Blog - Page 8 of 9 -

29May2024

Book Review: Who Really Broke The Treaty

May 29, 2024

andy oakley, book review, John Robinson, maori, treaty of waitangi, waitangi tribunal Book Review, Treaty of Waitangi

By Andy Oakley

First published on the BFD and republished here with permission.

In his latest book, prolific author John Robinson once again presents straightforward arguments supported by well-referenced facts about New Zealand’s history. As you read, you begin to understand the need to rethink our national identity and question the actions of successive governments, particularly their implementation of ill-conceived and racially divisive policies.

Robinson starts with a stark assertion: “By its actions, New Zealand is a racist state.” He provides evidence that we are a divided nation, with a BIG LIE at the centre of much of what we believe about ourselves. As I have done in my previous books, Robinson denounces the concept of race and questions the definitions of the social constructs of ‘Maori’ and ‘Indigenous’.

Robinson closely analyses the content and meaning of the 1840 James Busby English draft of the Treaty of Waitangi. He lists numerous examples of various tribes engaging in activities that contravened the Treaty, revealing who and what truly breached the agreement.

My initial impression of the book is that Robinson offers a new perspective on our history; one that is closer to actual events and likely to be very controversial.

Robinson’s main argument is that funding biased academics to distort historical events and fabricate acts of oppression against the Maori race has created a ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ situation. This involves social constructs, deception, and the gullibility of the New Zealand public. In this book, Robinson exposes these fabrications, positioning himself as the speaker of an innocent truth. He draws parallels between the Big Lies, deception and gullibility imposed on the New Zealand public and the indoctrination of the German people by the Nazis. Once you read Robinson’s truth, it cannot be unread. Be warned: this book will anger you.

Robinson argues that, rather than being oppressed by the government, some tribes were often the oppressors. He cites leaders such as Te Rauparaha, Te Rangihaeta, and Hone Heke, who went unpunished for treasonous acts. He lists, over two and a half pages, the names of settlers in Taranaki whose homes and outbuildings were burned by rebels who received no punishment; the settlers receiving no compensation from the Crown.

Compensation (money and extra rights) to anyone other than Maori in New Zealand would be considered racist by mainstream media, academia, and many politicians. Robinson outlines seven examples of Treaty breaches, mostly involving rebels rising against the sovereignty established by the 1840 Treaty. He notes that these rebels were a small minority, yet their legacy persists, including the existence of the Maori King.

Robinson concludes the book with an analysis of where our nation is headed and the potential consequences if we do not halt this slide into apartheid and the belief in what he calls “The Big Lie”.

At his book launch in Kapiti, I asked Robinson if he believes the Government is breaching Article Three of the Treaty by granting separate and additional rights to people who identify as Maori. He agreed. However, those granted these separate rights are unlikely to challenge this breach, and the deceived and gullible public have been taught that this is the New Zealand way – until we change it.

Robinson includes, in that change, disestablishing the Waitangi Tribunal; removing the Treaty from legislation; ending treaty settlements; and withdrawing from the 2001 United Nations Commission on Human Rights resolution and the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Who Really Broke the Treaty? John Robinson, Tross Publishing, 158 pages, illustrated, $35 (including postage), available at www.trosspublishing.com or trosspub@gmail.com.

21May2024

Who really broke the treaty?

May 21, 2024

admin

Jim Crow laws, John Robinson, maori, Maori king, Mike Butler, treaty of waitangi, waitangi tribunal Book Review, Treaty of Waitangi

By Mike Butler

It wasn’t the Crown that repeatedly broke the Treaty of Waitangi, and $4.3-billion has been paid to “settle” grievances that had been fabricated, according to commentator Dr John Robinson.

Career scientist Robinson, who has authored a series of works on racism in New Zealand, puts a blowtorch on New Zealand’s treaty industry in his new book titled Who Really Broke the Treaty?

He has seen the inside of that industry, worked for it, and knows exactly how it functions.

You would be surprised at the scale of a massive scam that has been going on for nearly 50 years – in broad daylight, and funded by you.

How many New Zealanders understand that words uttered by the Maori King in public on January 20 this year demanded that our unified nation be dismantled and replaced by two separate parliaments based on race, Robinson wrote.

The Treaty of Waitangi, as agreed in 1840, handed the sovereignty of New Zealand to Britain. Land in Maori possession remained in Maori possession. All Maori people living in New Zealand were given British citizenship, he wrote.

That agreement gave the right to govern. British law prevailed thereafter. The absolute rule of the chiefs was gone, he wrote.

But when the Treaty of Waitangi Act created the Waitangi Tribunal, naïve politicians gave radicals free reign to twist the treaty, plunder the coffers, and try to seize control of New Zealand.

This 50-year grand scheme centres on allegations that “the Crown” (meaning you and I), broke the treaty and should pay compensation.

But if the treaty gave the government the right to govern according to the rule of law, what is it to break the treaty?

That would be action against the sovereignty of the united nation, and action taken outside the rule of law.

Robinson shows that the Crown did not breach the treaty at all, and that all breaches were done by rebellious chiefs, and here they are:

1. Mass murder of settlers by chiefs Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata at Wairau in 1843.

2. Rebellion incited by Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata in Wellington in 1846.

3. War waged by Hone Heke against the government in the north in 1845-56.

4. Rebellion at Waitara by Wiremu Kingi over the sale of the Pekapeka block in 1859.

5. The establishment of a rival Maori monarch in 1859, rebellion, and war.

During these events the Crown and the governors never broke the treaty. All actions taken were in accord with the accession of sovereignty and the assertion of British law, Robinson wrote.

Firm government action that defeated tribal rebels during the 1860s was not to break the treaty. It was to uphold the treaty, he wrote.

Land confiscations did not breach the treaty. They were a consequence of rebellion.

There were numerous efforts by the government to bring the second Maori King, Tawhiao, and his supporters, back into the New Zealand community after their defeat in 1864.

But Tawhiao continued to insist that he had “the sole right to conduct matters in [his] land from the North Cape to the southern end”.

“All treaty settlements are based on the Crown breaking the treaty. Since that is not so, all such settlements are a fraud,” Robinson wrote.

There is no justification for the continued existence of either the settlements or the Waitangi tribunal, he wrote.

If you wonder why the demands for race-based preferential treatment are ubiquitous and unrelenting, Robinson’s list of 17 institutions including the Waitangi Tribunal and the Supreme Court helps explain why.

Here’s an interesting fact Robinson has turned up.

The Government’s definition of Maori is based on the same metric as used in the “Jim Crow” laws abandoned by the United States in the 1960s.

That metric, used by nine southern states, defined as black anyone with black ancestry, even “one drop”.

The New Zealand government’s definition of Maori, as a “person of the Maori race of New Zealand and includes any descendant of such a person”, is a “one-drop” definition.

But while southern states in America used that one-drop definition to discriminate against black Americans, the New Zealand government uses it to discriminate in favour of Maori.

The perverse reality is that treaty is all about equality, yet for the past 50 years New Zealand governments have been practising racial discrimination.

Robinson shows how and when the treaty was twisted, the government gave birth to the monster that is the Waitangi Tribunal, and suggests a roadmap for ending racial division.

Early steps by the coalition government are heartening, most especially the proposed Treaty Principles Bill and the opportunity for a referendum on it.

However, doubts remain regarding the courage of the Prime Minister on race, and the presence of a tribal activist as a Minister.

The book, Who Really Broke The Treaty? by John Robinson is available here.

23Oct2023

A SERIOUS DISCONNECT

October 23, 2023

admin

democracy, education, elections, the voice, treaty of waitangi Democracy, The Voice, Treaty of Waitangi

The tests of opinion on 14^th October – the General Election in New Zealand and the “Voice” referendum in Australia – showed a serious disconnect between the political/media establishment and the bulk of the people.

Right across New Zealand there was a movement to “Blue” by which I mean National, ACT and NZ First. But not in Wellington where the Bureaucracy resides. There the trend went the other way. Labour retained all its seats in the Wellington area except Hutt South, which went to National, and Wellington Central and Rongotai which went to the even more extreme Left Wing Greens.

Compare this with Auckland where there was an almost complete wipeout of Labour, with only four seats Red and sixteen seats Blue. This, of course, was largely the result of Jacinda Ardern’s totally unnecessary, economically disastrous and emotionally draining lockdown of New Zealand’s biggest city for 107 days in 2021 on the basis of one – yes, a single one – case of Covid. Not that the mainstream media, beholden to Ardern and Labour for so much of their funding, would ever admit that it was the lockdown that was largely responsible for driving Auckland “Blue”.

The result of all this is that Wellington, headquarters of bureaucratic control of New Zealand, has become completely out of step with the rest of the country. The danger here is that, despite the Election result, these power crazy civil servants will continue to expand their power over the lives of the citizens. This would undo the result of the Election unless the incoming Blue government takes a very serious stand with its civil servants, sacking those who are seen to be impeding the clearly expressed democratic will of the people. A good start in any wholesale dismissals would be all the neo-Marxists at the top of the Education Department who are more interested in indoctrinating school students than educating them – as has been documented by Roger Childs in his book, The New Zealand History Curriculum; Education or Indoctrination, available from Tross Publishing.

In Australia the political/media establishment tried to pull a fast one over the people by initiating a referendum to give those Australians with any Aborigine blood in them (about 3% of the population) a special “Voice” in government that would have been unavailable to others. Like all Australians, Aborigines already have a voice which can be expressed by such things as voting at election time, approaching their M.P. at Saturday morning “surgeries”, and making submissions to Select Committees of Parliament – all part and parcel of accountable democracy.

The essence of the “Voice” was to establish an Australian version of New Zealand’s Waitangi Tribunal, which would make endless recommendations to government so as to skew legislation the way of advancing this tiny group which, by definition, means disadvantaging all other Australians. It appealed to Canberra’s political elite as a way of moving away from open and accountable democracy towards the secret meetings behind closed doors which have become so much a feature of Treaty settlements in New Zealand, especially on the watch of National’s Treaty Minister, Christopher Finlayson, who seemed to prefer this method of governing rather than traditional democracy for which this List M.P. seemed to have an unnatural contempt – apparently because every time that he stood for Parliament in either Mana or Rongotai he was heavily defeated by voters even though in Rongotai they gave their party vote to National but couldn’t stomach the candidate.

The Voice referendum cost the Australian taxpayer A$400 million at a time when many people are having difficulty paying their bills and taxes. The “Yes” campaign to give Aborigines a special “voice” was directed by the political/media elite in Canberra and was supported by all sorts of virtue signallers from the Catholic Church to Woke corporates. It spent five times as much money on promoting its cause than the “No” campaign, which had a broader leadership that included Aborigines such as Senator Jacinta Price and Warren Mundine. These and other Aborigine supporters of the No campaign knew that the Voice was all about enriching and empowering the current Aborigine tribal elite rather than giving genuine help to Aborigines who might need it.

Sports stars and big companies used their profiles and power to urge Australians to vote “Yes” with Qantas, under the palsied leadership of Alan Joyce, being in the lead – even wasting its shareholders’ money in painting planes with “Yes” in big lettering. Local authorities draped “Yes” flags in their main streets and in a new variety of child abuse schoolchildren were given “Yes” badges to wear to school. In other words the whole Establishment was on side to tell Australians to vote “Yes” to this radical new undermining of both democracy and the principle of One Law For All.

So, what happened? Well, in all six states there was a majority of “No” votes, the average across the continent being 60% No and 40% Yes. The “little people” showed that they would make up their own minds rather than be told what to do by the Establishment. This was the first plebiscite on the new phenomenon of identity politics and the people of Australia showed that they didn’t want a bar of it. Better to keep Australia the way it is than to break it up on racial lines.

However, in Canberra the vote went the other way: 65% “Yes”. Since the Australian Capital Territory of Canberra is not a state this does not negate the earlier statement that all six states voted “No”. What it does show is that – as with Wellington going Red/Green when the rest of New Zealand went “Blue” – the civil servants and media wonks are at variance with the rest of the nation. So, how did they take the result? Oh, the vote was due to “misinformation” and “racism” by the No side. How naughty of the people not to do what they were told!

We need to be aware of just how removed this wretched political/media elite is from the rest of the country and be very wary of anything that comes out of their mouths. Their interest in upholding our hard-won democracy is not as strong as it is among the rest of the country. As the results on 14^th October showed, “Canberra” and “Wellington” are fast becoming dirty words in the lexicon of democracy.

A Wellingtonian.

1 … 6 7 8 9