori.

• Māori are known for bullying, harassment and inCmidaCon, even violence. Māori protest are bad for opCcs. They damage the public percepCon of the success of the governing party.

• If a party bring racial harmony and peace it enhances the chances of that party being elected again.

• This is why Māori acCvists focused on accusing Seymour of creaCng division. Re-elecCon means everything to siÜng MPs. So the 1920 MPs choose to appease the tribe and pay them what they want.

• Video of John Key’s fear of bad opCcs; ‘hikos from hell’.

• Note: Se]lements are made with taxpayers’ money, not from MP’s pockets. Thus MPs are happy to appease and pay Māori. They smile for the cameras and there are handshakes and hugs. The tribe feels good to have such a large bank balance.

• Other tribes catch on. If they complain, protest, bully, harass and inCmidate they will receive a large pay-out. So they have a go at the ‘last se]lement was not enough’ line. The gravy train picks up speed.

• Now its 1960. New Māori leaders are in charge of the tribe and a new set of MPs in Parliament.

• This is how a tribe can be paid out 3, 4 0r even 5 Cmes.

• Fairly and squarely it is MPs wo are clearly to blame for this sick cycle. UlCmately it is the PM who was the leader of the party when the se]lement was made who is to blame.

• The miracle ids that ‘the se]lement ATM machine’, never runs dry. Taxpayers are always topping it up. Endlessly. Māori tribes know this. MPs know this. So the sick cycle conCnues.

• Richard Prebble warned that there is no end in sight. Our children and grandchildren will have to contend with.

• Other forces are at work here too. Lawyers and consultants hurry to put fuel on the ﬁres of Māori complaint. They are feeding deeply oﬀ the se]lement cycles. Many get rich from it.

• Woke white bureaucrats and journalists seek meaning in life so join in with the Māori religion experience.

• This gravy train will pick up speed and size in Cme so this sick cycle will ulCmately destroy our country. We will become the Zimbabwe of the South Paciﬁc. It is a ma]er of when.

• Only one person can stop this and that is the prime minister. But will he step up?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

OMG! Look Look What's Turning Up In Christchurch Le]er Boxes!

12 Mar 2025

An analysis of a Ngai Tahu Support Group ﬂyer probably not authored by Mangere Pukukai O’Reagan.

QUIZ

1. Why does the TP Bill not ‘consCtute a violaCon of the TOW.’

2. When were compensaCons for TOW violaCons introduced?

3. Why does John Robinson say grievance ‘se]lements are a fraud’.

4. Why are Māori not indigenous?

5. What evidence is there that Māori businesses are ﬁnancially privileged?

THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

THE TRUTH

Treaty Preamble

BULLET POINTS

• NGAI TAHU SUPPORT GROUP (NTSG) ﬂyer delivered to Christchurch le]er boxes.

• The goal of NTSG’s ‘50,000 members’ is to eventually govern the whole of the South Island.

• NTSG want to challenge ‘misinformaCon’ from the SCG movement which is ﬁghCng MāoriﬁcaCon, cultural condiConing &cogovernance.

• NTSG say the TP Bill ‘redeﬁnes the rules governing compensaCon payments to Māori and … consCtutes a violaCon of the TOW.’

• Fact: The Bill faithfully reﬂects the original true meaning and intent of the TOW. (See chart below.)

• CompensaCon for TOW violaCons was introduced ajer 1840. That has nothing to do with the TOW.

• The jusCﬁcaCon for TOW se]lements has been challenged by John Robinson. The Crown did not breach the TOW, ‘all such se]lements are a fraud’. (Ref: Who Really Brock The Treaty, Tross publishing, 2025. Recommended reading.)

SEYMOUR’S ORIGINAL 3 PRINCIPLES

The Bri\sh agreed to set up a government for Māori and Non-Māori

Ar\cle 1 Māori ceded sovereignty

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 1

Ar\cle 2

Sentence 2

The Bri\sh promised to protect Māori in the ownership of their land, dwellings, and property as long as they owned them.

The Bri\sh would buy land from the chiefs.

Ar\cle 3 Māori became Bri\sh ci\zens, thus equal before the law with all other ci\zens.

Aﬃrma\on The chiefs understood and agreed to all that they were signing up to.

1. That the Government has the right to govern for all New Zealanders.

2. That the Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chiedainship of their land and all their property.

3. That all New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and du\es.

• NTSG say ‘Māori are indigenous.’

• FACT: Indigenous refers to ‘the people who originally lived in a place, rather than the people who moved there from somewhere else.’ Māori came from Hawaiki around 1250AD. Winston Peters agrees that Māori are not indigenous. (Act & NaConal signed up

to UNDRIP in 2010.). Māori are not indigenous

• NTSG say ‘there are sCll many areas where Māori are disadvantaged’.

• FACT: Māori have more access to services, things, faciliCes and insCtuCons than nonMāori. e.g. Many Māori businesses pay only 17% tax, while it is over 30% for everyone else. Many Māori businesses are set up as chariCes.

• E.g. Waikato- Tainui’s 2014 report: Raupatu Land Trust net proﬁt was $70.9 million, net worth $783.7 million, paid $342,000 tax.

• E.g. Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu’s 2013 report: operaCng surplus $50.86 million, net worth $877.26 million, paid $160,000 tax.

• FACT: Māori are an advantaged cultural group.

• NZ is an apartheid ethno-state. Most do not realise as it is happening gradually, like Nazi Germany.

• FACT: NTSG is perpetraCng misinformaCon.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Look What Just Turned Up In Christchurch Lekerboxes! (Part 2)

18 Mar 2025

An analysis of a Ngai Tahu Support Group ﬂyer probably not authored by Mangere Pukukai O’Reagan.

QUIZ NA.

• NGAI TAHU SUPPORT GROUP (NTSG) ﬂyer delivered to Christchurch le]er boxes.

• Nga Tahu was asked to verify that this ﬂyer was from Naig Tahu.

• They replied: the author of the flier is signed off as ‘Mangere Pukukai O’Reagan’ which means ‘Lazy, Greedy Ngai Tahu’ so the flyer is not from Ngai Tahu.

• We are not taking down Video 1.

• Ngai Tahu has 84,000 members so how are the acCviCes of all monitored?

• There are Māori in all tribes who are disgruntled by what their leaders are up to and are riling against them, They complain that the money does not ﬂow from the top of the tribe to the bo]om i.e. their tribal leaders are greedy.

• Tribal members see their tribal leaders receive TOW se]lements. The tribal leaders buy businesses, have them run by others so as to establish large passive incomes and live the life of Riley. This is the second accusaCon, laziness.

• Many tribal members get absolutely nothing from their tribes se]lement wealth.

• Therefore this flyer fits the expected profile of a disgruntled tribal member or group of members of Ngai Tahu.

• VIDEO OF A DISGRUNTLED TRIBAL MEMBER:

• CorrupCon: (1) proxy votes, most of which are not nothing to do with the whenua, (2) oligarchy, one family’s extended family members appointed to commi]ees, (3) having many trusts or iwi enCCes which have similar names so that it is diﬃcult for the public to point to the parCcular one that is criminal, (4) stealing straight from the iwi and the trusts via subsidiary companies via invoicing themselves: the businesses are probably geÜng government subsidies as well, (5) PuÜng money into investment funds and spending the money from the fund so there is no need to answer to the iwi.

• It is up to Ngai Tahu to explain what is true and not true in the ﬂyer.

• We have asked them a range of quesCons.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

OMG Look

What Just Turned Up In

Christchurch

Le]er Boxes

Part 3

20 Jan 2025

QuesCons to Ngai

Tahu Response to

Christchurch Ngai

Tahu Flier.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

QUESTIONS TO NGAI TAHU:

1. Do Nagi Tahu think they are special?

2. If so, in what way?

3. Do Nagi Tahu think they have special rights over and above those aﬀorded other New Zealanders?

4. If so, what rights?

5. And why have they got these rights

6. Where do they come fom?

7. Are Māori disadvantaged in any way?

8. If so, how so?

9. Please list the disadvantages.

10. Are Māori indigenous to New Zealand?

11. If so, how so?

12. What companies do Ngai Tahu own?

13. What tax rates do these companies pay?

14. How many shareholders does each company have?

15. Is it true that Ngai Tahu has 84,000 members?

16. Do they receive annual dividends from the proﬁts f each company?

17. What percentage of annual proﬁts are distributed to shareholders?

18. Is it true that Ngai Tahu want control of the coastal areas from Scarborough to Kaikoura?

19. Is it true that Ngai Tahu want control all of the freshwater in the South Island?

20. Is it true that Ngai Tahu required Meridian Energy to pay them $104million so that Meridian could move forward with a resource consent?

21. If this amount was paid, why was it required by Ngai Tahu? Please give reasons.

22. Does Ngai Tahu eventually want to be in control of the South Island?

23. Is there any truth to this?

24. What are Ngai Tahu’s goals / aims / objecCves for the South Island?

25. Where would Ngai Tahu like to be byb2040?

26. Would it be true to say that Māori want to be in complete control of New Zealand by 2040?

27. Is this completely true, partly true, or not at all true?

28. Does Ngai Tahu support the goals and aspiraCons for Māori as set out in He Puapua and MaCke Mai?

29. If so, why?

30. If not, why not?

31. You say you are in receipt of a photo of an elderly person delivering the ﬂyers. Please produce this photo. We will only be able to determine whether the ﬂyer is conspiracy theory or not when we read your answers to the quesCons presented to you.

NGAI HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THESE QUESTIONS.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

You'd Never Guess How Much You Are Paying Maori Every Year

23 March 2025

An analysis of how much the taxpayers of NZ are paying out to Māori based on 2004 ACT data.

QUIZ

1. What did the ACT Report say was the deﬁcit between Māori tax paid and what Māori received in beneﬁts?

2. How was the ACT report received by other poliCcians?

3. What errors did the InsCtute for Economic Research (IER) make errors in its calculaCons?

4. In 2004, how much was the Government spending per year on roads, defence, police, courts, prisons, regional development, conservaCon and the arts?

5. Over their lifeCme how much money is each non -Māori giving to supplement Māori ﬁnancial support?

BULLET POINTS

• Write down how much you think is the average pay out per non-Māori person to Māori each year.

• ACT Party 2004 Commissioned Report

• Richard Prebble was leader of ACT when this report was published.

• The report proved there is a $5 Billion Māori Tax to Beneﬁt gap; for every $2 Māori pay in tax, Māori receive $7, a net gain of $5.

• The situaCon has deteriorated since 2004.

• However, at the Cme a newspaper claimed that Māori households contributed more in tax than they received in beneﬁts and other Government transfers. Labour has commissioned research to jusCfy its race-based social spending. The ﬁnding was endorsed by an InsCtute for Economic Research (IER). The ACT study shows the Labour Government study was inaccurate.

• Some reports are rigged because the organisaCons involved depend on Government money to survive, else they lose the contracts.

• The IER lej out non-cash beneﬁts, such as health and educaCon [bulk of government spending], received by households.

• Helen Clarke called ACT ‘fanaCcs’. Minister of Māori Aﬀairs said ACT was ‘Māori bashing’.

• Since 2004 Māori bullying etc has increased tremendously and now such behaviours are commonplace by Māori Party et al.

• ‘Some $5 billion a year is a huge sum. It is about what the Government spends every year on roads, defence, police, courts, prisons, regional development, conservaCon and the arts.’

• A clearer way of expressing the above is: ‘Māori pay $2 billion a year in taxes. The Government spends $7 billion a year on Māori. The loss to the government is $% billion. A [new] billion is a thousand million, i.e. $1000,000,000,000.

• In comparison the cost of Dunedin’s new hospital was projected to be $1.4 Billion.

• The $5 Billion that went to Māori in 2004 could have alternaCvely beneﬁ]ed all New Zealanders via roads and hospitals etc.

• Māori on average receive more than they pay in taxes. Each year per Māori this is $8000 more than they pay in taxes. Over a lifeCme the average net beneﬁt per Māori is $560,000.

• Over their lifeCme each non-Māori is giving to Māori a total of $120,000.

• BOOK: ‘What Is The SoluCon For Māori’

• These transfers of funds to Māori do not include Waitangi Tribunal se]lements etc.

• ‘The ﬁscal envelop for all WT claims is $2 Billion, less than half the annual transfer ($5 Billion) to Māori.’ In 2004 pay outs to tribes were: $2 Billion.

• The situaCon is worse in 2025. Beneﬁts for Māori have increased exponenCally. Māori authoriCes have had their tax rates cut to 17.5%, most companies now pay 28%.

• Today many Māori receive scholarships tp gp to university.

• What advantage is the country receiving for this enormous investment?

• You do not ﬁx poverty by giving away taxpayers’ money.

• Māori have received at least $105 Billion in the last 21 years. What is the return for the country?

• Willi Jackson wants co-governance so Māori can get more handouts and yet their social indicators are sCll poor.

• “The evidence indicates that the government spending is not the soluCon, but a large part of the problem.” Governments have created an insaCable monster.

• Appeasing Māori leads to them always wanCng more.

• NZ’s naConal debt is $179 Billion. We borrow to appease Māori.

• However, ‘Māori economy surpasses $100 Billion goal, assets grow to $126 Billion in 2023’. Why is this money not being used to ﬁx Māori problems and pay for their own dance fesCvals?

• Why are Māori hoarding mo ney? Is it to take over the country?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Should We Respect Maori?

29 March 2025 The arrogant behaviour of acCvist Māori does not engender respect. Rather the behaviour of acCvist Māori is narcissisCc and includes gaslighCng.

QUIZ

1. How is ‘respect’ deﬁned?

2. What is the main goal of a narcissist in any interacCon?

3. What did the acCvist Māori woman do to try and undermine the policeman’s conﬁdence?

4. What adjecCves could be used to describe her behaviour?

5. List some examples of the acCvist Māori woman’s gas-lighCng and distorCng reality?

BULLET POINTS

• Video of a Māori woman acCvist videoing and harassing a policemen at the site of a cigare]e robbery carried out by 4 Māori youths. She used name calling and disrespected the police. She wanted his home address so she could bully, shame, inCmidate and harass him, and is QID number so she could complain to the Police Conduct Authority. He was just doing his job.

• Māori acCvists want the rest of the populaCon to live in fear of Māori, i.e. tribalism, as per pre1940.

• Māori acCvists are narcissists. They want nonMāori to live in fear of Māori so they can achive control. Non-Māori have to be on best behaviour around Māori, have to bow down to them and tread on egg shells.

• Jordan Peterson: narcissists do not interact on the basis of mutual respect, reciprocity and shared understanding. They are not interested in mutuality, they are only interested in power. Narcissists, in any interacCon, is to secure control, a]enCon and validaCon on their terms. This process includes distorCng reality and gaslighCng. This undermines a person’s conﬁdence and they become more pliable and more easily manipulated. Narcissists will not feel guilty about what they’ve done, that is why they are dangerous.

• The Māori woman acCvist said the police were ‘talking disrespecyully about the four Māori youths’.

• ‘Respect’ means ‘deep admiraCon and respect’. The Māori woman acCvist wanted the police to respect the Māori youths. She is delusional.

• Māori acCvist use the term ‘respect’ to gain control.

• Lord John Russell in 1843, commenCng on the Māori tendency to hike up the price of land, said ‘This is the consequence of want of ﬁrmness in not resisCng unjust demands Such conduct appears humane and generous and kind; but really it is a weak yielding to inCmidaCon and foolish concessions which lead to absurd demands. Such is always the

consequences, especially when dealing with savage tribes’.

• Now we are in the midst of a coup.

• Replay of VIDEO. Māori acCvist woman conCnues. Police are just doing their job

• GaslighCng: Telling the policemen that he is ignorant, a liar and arrogant. It is his fault that Māori are poor. ‘98% of land has been stolen.’ Fact: Māori sold 92% of their land. Cigare]es were stolen because they can be easily sold on. Māori poverty is due to poor choices.

• It is best to ignore Māori acCvists.

• Twice she demands respect. The Māori youths who stole the cigare]es should be respected.

• What should be respected with deep admiraCon within Māori culture?

• NegaCve social indicators are high for Māori culture.

• Forcing people to learn Te Reo, etc does not work.

• Sign: ‘Together Te TiriC.’ We should reject this sign as it implies partnership when there are 160 cultures in NZ.