On Waitangi Day, Saturday 6 Feb, TV One aired “The Great Waitangi Debate” on their Marae Program in which Matt and I were audience members. Panelist Tim Wikiriwhi (who won the MandM award for being the most inflammatory speaker of the day) has submitted his review as a guest post. Other blogs have published bits of it, we are the first to publish it in its entirety. Neither Matt or I concur completely with Tim’s assessment of Matthew Hooten’s criticisms of Stephen Franks’ position (which Stephen documents here) nevertheless we back his call for racial equality and he alludes to some fascinating historical arguments around land confiscations which we both intend to read more on. Tim Wikiriwhi was the Maori Spokesperson for the Libertarianz Party for 10 years and is himself Maori. Tim writes:
It was with great pleasure that I accepted TVNZs invitation to participate in this debate, and agree with Steve Franks who said it was truly a great thing for tvnz to open up this discussion in the public arena as a lack of serious debate plays a large part in perpetuating the troubles surrounding race relations and the treaty.
I completely agreed with his argument that the real treaty was not holding us back but that the bogus treaty separatist interpretations and sexed up versions were the trouble. I did not agree with his position that it was ok for the state to treat different peoples differently or that some of the favoritism was pragmatic common sense. This was in fact picked up by Matthew Hooten when he slammed Franks for claiming the favoritism that worked was not treatyism but that the rest was!
Hana Oreagan was nice enough in person, but the politics she espoused can only be described as flakey and hypocritical. For example she could not see that when she slammed the NZ government for being discriminatory against Maori in the 1920s ( Lower pensions for Maori was one example she used) that she her self was advocating the same type of discrimination be imposed today …favoring Maori…this completely escaped her just as she did not recognize that some of the favoritism in the 1920s was actually in favour of Maori such as exemption from rates.
Off air I did my best to show her this error and that what was needed was one equal law for all. Her claim the treaty can mean whatever we want it to mean just shows how flakey her ideas really are.
When the time came for me to present my arguments, I attempted to give as broad a range of the troubles as I could in two minutes, hoping to fill in the details later when interviewed. Yet Shane decided it was better to attack my views on taxation instead! This worked in my favour as it gave me opportunity to slam socialist rapaciousness.
I do want to add in here a couple of historic references to support my speech which I was unable to include in the debate. The first is Governor Grays declaration to the Waikato Chiefs about respecting the sovereignty of the queen and keeping the peace dated 11 July 1863 (as can be found in Richard Stowers book The Forest Rangers pg6) Governor Grey asked them to stop the evil acts against peaceable settlers…Grey asked for the free passage of Europeans in the Waikato district, in particular movement on the Waikato river. He also stated:
Those who remain peaceably at their own villages in the Waikato , or move into such districts as may be pointed out by the government, will be protected in their persons, property and land.
Those who wage war against her majesty, or remain in arms, threatening the lives of her peaceable subjects, must take the consequences of their acts and they must understand that they forfeit the right of possession of their lands guaranteed them by the treaty of Waitangi; which lands will be occupied by a population capable of protecting for the future the quiet and un-offending from violence with which they are now so constantly threatened.
A second reference is to Sir Apirana Ngata who stated in his ‘The Treaty of Waitangi, An Explanation’ that…
Some have said that these confiscations were wrong and they contravened the articles of the treaty of Waitangi, but the chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the Sovereignty and authority to make Laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled. The Law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This in itself is Maori Custom-revenge-plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The Confiscations can not therefore be objected to in the light of the treaty…
Finally I am happy I got a plug in against the anti freedom Nannyism and anti colonialism of Minto regarding Crime and health statistics that are used as vindication for socialist favoritism and ongoing regulation.
“Why are we trying to manipulate fat people I said?”
“That is not a duty of government but a matter of self responsibility!”
(Socialists believe its their right/duty to force you to be the politically correct weight)
I liked Matt Hootens smug grin…very amusing, but he said little worthy of note except that people will continue to use the current system to gain filthy lucre which more supported us and not them!
I think even Hana O Regan thought she had been paired up with a wally.
Valuable contributions from the audience came from:
- Martin Doutre, New Zealand’s foremost expert on the history of the treaty documents when he verified Steve Franks assertion that the modern treaty used by the separatists and current government is a fraud.
- Matt and Madeleine Flannagan both questioned the interpretations of the separatists … “How did they get their idea that the treaty obliged the state to teach and propagate Te Reo?” … “Why do they think a legal document like the treaty can be interpreted without applying the usual rules of law?”
- Prof David Round criticised the ongoing and deepening riff caused by the separatist treaty industry.
Most of the rest from the likes of Minto, Dalamere and co were the usual socialist rubbish that denies any responsibility of the Maori people to stand on their own two feet lumping the taxpayer with the burden of carrying them like babies.
It was difficult to follow much of the commentary as it was so muddled up with some truth and a hell of a lot of false assumptions/propaganda.
I was even dis-owned by my tribe for supporting equality before the Law! (Oh well, I shall continue to walk on alone if I must)
I was happy that in the last segment I got to slam our racially divided electoral system and parliament adding that what made the election of Barack Obama great is that he was elected in a proper non-racist election competing with white men and woman, unlike our current shameful apartheid system in NZ.
In closing I want to state for the record that…Just as the state education system is a propaganda machine of the theory of evolution…so too it propagates the lies of treaty separatism.
This exposes the travesty of having a democracy with state control of our schools and the urgent need to divest the state of its evil encroachments and control over our children’s minds. Privatize education!
The battle goes on…
RELATED POSTS:
View “Marae: The Great Waitangi Debate” Here
Sovereignty and The Treaty of Waitangi
Maori and Pakeha are Not Partners to the Treaty of Waitangi
(Our Review of the Debate)
Tags: Eq · Guest Post · Mare · Tim Wikiriwhi · Treaty of Waitangi · TV One · TVNZ33 Comments
A common objection to belief in the God of the Bible is that a good, kind, and loving deity would never command the wholesale slaughter of nations. In the tradition of his popular Is God a Moral Monster?, Paul Copan teams up with Matthew Flannagan to tackle some of the most confusing and uncomfortable passages of Scripture. Together they help the Christian and nonbeliever alike understand the biblical, theological, philosophical, and ethical implications of Old Testament warfare passages.
For a little background on Martin Doutre, the self-proclaimed ‘expert’ on New Zealand history who seems to be the source for Tim W’s strange claims about the Treaty, take a look at this article and the debate which follows it, during which Doutre outs himself as a 9/11 ‘Truther’, a fan of Holocaust denier David Irving, and a believer in the ancient settlement of NZ by a dwarf race of Celts:
http://books.scoop.co.nz/2008/11/18/no-to-nazi-pseudo-history-an-open-letter/
In case you don’t to wde through the whole debate here’s Doutre two-third of the way down giving himself away:
‘As for David Irving, it was generally accepted worldwide that he was the most astute, prolific, all-round scholar and historian on the subject of WWII, at least up until May, 1988, when he made a very bad career choice. At that time he was called upon to give expert testimony, under oath, in a court case and stated that he could find no documented evidence of “Hitler’s Final Solution”. For this unforgivable admission, he fell foul of the Zionists who, thereafter, focused their hatred on him and have been unrelenting in trying to destroy his credibility ever since.
To me, David Irving is simply the leading expert in his field, who has been very unfairly maligned (not unlike Joel Hayward) for being clinically honest about what he can glean from the documented evidence. I feel very sorry for both Irving and Hayward, as well as a raft of others thrown into prison by the “thought police” and can readily see, by their ill-treatment, that we’re still in the throes of the inquisition, which seems to be getting worse, not better. Moreover, others of us trying to make some sense out of the disjointed, nonsensical history pushed by mainstream academics have to contend with the abusive threats of Jew control-freaks’
Some ally, Tim…
I myself have never read anything Martin Doutre wrote, neither have I examined the arguments for his contentions about the Treaty. So I am not an advocate of his position.
I do note, however, that your comments fail to address any arguments Martin Doutre raises. You simply ridicule him. If you have some cogent arguments against his position then I am interested.
Yeah right.
Have you ever herd of being objective?
Do you know Ad Homonym attacks are puerile?
Show me where Martin Doutre denies the holocaust or be damned!
From what I have read about Martin Doutres comments regarding Irving all appear to hinge what he calls the ‘thought police’ and from that angle as a Libertarian I stand 100% behind him even though I don’t deny the Holocaust. (neither does Martin deny it and he also says Irving does not deny it in totality either…only the scale of it.) Martin dared to objectively appraise Irving ’s scholarship as an expert on Hitler. He dared to express his indignation that Irving was jailed for having a personal opinion that differed from officialdom.
He dared to support individuals who challenge the notions of the common herd and for all these things I praise him whole heartedly!
He specks from personal experience as he himself has had to face the same bigotry here in NZ regarding his own studies and theories that Maori were not the indigenous people of NZ
These are Libertarian Ideals even if you strongly disagree with the content!
So damn all those little minds for labeling this honest free thinker as a racist and holocaust denier!
They have no real arguments against him.
I share Martins disgust that a scholar has been jailed for having a personal opinion.
And all this bollocks is irrelevant to the truth about the treaty and to Martins unmatched expertise on this subject, just as it is irrelevant whom he collaborates with in his work or who agrees with his position regarding Pre-Maori New Zealand. So I unashamedly endorse Martin as a scholar and a Gentleman…a real hero.
So Tim thinks Doutre is the leading expert on the Treaty! He can’t even read the Maori version or many of the documents relating to it! He’s never published on the subject in an academic journal. He has no degree in anything, let alone history.
The Littlewood Treaty is a joke not taken seriously by a single historian. Have a read of Paul Moon’s correspondence with Doutre on the issue, which is online.
Anyone who praises an open neo-Nazi like David Irving whose books deny the Holocaust as ‘the most astute historian’ of World War Two is of course denying the Holocaust.
And not only does Doutre defend Irving – in the quote above he says Irving is the victim of a Zionist conspiracy! That’s classic anti-semitism.
David Irving has no academic standing, has never published in an academic journal, has no history degree, and has been exposed as a liar and falsifier of history in court (after initiating the court case himself!). And now Tim talks about his ‘objective scholarship’! Dear oh dear…
You want to associate yourself with Doutre, Tim? Keep digging! Maybe you want to defend his view of 9/11 as an international conspiracy and his denial of Osama bin Laden’s guilt?
Matt…Isn’t interesting the level the sheeple stoop to avoid the real issues! As Christian free thinkers you get your share of it!
I would like to put this to you…I said I don’t think the government or law should treat different people differently, but that it is our right as individuals to make discerning moral judgments and to treat different people differently…ie be of discriminating minds.
Thus I say when the state is divested of its usurpations that in the resultant free society then it will be completely above board for Maori to have Maori emersion schools just as it is ok for private companies to run woman only gyms and for book sellers to have Christian only books on their shelves or for an Indian restaurateur to advertise for Indian staff. ( Maori may hire Maori for their Maori Culture souvenir shops)
Can you see that freedom to discriminate…no matter how absurd or unchristian is a crime only when committed by the state?
This is Freedom.
(I wish I did not have to say this after all that Irving/ Nazi rubbish but even Irving is entitled to his opinion!)
Yeah Right….To my knowledge Martin denies Christ’s resurrection yet should this make me hate him or turn a blind eye to his views on the treaty?
I believe in the resurrection…Does that make my call for one Law for all NZ the delusions of a religious fanatic?
And who cares if Anti British colonialists state paid socialist flunkies don’t accept the validity of the Littlewood treaty…its been forensically verified!
I will be sending M and M the evidence that Martin has so stand by for their judgment. In the mean time please refrain from diverting the issue on this thread from the debate.
I smell a Rat. You no doubt have access to the Littlewood facts on line yet you choose to take the devils side.
Yeah right…I did not say Martin was the absolute expert on all things treaty…but on the History of the documents themselves.
Comprendo?
Matt,
To further correlate my comments to Yeah right with my question to you… Do you see that it is freedom and a right for Christians to be free to rigorously disagree and personally pass moral judgment on those who deny Christ’s resurrection as evil (if they so wish) and even to separate themselves from such persons (if they so desire), but oppression for the state to make the same distinctions and legally punish or subordinate such resurrection deniers?
Do you see that as long as we do not initiate force, that it is evil for the state to make our Christian moral judgments illegal and force us (for example) to refrain from discriminating against those who advocate anti Christian ideals or (for example) ban us from refusing to hire homosexuals (If you dont want to)?
I am not suggesting such discrimination (not loving our enemies as ourselves) is a Christian virtue or wise but simply that it is evil for the state to force us to abdicate our Christian values in favour of political correctness? And Visa versa…Ie Homosexual employers should not be legally banned from rejecting Christian job applicants if they don’t like Christian they consider bigots?
“This exposes the travesty of having a democracy with state control of our schools and the urgent need to divest the state of its evil encroachments and control over our children’s minds. Privatize education!”
This is true, everywhere.
Um, Mr Wikiriwhi, did you notice that in the debate at Scoop Review of Books cited above Martin Doutre says that he thinks Joel Hayward’s 1996 Masters thesis at Canterbury University is one of the very best things ever written about the Nazi treatement of the Jews?
You may remember that after media publicity and international condemnation Canterbury withdrew the thesis because it denied that any Jews died in gas chambers. Hayward eventually apologised for the thesis and said he didn’t research it properly. But Doutre says the thesis was very good. Does this not indicate very clearly that Doutre is in fact of the view that the Holocaust never happened? Why else would anyone think that the thesis, whose whole point was to deny the Holocaust, was very good? Doutre isn’t saying that the thesis deserved to be published, in the name of free speech – he’s saying he approves of the contents. Are you sure you want to describe a man like this as a ‘gentleman scholar’ and a ‘hero’?
I googled Doutre and 9/11 and found that he has indeed written an article claiming 9/11 was an inside job for a neo-Nazi website.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentagon911/pentagon911.html
People who deny things as obvious as the Holocaust and 9/11 being the work of OBL are generally either motivated by bigotry or else mentally ill. I don’t know Doutre so can’t say which category he falls into. But I wouldn’t describe him as a ‘hero’…or a ‘scholar’…
Anti anti Semite… Why are guys like you so obsessed with hatred against those who peacefully hold differing views to yourself that you are prepared to ruin my righteous cause of thwarting Official racism in my country ? You are a hypocrite! You think you have the right to cast dispersions…not against the facts…but against the personalities who present them simply because you don’t like them…and in the process you are helping the Nazis of my country!
So go stir you potty somewhere else!
You have said nothing relevant to the topic.
Half the globe thinks 911 was an inside job!
I don’t. But none of that is relevant to this issue.
You use a pseudonym…Martin does not.
Who is the phoney here?
If you used your real name no doubt I could dig up dirt on you if that was how I operated but the truth is I don’t give a toss who you are or weather you hate Palestinians or Arabs or visit Gay bars.
What concerns me is you fanatics have hijacked this thread and sullied it with your guile…and it sticks even if it is misconstrued and irrelevant.
Do you ever think before you act?
You are motivated by hatred and are doing the devils work…Thanks for pouring your worthless stink all over my valuable and righteous cause and Martins work regarding the Littlewood treaty…Not!
This just so happens to be the most crucial issue facing our nation so please take your crap somewhere else where it is relivant. The Holocaust is in the Past.
Treaty separatism is Now…get it?
Anti anti Semite and yeah right (what a pair!)
Have either of you ever met Martin? Let me guess…No!
I have known Martin in his capacity as treaty historian for many years
We have met many times and so I speak with first hand knowledge when I say he is a scholar and a gentleman and I am proud to call him a friend even if he has bought into some of those crazy ideas that circulate the planet.
So unless you can convict Martin of some heinous crime (other than disagreeing with you) take your little minded hatred and shove it!
I Lion…Thanks for your comment. You must be a Libertarian.
I hope all this Irving/ Nazi mud slinging has not negatively influenced you against my arguments.
Cheers!
Um, you asked for evidence that Martin Doutre denies the Holocaust. I pointed out that he said that the Hayward thesis, which everyone knows is a Holocaust-denying text, was a good piece of history. Someone else pointed out that Doutre called David Irving an ‘astute historian’ who was being honest (as opposed to distorting the facts) when he denied the Holocaust.
When people point these things out you tell them to ‘shove it’, and say no one who hasn’t known Martin Doutre for years has the right to criticise him. I must say that’s a pretty strange response. I don’t think it will win arguments.
Since you obviously can’t face the reality that the man you call a hero is a Holocaust denier and a 9/11 Troofer conspiracy theorist, I am going to give you the quote about the Hayward thesis and the link to the 9/11 article:
‘Since the end of WWII countless scholars have been stifled and vilified in their attempts to cut through the propaganda and get a real insight into what truly happened. One of the best, balanced appraisals on the subject that I’ve ever read was the Master’s thesis by Dr. Joel Hayward of Canterbury University. Like so many others he got crucified by extremist elements, was witch-hunted and harassed into a nervous breakdown.’
http://books.scoop.co.nz/2008/11/18/no-to-nazi-pseudo-history-an-open-letter/
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentagon911/pentagon911.html
Don’t you think it is offensive to deny to blame the American government and Jews for the 9/11 attacks by Al Qaeda? Do you really think someone who promotes such bigoted nonsense is a ‘hero’ and a ‘scholar’?
Maybe it’s time for you to face up to the reality that the man you call a ‘hero’ and a ‘gentleman scholar’ supports Holocaust denial and bizarre theories which blame Jews and Americans for 9/11.
Is it true that you are a spokesman for the Libertarian Party of NZ? I wonder what the rest of the people in the party think about your decision to defend Holocaust denial and 9/11 denial.
There is lots of other stuff about Martin Doutre that could be mentioned – his belief that Jewish people control the financial markets, his claims that Jews were responsible for the slave trade in the nineteenth century, his frendship with and defences of Kerry Bolton, a well-known neo-Nazi and onetime Secretary of the National Front, his slanders against the respected Jewish academic Dov Bing, who has exposed the anti-semitic activities of people like Bolton…perhaps you’d better reconsider who you call a ‘hero’…
Anti …I did not ask for any of your irrelevant crap! I refuse to entertain you with further comment. I know you hate him yet I asked you to refrain from wreaking this thread with your obsession against Martin Doutre for the sake of justice …but freaks like you have no conscience…only hatred. Are proud of yourself for turning my case against official racism into your personal spleenfest? Are you proud of making me appear to stink before my peers? Well done! What have you achieved here…or anywhere except to push your own malicious barrow?
A pox on you!…no I am not permitted to curse you even if you deserve it.
Putting all this Nazi rubbish in the trash where it belongs lets get back to the debate…
Am I really that radical?
Commenting from the audience on my 2 minute speech Race relations Commissioner and friend of Hone Harawera Joris de Bres called me an extremist and on the margins but are the comments of this compromised bureaucrat really true?
No. ( I say New Zealanders ought to question the ability of this corrupt man to officiate on race relations!)
The truth is I am far from being the only Kiwi who is extremely sick of all the racism and lies.
I can prove this very easily. I ask you to think back but a few years to the Leadership of the National Party by Don Brash, whom single handedly resurrected an all but dead National party after he delivered his Orewa one speech. That was a speech that contained the same spirit as the one I delivered in the TV one debate and because of it he almost made it to Prime minister!
He was cheated out of this by the Labour government who stole the election (Re: Pledge Card gate) and the machinations of Winston Peters who sold out to Clark for forty pieces of silver
(Remember the baubles of power?)
The real question is how Quisling John Key could be so brazen as to completely reverse the Brash call for one law for all NZ and jump straight into bed with the racist radicals Turia, Sharples, and Harawera! How could he Hongi Tama Iti who had only just escaped being convicted of racist terrorism charges because of bad legislation? Key would have kissed the devils backside to be PM. He has certainly sold New Zealand down the river!
I would say the majority of New Zealanders want one Law for all including many Maori .
Here is a link to a piece I wrote that covers many of these issues
http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/76587/universal-pride-washington-separatist-sh
Oh dear. Talk about rewriting the history of a thread. Tim now says:
‘I did not ask for any of your irrelevant crap’ about the Holocaust.
At the beginning of the thread, though, Tim said:
‘Show me where Martin Doutre denies the holocaust or be damned!’
I and others have done just this and now Tim’s having a hissy fit. Tim’s upset because he realises he’s made a fool of himself by claiming that Doutre is not a Holocaust denier when Doutre endorses the work of Joel Hayward, David Irving, and Kerry Bolton – all famous Holocaust deniers.
So let’s look again at the credentials of the man Tim calls NZ’s foremost Treaty historian:
– he can’t even read the language one of the two languages the Treaty is written in
– he can’t read the language that most of the documents relating to the creation of the Treaty are written in
– he does not even have an undergraduate degree in history or any related subject (in fact he has no tertiary education in any subject)
– he has never published an article in a peer-reviewed journal
– he publishes his own books, because no one else is interested.
– the only magazines and websites which publish his work are anti-semitic conspiracy sites like Serendipity (the nutty site that published the 9/11 article) and Uncensored (the magazine based in Auckland which claims the Holocaust was a Jewish hoax, that 9/11 was the work of reptilian shape-shifting aliens, and that Martin Scorsese hoaxed the moon landings. Doutre has one of his articles on NZ ‘history’ in the latest issue, alongside various pieces of nutiness).
– he thinks that Holocaust denier and neo-Nazi David Irving is an ‘astute historian’, and he thinks that Joel Hayward’s totally discredited Holocaust-denying MA thesis was an excellent ‘balanced’ piece of research. Anyone with any knowledge of the historical method would be able to see right throught Holocaust deniers like Irving and Hayward.
– he entertains a range of totally bizarre and hateful theories about the world, including the bigoted view that 9/11 was the work of the American government and Jews. This shows he is seriously lacking in basic rationality.
– he accuses all his critics, and the critics of his Holocaust-denying friends like Irving, of being part of some huge Jewish conspiracy designed to silence ‘real history’. This again shows a serious lack of rationality on his part.
And this is the man that Tim calls a ‘hero’ and a ‘scholar’. Tim’s made an idiot of himself in this thread, and he’ll continue to make an idiot of himself as long as he tries to defend anti-semitic conspiracy theory nutters like Martin Doutre. His antics have noted by those of us who keepn an eye on the activities of the anti-semitic conspiracy theory/neo-Nazi community in New Zealand.
Anti….You are a Worm. I made the mistake of taking a bite out of your shit sandwich but that is all…You however are evil.
I said I would not entertain you with any further comment either…that was another mistake on my part.
These are honest mistakes.
Standing behind Martins evidence on the treaty howevery is not a mistake.
No matter how much you try and destroy my reputation or the righteousness of my cause because I refuse to accept anything you have presented as reason enough to abandon him and his valuable contributions to ending Racist laws in this country because everything you have said is nothing but the hate filled irrelevant wiles of a devil. Thus you have failed in your objective. I will continue to promote the evidence Martin has even if I have to walk through the valley of the shadow of death… unless the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny. Then and only then would I reconsider my position on his scholarship re the treaty documents…but I would still be his friend because I like him. We have become friends. Only if it turned out that he had intentionally deceived me regarding the validity of the Littlewood treaty would I reconsider our friendship.
If I abandoned every person who held some peculiar beliefs that I found to be misguided or digusting I would have not a friend in the world. Nothing you have accused Martin of comes anywhere near valid reason for me to hate him or abandon him because he hold his ideas in peace. It is not a crime to deny the holocaust (though he doesnt). It is not a crime to think 911 was an inside job. These are silly Ideas but that is all. They certainly are no proof of derangement or malice.
I may think Martin is deceived on many issues, just like my own Marxist atheist family. I may even hate some of the ideas he entertains, just as I may hate a Tee-shirt of Che Guevara being worn by one of my cousins, but I will not hate or abandon my family or friends themselves for peacefully holding such Ideas that I don’t like because they hold them in peace…because I trust the integrity of their hearts…because I know being deceived is not evidence of an evil heart.
You on the other hand have shown yourself to be motivated by hate…to be malicious…to the be fanatically (indeed hell bent) on achieving your aims no mater what the cost to others such as myself even to the extent that you would happily destroy my attempts to rid New Zealand of the very same type of racist that spawned the Holocaust in Germany…if that is what it takes to satisfy your perverse hatred.
You I could justly hate if hatred was of any value whatsoever because you are not simply deceived but are a loathsome creature full of guile…like Hitler and on this issue you have actively taken the side of the racist fascists and are causing my cause very real pain and suffering.
I am now resigned to having to deal with your damnable machinations in the future because I know you will never stop being a thorn in my side.
You will no doubt continue to make my life miserable. I will be marred with the fowl stench of your tirades at every turn. My self imposed duty of ridding my Nation of Waitangi racism will be harder for me to bare. I and my credibility will suffer for it much more… and perhaps even my wife and friends will suffer too by association because I refuse to let your verbal terrorism sway me from the course that I know is right…that I know is urgently needed by my country.
So do your worst evil devil! I will not falter. You may destroy my efforts but you will never destroy my heart or my soul or my determination to do what is right and good…May I never end up so bitter and twisted with hatred as you! You have failed as a human being because you have let hatred be your driving force…your pleasure. I suspect there is little else to a personality like you…No creative side…no forgiveness in your heart…no soul at all. Your Name Anti Anti is apt because that is all you are.
Thanks all for the comments, references and links, a real eye opener it was.
I was blissfully unaware of the myriad of groupings, researchers, supporters and watchers (overt and covert) active within the New Zealand society.
Tim seems to have accepted, in a backhanded way, that Martin Doutre really is a Holocaust denier. I’m sure that Dov Bing, the NZ Jewish Council and other bodies Doutre has smeared in his anti-semitic defences of neo-Nazis like Kerry Bolton and David Irving would appreciate it if Tim could man up and openly admit he was wrong to defend Doutre from accusations of Holocaust denial.
Tim’s new argument is that Doutre does hold some weird beliefs, but that this is irrelevant to his work as a ‘historian’. Tim is wrong, of course. Doutre claims to have a special knowledge of history, while at the same time endorsing a variety of pseudo-historical beliefs – he denies the Holocaust, he thinks Jews did 9/11, and so on – that no one who understood anything about historical research would endorse. What would we say about a man who claims to be a neurosurgeon and yet believes in phrenology?
Tim claims that those who criticise Doutre for his Holocaust denial and his other pieces of pseudo-scholarship are ‘evil’, and ‘doing the devil’s work’. This is amusing, because Doutre’s good friend and collaborator Kerry Bolton is NZ’s best-known Satanist, and Doutre has publically defended Bolton’s activities in Satanist groups like the Order of the Left Hand Path (in the discussion thread at the Scoop Review of Books cited above, Doutre launches an anti-semitic attack on Dov Bing, the Jewish academic who along with one of his graduate students exposed Bolton’s attempts to fuse Satanism and neo-Nazism in groups like the Order of the Left Hand Path). Bolton and Doutre have toured the country together promoting the nonsense about the Littlewood ‘Treaty’ (funny kind of ‘Treaty’ that was never signed by either Pakeha or Maori!).
If you’re looking for people who are doing the devil’s work, Tim, I think you’d better look closer to home! You’re in bed with Holocaust deniers – and with Satanist nuts!
Anti Anti said…the Littlewood ‘Treaty’ (funny kind of ‘Treaty’ that was never signed by either Pakeha or Maori!).
I congratulate you for saying something pertinent!
This is all that I have been begging for from you.
I don’t knock you for being an anti anti semite…I am 1 2.
I don’t knock you for thinking those who think the Jews or GWB are responsible for 911 are deluded…I do 2.
What I objected to was your need to raise these issues on this tread to vent your spleen…esp to the degree that you did.
What I objected to was the notion that those who question our assumptions on these things are automatically collaborators with Nazis or Bin Laden.
Do you realize many Libertarians actually seriously entertain the idea that GWB or the Jews were responsible for 911?
Do you realize many Libertarians are AntiChrists?
These are sick ideas but the key to tolerating these folk is that they don’t seek to impose their views on us.
And they are not promoting tyranny but liberty and believe it or not it is healthy to have a society of thinkers who question us on our beliefs and criticize us when and where they see fit.
On this level I have no trouble with you passionately disagreeing with Martin Doutre but there are rules of decency and It was your violation of these that I could not tolerate because you were truly halming the good that I..and yes Martin are trying to achieve here at M and M.
Having said that I am no angel myself!
I need the grace of God and my fellow man at all times.
I believe in redemption and in holding out the olive branch when others show signs that it will not be taken off me and used to twack me over the head! And I am a risk taker and prepared to take a risk on you.
Should you wish to discuss the merits or lack of them regarding the TVNZ debate I will be most willing to converse with you as civilized men ought…even if you criticize me.
Now to this point of yours regarding the fact that the Littlewood treaty was not signed by anyone thus it is not important…
You are wrong.
It was signed by Hobson himself!
And Martin does not say it is the only valid treaty. He says it correlates perfectly with Te Tiriti O Watangi which was signed by the majority of Chiefs and in fact he argues that it is this original Maori version that is the real deal not the later fabrications.
The importance of the Littlewood treaty is that it vindicates the plain interpretation of Te Tiriti O Waitangi and undermines the Apartheid/ Maori sovereignty versions and interpretations.
It is important because of the massive deceptions being foisted upon us by socialists and separatists today resulting in an apartheid Nation and gross political extortion.
It is important that I support Martin in getting these truths out to the people of New Zealand because successions of corrupt governments have sort to keep them in the dark about it because of their evil Machiavellian plans to impose UN / communist Anti British colonialism and to destroy the foundations of freedom! (Re: their declaration of Indigenous rights)
Thanks again for raising a vital question.
Keep the conversation on topic and we can actually have a conversation instead of a bitch slapping session…as politically incorrect folk might call it!
In fact if you can separate your opinion about Martin from the vitality of getting the truth out there (God Forbid it?) you could even help us in this most Nobel..Anti Fascist ideal!
The choice is yours.
Prove I was wrong to call you nothing but a Hater!
I would love nothing more!
Tim W
Tim on Martin: “It is not a crime to deny the holocaust (though he doesnt).”
anti-anti-semite on Tim: “Tim seems to have accepted, in a backhanded way, that Martin Doutre really is a Holocaust denier.”
Why even bother to speak to this guy, Tim? Why?
.-= My last blog-post ..Scepticism, Open Mindedness and Mistrust =-.
Glen…Because ultimately my desire is to enlighten my brothers and sisters (We are all family) not simply to win arguments.
I cant pretend to be Holier than thou myself. I am no limp wrist but I find it difficult to utterly condemn anyone and will grasp at any straw of hope.
Every one needs grace!
Thank you for your supportive question. I am glad to see that you saw through this black cloud that threatened to consume my arguments (and still could), but please bare with me a little longer and lets see if reason can win the day!
I am compelled to make this one last effort…If I succeed it will be well worth it and may have gained a supporter. (that would be fantastic!)
If I fail…nothing is lost except a man will have chosen to remain an enemy lost in darkness. I can take no joy from such an outcome.
I win little by dishing out an eye for an eye.
My hearts desire and integrity is being demonstrated to all those like yourself who have the eyes to see the righteousness of my fight and most importantly any damage that has been done to the cause by this debacle will be minimized.
I sincerely hope Anti anti joins the fight to get the truth about the Littlewood treaty out to New Zealanders!
This would be a victory I would be proud of…and on this issue Martin would be vindicated too!
Am I crazy? Maybe I am! I dare to hope!
To Quote the great man Robert Schuller…”You have got to have dreams big enough to squeeze God into them!”
Cj nza…I am happy you have gained some value from all this.
Cheers!
Treaty racism is not unique but part of a global trend…
Another serious point I raise during the debate that was edited out by TVNZ was that the racist political troubles we face here in New Zealand were not really treaty based but founded upon the evils being propagated from the socialists infesting the UN.
This came up several times in my comments, none of which made the final cut. I believe it was because TVNZ did not wish to rock the political boat any further or be party to this line of reasoning being presented to the public. (They could have edited some of the drivel from the other speakers but instead chose to cut me down to a minimum.)
What the viewers did not see was Marae Interviewer Shaine Tourima asking why I seemed to be so vocal against Tame Iti?
I launched into a tirade against this evil racist by reminding the audience that he was a terrorist and took great pride at being the poster child of the Maori sovereignty movement and that perverse socialist doctrine of inequality…indigenous rights. I said He was the one we all saw supporting the racist terrorists of Fiji ie George Speight and co.
Later when another member of the audience made some muddled comments …half truths about what he thought was the chief cause of the racial problems. I actually thought some of what he said was good, but was forced to disagree with his main conclusions…and you catch just the first part of my answer in the final cut when I say that the real problem of the matter is found emanating from the socialist UN doctrines of indigenous rights and that they were destroying the whole world!
TVNZ again cut out my qualifying references to Fiji and also Zimbabwe.
I can only assume they did not wish to antagonize their bosses in the beehive who have not only taken the side of the indigenous rights racist of New Zealand, but have also taken the side of Indigenous rights racists in Fiji against the honorable Commodore Bainimarama.
It is my solemn belief that New Zealand ought to be helping this National Hero save Fiji from the indigenous rights racists of his Island and institute one law for all Fijians for the very same reasons we must fight the same type of racist and their collaborators that infest our Nation and get one law for all here. I raise this point on Fiji because as I said in the debate, it is part and parcel to the very same troubles we ourselves are facing regarding indigenous rights and treatyism.
Question: Do you find it hard to believe the use of military force to overthrow a democracy could possibly be just?
Here is a piece I wrote on this very issue that appeared in the Free Radical 75 …I look forward to your criticism.
http://pc.blogspot.com/search?q=the+right+of+revolution%3A+In+praise+of+frank+Bainimarama
(Thanks Not PC)..
This blog has become ridiculous, do M&M really believe the stuff they write, or are they just provoking people like me to get their blog count up?
“Socialists believe its their right/duty to force you to be the politically correct weight”
I’d consider myself a socialist, one who believes that health care should be free and available to everyone. I believe that as a result we should be focusing on preventing illness, one of which is obesity. To do this effectively, healthy foods should be cheaper than unhealthy foods, so I think the government should tax unhealthy food and subsidize healthy food. I don’t want to FORCE anyone to lose weight or do anything. I want it to be easier for people (especially poor people who are disproportionately overweight) to stay healthy. Is this wrong? Am I forcing anything here?
“the usual socialist rubbish that denies any responsibility of the Maori people to stand on their own two feet lumping the taxpayer with the burden of carrying them like babies.”
I thought we were handing responsibility to Maori by promoting self-determination and giving them a chance to control their destiny? Do you not think New Zealand owe Maori anything? What price do you put on stolen land? Why are Maori poorly represented in so many statistics, is it because they have been treated wrongly, or are they just sub standard as a people?
Is it right to treat everyone equal, when we are not equal to begin with? Under our current neoliberal capitalist system, we know that the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, I’m not comfortable with that, I see that as being unequal.
Another question that relates to this;
Was Jesus a socialist?
From what I can gather from the bible, Jesus was all for sharing, giving and helping the poor/sick. Or do you believe Jesus would be for capitalism?
Jerry,
My Name is Tim Wikiriwhi and I am an Independent Libertarian.
M and M did not write this piece you are criticizing, but kindly gave me a guest spot here because of a TV debate that we participated in, and thought the topic was worth discussing.
In the pieces they actually did write on this debate they clearly stated they don’t agree with everything I said on TV and when they dished out their judgments on the panel, I did not receive the award for best argument. Instead they gave me the ‘Most controversial’ award which could be interpreted as being the least credible award! So please don’t hold them accountable for what you have considered are ‘Ridiculous’ statements. I must take full responsibility for them and I do so proudly.
I only regret that comments like yours may persuade them they made a mistake giving me this spot on their wonderful blog and wont consider doing it again. But having said that, my piece has provoked some very good questions from you (as was my intension) and I hope now that I can give you some good answers in a short space ( because this is not my blog therefore I must keep my comments to a respectful quantity.) If M and M see that I have solicited good discussion they may overlook your negative comments and consider the gift of this spot to me was worth while after all.
Now you are exactly the kind of person that I seek to challenge here.
A person of good will, yet someone who has not really thought though the real implications of socialism…ie that it employs unjust means in the attempt to achieve noble ends and fails terribly.
Via heavy handed government socialist politicians commit great evils that end up hurting people including those they say they intend to help.
Lets look at your first benevolent statement…”I believe healthcare should be free…” Sounds noble enough… to a person with no grip on reality!
The fact is you can get nothing for nothing in this world! Someone has to produce the goods and Health services you want to give away ie…Someone must pay!
Thus what you believe is impossible and nieve.
What it boils down to in reality is that you believe that the State has the right to take money from some people ( the wealthy and the productive) and give it to others…who then gets the services for free! ( The unproductive and irresponsible)
You are an advocate of the forced redistribution of wealth not charity…Theft by political dictate. This is not charity! You are being generous with other peoples money and denying your dependants (who receive your extorted funds and services) that they have any self responsibility to take care of themselves.
This is exactly what I mean by the Tax payer being loaded with the responsibility of carrying Maori Like babies…why?…because you deny they are the equals of everyone else not I. You disown them of any self-responsibility by calling them victims…You say its not their fault they are sick, lazy criminals…you blame others who “treated them wrongly”…what a crock! What a degrading and disempowering belief! What a contradiction your socialism has…you call it self determination when it is in actuality victimism and dependency and this so called self determination is again to be paid for by non-maori! Ie you think they should be carried by everyone else and that this will raise them up. No It corrupts them and enslaves everyone else! Now that’s some strange notion of self empowerment!
Stolen land you say? Have you read any of my post that talks about why land was confiscated…that this was just and for the sake of establishing peace in New Zealand?…obviously not. (this peace was as essential for Maori as for Pakiha!)
This leads me to your final question…”Was Jesus a socialist?” I can categorically affirm the fact that he is not!
Jesus, like me does care for the needy and does despise heartless greed, but unlike you he never wanted the state to force anyone to be their brothers keeper…but to do so freely and willingly from the goodness of their hearts!
Socialist welfare is not Christian charity! It is a false lying cheating theft driven by hatred of freedom and wealth hidden under a sheepish cloak and from a belief that socialists may redistribute the wealth of others by force of law!
Socialism is an Atheist rejection of true charity and true Christian values and is founded in that very denial of Christian ethics…the greatest happiness principle…(Doesn’t that have a benevolent ring to it! Who would deny that???…Me!) It is nowhere to be found in the bible because it is perverse!
What more because it promotes Mobocratic tyranny it actually ends up being the greatest misery principle! It impoverishes everyone.
It make the lot of the less wealthy even harder!
I will pause here and give you opportunity to challenge what I have thus far said. I hope my answers have at least given you pause.
Thanks again for raising theses common queries.
Regards Tim Wikiriwhi
“Am I forcing anything here?”
Yes of course, unless you’re hoping that people will just subsidise healthy foods out of personal kindness, and not via taxation.
.-= My last blog-post ..Scepticism, Open Mindedness and Mistrust =-.
another issue that Jerry’s ‘Team treaty separatism’ tried to sell during the debate was that treatyism was not having any adverse economic effects for NZ.
I say bollocks! Filthy lucre is at the very heart of this corruption!
This is a massive lie and flies in the face of daily reports of business transactions that fall over as a direct consequence of radicals placing Waitangi claims in the way with no other reason than to extort settlements from private peoples and businesses.
These vile extortions range from multi million dollar investment deals all the way down through property developments to private sale of such things as camp grounds. Even Hamilton central is under a cloud of treaty claims. Treatyism stifles foreign investment and foreign ownership and migration all adding up to massive financial losses to the people of NZ except for the filthy rich like Bob Jones and Owen Glen… who were the bankrollers of Winston Peters and his anti foreign investment policies.
Few have considered why these two sharks wanted to keep out foreign investment and have open competition in NZ. They wanted xenophobia monger Winston Peters anti foreign investment policies to be the law of the land so that they can buy up what ever New Zealand property and businesses they want as cheaply as possible…ie they make millions at the expense of every one else in New Zealand who would benefit/profit from having foreign investment here…It was all about maintaining a monopolistic protectionism.
So Treaty separatism makes not only the racist perverts rich and bankrolls corrupt politicians, it pours untold masses of filthy lucre strait into the coffers of fascist pseudo capitalists that they would never get under free trade…severely hobbling the economic wellbeing of our nation.
Madeleine…You have made some great points to Jerry over on the other TVNZ debate thead. Also your property rights piece is great too! (I have resisted making comments on it as this treaty debate thread is still hot and I don’t want to overstep my presence here on your blog.)
Ant-British/Western colonisation is at the heart of the Indigenous rights debate. It is a doctrine of inequality before the Law and an attempt to undermine such important tenants as property rights and limited government and is akin to the global warming scam which emanates form the same socialists and is aimed at the same thing. (Which is why you find the Green party and the Maori party are kissing cousins and why socialists like Minto are in the thick of it all.)
Minto would have us believe that what happened in SA, America and Australia may be used as evidence against the historical colonisation of New Zealand which is a travesty that denies the benevolent spirit behind the treaty of Waitangi…ie The equal rights of settler and Native.
Socialists like Minto are fanatical haters of Western ideals and values and are active members of the theory of indirect world socialist revolution against capitalism and freedom. They will support terrorists if that will further their goals because the socialists believes the end justifies the means. ..which is another reason they usually are vehement Anti-Christ’s. (That so many foolish Christians support these antichrists and their evil doctrines is a testimony to how successfully the socialists have infiltrated the church and spread their doctrines of devils…even convincing the church that Christ was an anti capitalist communist!)
This covert action is well documented (It is not all cold war propaganda as these socialists want you to think)
Just as when Bin Laden destroyed the trade towers, Minto and Co would have praised and defended Tama iti for murdering white people (had he not been discovered in time) because in his hate of our western values he collectivizes all not Maori as oppressors and thus in his mind they all deserve to be murdered by the likes of Iti whom he sees as a champion of Anti western values…a champion of his world socialist revolution.
He thinks separatism that favours Western Whites are apartheid but that favoritism that favours anti western coloreds is just!
He would have everyone believe that Savage Pre-European Maori were noble savages and that their society and values were superior to western Christendom, and that Brittan invaded NZ with the idea to destroy the Maori and plunder their wealth.
He’s has as a heart as black as coal and as forked a tongue as Beelzebub himself!
I fight for zero favouritism…ie strictly limited government and absolute equality befor the law.
(I tried to put this comment up on the other debate thread under your comments to Jerry but stuffed it up when I was editing it and it got tagged as spam so I decided to try and put it up here as it is relivant to both treads.)
Some final remarks made by Mathew Hooten deserve rebuttal before I end my review of the Great Waitangi Debate.
I have already criticized the Idea that treaty Separatism is not financially holding New Zealand back…It most certainly Is hold us back financially in many ways…I just want to make it clear for the record that it was Spin doctor Hooten who tried to sell us the lie that all this racism was not bad for our country financially.
That some Maori may be making a lot of money from it is evidence of profiteering from corrupt political favoritism and not a real benefit to the Nation at all. It is an extortion racket.
I think the most damnable thing that passed Hootens lips was in the last minutes of the debate when he attempted to smarmy my condemnation of our racist democracy and my stark comparison with the election of Barrack Obama.
Trying to defend our apartheid electoral system Hooten pretended there exist no qualifications or moral precepts (Higher Laws) that could be used to say that our racist democracy was unjust!
He said we could set up our democracy any way we wish!
He said there are no sacred rules.
He said there is nothing that says one vote should equal exactly the same as another!!!!
Now I should not have to say a word about this to you readers.
The corruption ought to appear self evident even to the least politically minded surfer!
Unfortunately we live in a society that has forsaken all things sacred…including the belief that some things are truly right and other things are truly wrong and evil.
Even Christians have been deluded into accepting this view of Hootens..ie that every thing is merely culturally relative.
This is where 100 years of Socialist Atheism has led us.
We have completely forsaken the great reformation/enlightenment truths that gave birth to Western Freedom and Democracy.
Read The American Declaration of Independence and you will see today that not only has God left the building…but so has equality before the Law and our sacred inalienable rights!
Hooten is merely vocalizing the very immorality into which our society has succumbed…and a major reason it is allowed to continue.
I rebuked him!
I invoked the principle of justice…equality!
This is such a self evident truth that it can be vindicated by a child!
Even Mathew could easily be exposed as the hypocrite …if he was enslaved or beaten by a Maori, yet when he went to the Law they simply said to him…he was lucky that he was not killed…or
what would Mathew say if Tama Iti had been successful in taking control of New Zealand, and lined him up against a wall beside me…simply because he was white?
According to his view there are no grounds to say this oppression would be unjust!
While the debate was civil as it should be.
I must now lay full condemnation upon this nihilistic Machiavellian scoundrel. He has chosen to take the side of evil!
He supports the racists, the extortionists, the perverters of our laws and electoral system!
He is scum! Because he has no values, no sense of true justice…he makes his bed with the Devil and his angels!
He should not have been in the debate.
His own words disqualify him from having a valid opinion!
He tried to sell you his lack of values…his lack of ideals!
He is an empty vessel…a fool.
Racism is an insidious evil.
I have been obliged to say some ugly things…and make some harsh criticisms. I cannot have been true to justice and not said them.
Yet I wish to finnish on a positive note.
Freedom and equality…when we get it will be great and good for all including Maori. We need a new constitution of equality before the law and a strictly limited government.
But until that great day arrives I make a plea to Maori to get better role models…for example Booker T Washington. Go read his ‘Up from Slavery’…then you will see what real oppression is like…and better still you will see how an individual can rise above it all…rise above the hatred…taking full responsibility for themselves and their own future….spreading love and hope, not racism and hate…not expecting welfare or favoritism…not seeking revenge! Now He is a man all Maori children ought to admire and emulate!
Parents…teach your children the wisdom of Booker T.
I haven’t had a chance at all to digest everything including the comments – but i thought i would let you know, i have a digital printed copy for my research in a 100 level paper i’m doing at uni 😛 Why have i found most of this poignant? Cause until i took this paper, me being American had no FREAKING clue about the treaty let alone the crap the brits “Shat” out at the maori >___> <3