WHY THE WORD AOTEAROA SHOULD BE DISCARDED

Fellow New Zealanders,

I want to say about something far greater than politics. I speak about identity, history, truth, and the name of our nation — the name by which the world has known us for generations: that is “New Zealand”.

Names matter.

A country’s name is not simply a word on a map. It is the banner under which generations have lived, worked, fought, sacrificed, built families, built communities, and built a nation. It is the name carried by our soldiers, our sports teams, our exporters, our passports, and our people across every corner of the world.

And that name is New Zealand.

For 383 years, since 1643, this land has been internationally recognised as New Zealand. When Abel Tasman and Dutch cartographer Joan Blaeu reported this discovery back to the States General — the Parliament of Holland — this land was given the name “New Zealand.” Since that time, through every generation, every law, every treaty, every map, and every international relationship, this country has been known as New Zealand.

That is not opinion.
That is historical fact.

Before European arrival, there was no single united Māori nation governing all the land, foreshore, offshore islands, and seabed of what we now know as New Zealand. Māori society was tribal in structure — iwi and hapū, each with their own territories, traditions, and identities.

There was no single nationwide Māori name that collectively described the entire landmass and surrounding territories of modern New Zealand.

That reality should not diminish Māori history or culture. Māori heritage is an important and treasured part of our nation. But respecting history also means being truthful about history.

The claim that “Aotearoa” has always been the name of the whole country is not supported by historical evidence.

The term “Aotearoa” gained wider use much later and was popularised in the late 19th century by S. Percy Smith, a European writer, through retellings and interpretations connected to his story of Kupe. It was not historically established as a unified national name covering all of modern New Zealand in pre-European times.

And so I say this clearly:
New Zealand is not a colonial insult.
New Zealand is not something to be ashamed of.
New Zealand is the name under which this nation was built.

It is the name under which Māori, European, Pacific peoples, Asians, and countless migrants from around the world came together to create one of the finest countries on Earth.

We are New Zealanders.

Not because of race.
Not because of ancestry.
But because we share a nation, a history, a future, and a common identity.

Changing or replacing our country’s name is not a small symbolic gesture. It risks dividing people where unity is needed most. It risks rewriting history instead of understanding it. And it risks disconnecting future generations from the name that has united this country for centuries.

A mature nation does not erase its past.
A mature nation acknowledges all parts of its history honestly and proudly.

We can honour Māori culture without rewriting historical fact.
We can celebrate te reo Māori without abandoning the internationally recognised name of our nation.
We can walk together as one people without pretending history was something it was not.

This country belongs to every New Zealander equally.

And the name that unites us — the name recognised throughout the world — the name carried through war, peace, hardship, triumph, and generations of shared endeavour — is New Zealand.

Let us protect it.
Let us preserve it.
Let us proudly stand beneath it.

Not divided.
Not rewritten.
But united as one people, under one enduring name:

New Zealand.

By Alfred Johns

HOW TO CURE ANTI-SEMITISM.

By John McLean

Ordinary Australians, like their cousins in New Zealand, are having it tough at the moment – rising food and fuel prices, unaffordable housing, diminishing employment prospects due to AI, automation and other factors, inflation eating away at wages, and an irresponsible governmental national debt of US$686 million on which interest has to be paid every week.

Yet in the recent federal budget of May, 2026, the Treasurer, Labour’s Jim Chalmers, threw a total of $604 million to one of the richest and most powerful lobby groups in the country – the Jews. I use these words carefully as the Executive Council of Australian Jewry were given $124 million of this windfall and yet they have been instrumental in framing the Albanese government’s “hate speech” laws, which are a violation of our once treasured right of free speech. Just like in the United States where the Israel lobby contributes more money to Congressmen than any other group does. In return Congress supplies the Jewish state with huge amounts of taxpayers’ money (an average of US$2.6 billion a year since 1971), two thirds of which Israel spends on military equipment to fight her neighbours in endless wars.

As already stated, the said Executive Council of Australian Jewry is getting $124 million of this taxpayer handout of approximately $300 million for specifically race-based Jewish organisations. Of this, two race/religion based outfits called Charities Jewish House and Jewish Care will get their hands on $4 million. Other projects run by Jewish community organisations are in line for a total of $131 million. Another $43 million is for “mental health support” for the small number of people “affected by the Bondi shooting”.

There was a Jewish kosher catering business in Sydney called Lewis Continental Kitchen whose premises were burned down in 2024 as a result of a gangland killing and yet $500,000 of public money is being showered on this business to help it rebuild. What other Australian business gets this sort of taxpayer support? There was even $500,000 to provide security at Jewish holiday camps in Victoria!!!!

The Royal Commission into Anti-Semitism, which Albanese set up so precipitately and unnecessarily after the Bondi shootings, is slated to take $131.1 million (nice for the Commissioners!!!) while another $207 million is to be used “to counter anti-Semitism” and combat “hate” – whatever that means. Probably prosecuting anyone who speaks out against Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians and Lebanese or its brutal bombing of civilian targets in Iran.

The purpose of all this public money being directed towards one small and wealthy group is to “combat anti-Semitism and improve social cohesion”. These last two words are what every dictator from Stalin to Xi Jin Ping has used to crush dissent. “Social cohesion” and dissent are mutually exclusive of each other, “dissent” being the right to think differently from the official narrative.

By far the most sinister of these handouts is $13.6 million “to refuse and cancel visas for anti-Semitism” and the hands of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry can be seen all over this nasty attack on free speech. If some overseas speaker or writer wants to visit Australia who might be believed to say something negative about the Jews or the terrorist state of Israel, that person will be forbidden entry to the country. In other words, the Jews will now have the power to tell Australians what and whom they can hear. As Voltaire said a couple of centuries ago, “If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticise”.

One of the more interesting allocations of this largesse is $80 million “to prevent violent extremism and youth radicalisation”. This is code for extremism and radicalisation of Muslims who have infiltrated Australia in recent times, including several thousand Lebanese Muslims whom the former Prime Minister, the traitorous Bob Hawke, waved into Australia – people from primitive and remote villages in the hills of Lebanon who had been brought up in an atmosphere of sectarian violence and hatred of non-Muslims and who had (have) little or nothing in common with Australian values.

The Muslim father and son who carried out the Bondi shootings were definitely “extreme” and “radicalised”. Thus, by so recklessly allowing so many Muslims into the country without anyone in Canberra having the wit to read the Koran, the Australian government is very much the architect of its own misfortune. In trying to understand what happened it should look in the mirror instead of violating the free speech rights and taking the taxation money of ordinary Australians.

It could be argued that all Muslims are capable of being “extreme” and/or “radicalised” since the Koran, the Holy Book of Islam, instructs them to violence against non-Muslims. Some examples:

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you…..And slay them wherever ye catch them” (Surah2: Al Baqarah 190-3)

“Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2.216)

“Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers” (Koran 3: 151)

“But if they [friends] turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them” (Koran 4.89)

“The disbelievers are ever unto you open enemies” (Koran 4.101)

“Remember when your Lord inspired the angels….I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” (Koran 8.12)

With this sort of inspiration in the Holy Book of Islam it could be argued that Bondi was an accident waiting to happen. The point to remember is that these two father and son killers were NOT Australians. They were Muslims who had never adopted Australian standards. So, why should ALL Australians have their right of free speech violated by ever increasing “hate speech” laws? The answer to that is that Labour governments never lose an opportunity to twist a tragedy such as the Christchurch mosque shootings and the Bondi killings into a “need” for a clampdown on free speech, the ownership of guns, etc. Just remember how, in the wake of the Christchurch shootings, Jacinda Ardern’s first reaction was to strip New Zealanders of their traditional rights to own a gun and so farmers who needed a rifle to shoot vermin were treated like criminals and forced to hand over the weapons that they had used responsibly for decades. With the help of an hysterical media Ardern couldn’t get in fast enough to use the tragedy to take away traditional rights that New Zealanders had enjoyed since Day One.

The stated justification for elevating one minority group above everyone else was the killing of several people at an outdoor Jewish religious ceremony in 2025. In the media and political hysteria that followed not one person pointed out was that the killings, although unacceptable, could not be regarded as unexpected.

This was a Jewish religious ceremony held in a public park near that magnificent beach of hedonism that is called Bondi. Generally speaking, religious ceremonies are not and should not be held in open public places. Such parks are for the public and should not be taken over – either entirely or partially – by a religious group – especially one that is as hostile to Christianity and Islam as Judaism is.

The Jews’ Holy Book, the Talmud, is just as violent and nasty as the Koran. They look down on Gentiles (non-Jews) as “goyim”. The Talmud holds that “Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal” (Book of Sanhedrin 59a) and “Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed” (Book of Abodah Zara 26 b).

To hold such a Jewish ceremony at the very height of Israels’ killings of approximately 70,000 civilians in Gaza was provocative to say the least. What happened should not have happened and should be condemned without qualification. But one has to wonder whether a court of law would reduce the amount of damages on the grounds of contributory negligence by such a blatant and public exercise of the Jewish religion when passions were running so high.

In Australia there was already enough violation of free speech in the name of “anti-Semitism” before Albanese set up his Royal Commission. In September, 2025, before Bondi, Australia’s federal police had already set up a “counter-terrorism and special investigations unit” which seems more concerned with giving special consideration and resources to the Jewish community than in opposing terrorism.

“Anti-Semitism is a cancer that requires swift and direct action, which is what the Australian Federal Police is continuing to do”, screamed the Assistant Commissioner with the appropriate name of Stephen Nutt. He claimed that those causing “high harm to Australia’s social cohesion” would be targeted by the police. This could include those who oppose Israel’s aggressive actions. If you don’t stand with Israel in all its wars and massacres, you must be an “anti-Semite”. Since when has it been the role of the police to decide what we can say and what we can’t? Especially in Australia where the police forces are better known for their corruption than their efficiency.

Australia’s throwing money at a perceived problem of “anti-Semitism” will not only not solve the problem but it will make it worse as the average Australian, struggling to make ends meet, will resent his or her taxes being given to this already rich and manipulative group. Therefore Jews are likely to become more resented, which will be the exact opposite of the Government’s intention. Such increased resentment is likely to increase feelings of “anti-Semitism” rather than reducing them.

It is only natural that Israel’s continuing attacks on its neighbours ever since it was founded in 1948 on somebody else’s land by terrorists and by the use of terrorism will have consequences. There is a precedent for this. The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 was carried out largely by Jews rather than Russians. In 1918-9 a group of Jewish communists tried to take over Bavaria in Germany in the wake of the collapse of the Kaiser’s forces at the end of the First World War. They failed but this attempted attack on Germany did not go unnoticed by the Germans. When a few years later the Nazi Party instituted various policies against the Jews the people of Germany were generally either supportive or neutral and apathetic. They saw no reason to go in and bat for the Jews. As Hilaire Belloc wrote so prophetically in his 1922 book, The Jews, “The revolution in Russia will be the historical point of departure whence will date the renewed hostility to the Jews in Western Europe”. For  the sake of the Jews one can only hope that Israel’s genocide of Palestinians and Lebanese and its bombings of Iran will not generate the same passions.

The surest way of defeating “anti-Semitism” is for Israel to stop its endless aggressions against its neighbours and its going out of its way to massacre large numbers of Arab civilians. That, more than anything else, would reduce the increasingly negative feelings against Jews that feed the beast of “anti-Semitism”. And it wouldn’t cost a cent or violate traditional rights of Australians as Albanese’s legislation does.

The Australian government’s attack on free speech in the name of “anti-Semitism” is more likely to protect Israel from criticism than to protect Australian Jews from people who don’t like them. To throw $604 million of public funds at this perceived problem is a total waste of money. The word “anti-Semitism” itself is a fraud as the true Semites are the Arabs of the Middle East plus the small number of Sephardic Jews, who comprise only about 10% of the population of Israel. Most of the Jews of Israel are Ashkenazi Jews who are not Semites, that word being correctly used only for the descendants of Noah’s son, Shem. And let us not forget the words of Shulamit Aloni, a former Israeli Cabinet Minister, “Anti-Semitic? It’s a trick. We always use it [to stifle criticism of Israel]”.

For further reading:

“Free Speech Under Attack”. $35

“Who was behind the Bolshevik Revolution?” Ron Asher. $30

If both books are bought together before 30 May, 2026, the combined price (including postage within New Zealand) will be $50.

Available from Tross Publishing: www.trosspublishing.com

 

It’s Called Setting Yourself Up

By William Chambers

The Conservation Minister, Tama Potaka, has said he is removing certain DoC land from the stewardship category to allow for future sale or exchange.

A majority of respondents during last year’s consultation opposed this.  But Patoka confirmed that he is going ahead with it anyway.

There must, or should, be a lot of people wondering why a Conservation Minister, tasked with protecting our DoC Estate, would personally push so hard for this proposal.

Well, the revealing fact is there is a concerted agenda at play by certain Activists of every hue, to have the entire DoC Estate placed under Maori “control” if not outright “ownership”. And it needs acknowledging that Potaka is considered by many as a committed activist.  Which could very well explain his enthusiasm for changes to what the majority presumed were air-tight rules around our publicly owned conservation land.

It should be kept in mind that, when Activists push for something, it inevitably involves an income stream of easy money for them. Which is also glaringly evident in the additional proposal to charge international visitors $20–$40 for access to high-traffic DoC areas like Milford Sound, Cathedral Cove, and Tongariro Crossing.

Hence, it looks very much like Potaka could be deeply involved in setting up a lucrative future for elite Maori to benefit from.  The point about getting these devious changes made now is so that when Maori do take over our Conservation Estate, they wont be accused of making changes in order to profiteer.  The ability to sell, charge usersor claim a percentage of royalty payments from mining of whatever sort, will already have been set in place.

Cant you see this whole scenario is a classic example of trickery that certain activists manage to pull off, by persuading unscrupulous politicians to bring these changes into force through Acts of Parliament.  Despite the fact that handing our Conservation Estate to Maori is a criminal policy, because it would involve theft of land that is rightfully owned by all New Zealanders.

If youre concerned about where it will all end, you have very good reason to be  as there is a “movement” that was set in motion in the 1970’s by the likes of the activist and lawyer Moana Jackson, who said, quote“There is going to be a revolution in NZ … not with guns … Maori will take over from the inside.” 

Potaka could be described as an “insider”.  And, ironically, he has a role as an adviser (brainwasher) to our gullible Prime Minister, on matters to do with Maori.

We dont stand a chance.

Professor Elizabeth Rata, from Auckland University has warned, quote: “The final step for Maori will be a takeover in the form of tribal sovereignty.  A coup d’état.

This devious, one-step-at-a-time takeover agenda is now gaining traction at an alarming rate  due to the number of woke (naïve) folk who are completely oblivious to the revolution going on before their very eyes.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Thats why it is imperative to point out (make people aware) of whats really going on in what we blithely imagine is “our” country.

Twenty-five centuries ago a famous Athenian, Pericles, famously said, quote: “A citizen who does not speak up about public affairs that affect their country, is not a quiet man, but a useless one!”

And Haile Selassie said way back in time, quote: “Throughout history it has been the inaction of those who could have acted that has made it possible for evil to triumph.”

Politicians come to mind regarding that one.