4G Maori Rights?

Forums › Off topic › 4G Maori Rights?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

586 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696659 5-Oct-2012 10:47
NonprayingMantis: BTR: While this does annoy me it is worth noting that this is only a small percentage on Maori doing this. I am friends with quite a few maori people and they all think this kind of behaviour makes their race look bad. I would hate to see people thinking all maori are the same... So where is the large majority of Maori protesting in the streets about how these people are giving them a bad name? We’ve seen Hikois over much smaller things than this, yet this provokes virtually no activity from the supposed ‘moderate’ majority. Why, for example, do they continue to vote in people like Pita Sharples who clearly believes that Maori have a right to spectrum? I see the same arguments about Muslims. You get the massive protests over something as minor as a drawing or an amateur youtube clip, but when the radical few do something really crazy (like 9/11, the 7/7 bombings etc etc) you get barely a peep from the so-called moderate majority. If they really want to call out these crazy few, then they should do it. It is well known the there is a "silent majority" in all sectors, the ones that go to their jobs every day and slog out a living and simply don't have time to protest. Unfortunately the vocal minority get all the attention. Could you imagine the coverage a protest to keep everything to same as it is would attract? None at all! BTW what does IWI stand for? I WANT IT. I know a little more than nothing but not much...

gzt

3196 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 696687 5-Oct-2012 11:17
freitasm: KiwiNZ: freitasm: KiwiNZ: I believe that the decision should be made by the Tribunal, if it rules against the claim so be it, if it rules in favour of the claim then so be it. Sure. And everyone's got rights to disagree with the premise being put forward by these "private groups". It's my opinion these enterprising people do not represent Maori people, but their own interests. Yes you do have the right to disagree and you have the right to make submissions accordingly. What metrics do you have to support your second point? Do you have evidence that any profit coming from Maori rights have been distributed to all Maori people in New Zealand? [Edit: I'm not sure where either of you are going with those tangents, but...] My understanding is there has been only one settlement on behalf of all Maori - the Sealord deal. My limited understanding is this was planned from inception to be converted to shareholdings divided between iwi and this process has now been completed. So in that particular case there was never an intention to distribute anything to all Maori. The 3G allocation is different again. That is held on behalf of all Maori with no plans for that to change. We discussed profit and distribution from that earlier.

Kyanar

1935 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 696797 5-Oct-2012 14:31
Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori.

KiwiNZ

804 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696813 5-Oct-2012 14:51
Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? KiwiNZ Whāia te iti kahurangi Ki te tūohu koe, me he maunga teitei Pursue excellence – should you stumble, let it be to a lofty mountain

Kyanar

1935 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 696815 5-Oct-2012 15:00
KiwiNZ: Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? No. Well, sort of. I'm advocating that we finally come up with a way of recognising that the past is the past and bad things happened on both sides that doesn't involve money or other property transfers. One appropriate way of doing this might be for our country to get out of the stone age and formulate a real constitution - one which recognises Maori culture and the influence it has on our society, but finally puts an end to the endless treaty claims. Then we can write off the Treaty as having done its dash and have a worthy inclusive successor which reflects the multi-cultural nature of this great nation.

crackrdbycracku

864 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696817 5-Oct-2012 15:03
Kyanar: KiwiNZ: Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? No. Well, sort of. I'm advocating that we finally come up with a way of recognising that the past is the past and bad things happened on both sides that doesn't involve money or other property transfers. One appropriate way of doing this might be for our country to get out of the stone age and formulate a real constitution - one which recognises Maori culture and the influence it has on our society, but finally puts an end to the endless treaty claims. Then we can write off the Treaty as having done its dash and have a worthy inclusive successor which reflects the multi-cultural nature of this great nation. Hmm constitutional reform... Personally, I think the lack of a written constitution is an advantage particularly for a country our size. A constitution usually reflects the time and circumstances it it written in. I do agree we need some sort of recognition of 'special interest' without money or property transfer. I think we are actually making, slow, progress on this. Didn't anybody tell you I was a hacker?

dickytim

586 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696819 5-Oct-2012 15:07
KiwiNZ: Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? without question....yes The treaty is holding NZ back as a country and costing billions. We need to get over this racism that exists in New Zealand and realise that we are all New Zealanders regardless of race. In fact the whole world needs to get over this topic. Yes the British took land etc from the original inhabitants, much like the Maori did before that. Just like the French did in French Polynesia, the Brits did in the USA and the Spanish in South America. I know a little more than nothing but not much...

networkn

4730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 696820 5-Oct-2012 15:08
I apologize in advance if this is seen as offensive: A young Maori boy comes to his father and says "Dad, can we get Sky?" Dad replies, "Son, hold your horses, let us first get the ForeShore and Water first!" I actually agree with Kyanar, it's time to find a way to put the Treaty behind us, recognise the past, as past. There needs to be an end, and the Treaty continues to drive a wedge between the members of this country where no wedge should be.

networkn

4730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 696821 5-Oct-2012 15:09
dickytim: KiwiNZ: Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? without question....yes The treaty is holding NZ back as a country and costing billions. We need to get over this racism that exists in New Zealand and realise that we are all New Zealanders regardless of race. In fact the whole world needs to get over this topic. Yes the British took land etc from the original inhabitants, much like the Maori did before that. Just like the French did in French Polynesia, the Brits did in the USA and the Spanish in South America. I 100% agree with : We need to get over this racism that exists in New Zealand and realise that we are all New Zealanders regardless of race. In fact the whole world needs to get over this topic.

gzt

3196 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 696824 5-Oct-2012 15:14
Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Maori cannot. The law does not work that way for anyone. Claims for illegally obtained land and the like are claims against the crown as a signatory to the Treaty of Waitangi - which is part of the constitution of New Zealand. A decision was made a while back to establish a special court for this process instead of adding the workload to NZ's existing courts. Governments aside - the fact is claims of rightful property ownership can go back a long way and are recognised as valid under many legal systems. Many people completely utterly wrongly believe all payments are somehow related to pain and suffering like an American style civil suit. This is not the case. To my knowledge there is not a single instance of this. Settlements in some instances contain an apology from the crown - this apology for harm is often very meaningful to people who have been attempting the return of their property for many years - but it is completely incidental to the property restored or property lost for which compensation has been agreed.

KiwiNZ

804 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696825 5-Oct-2012 15:21
Remember if the Treaty is cancelled then New Zealand is returned to the legal state prior the signing of the treaty, that is, sovereignty is not ceded to the Crown and the territories are vested in the Confederate Tribes and non aligned Tribes. New Zealand Government as it stands ceases to be an entity. KiwiNZ Whāia te iti kahurangi Ki te tūohu koe, me he maunga teitei Pursue excellence – should you stumble, let it be to a lofty mountain

KiwiNZ

804 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 696826 5-Oct-2012 15:23
crackrdbycracku: Kyanar: KiwiNZ: Kyanar: Personally, I want to know when I will be able to go sue someone for something their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather did that somehow affected my grandfather's grandfather's grandfather. Oh wait, you mean I legally can't? Then why can the Maori. Are you then advocating we do away with the Treaty? No. Well, sort of. I'm advocating that we finally come up with a way of recognising that the past is the past and bad things happened on both sides that doesn't involve money or other property transfers. One appropriate way of doing this might be for our country to get out of the stone age and formulate a real constitution - one which recognises Maori culture and the influence it has on our society, but finally puts an end to the endless treaty claims. Then we can write off the Treaty as having done its dash and have a worthy inclusive successor which reflects the multi-cultural nature of this great nation. Hmm constitutional reform... Personally, I think the lack of a written constitution is an advantage particularly for a country our size. A constitution usually reflects the time and circumstances it it written in. I do agree we need some sort of recognition of 'special interest' without money or property transfer. I think we are actually making, slow, progress on this. New Zealand has a constitution ... http://gg.govt.nz/role/constofnz.htm KiwiNZ Whāia te iti kahurangi Ki te tūohu koe, me he maunga teitei Pursue excellence – should you stumble, let it be to a lofty mountain

pcheroes

50 posts

Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 696829 5-Oct-2012 15:35
Does anybody else think that this is further segregating the diverse cultural environment in New Zealand? Extremists who represent a minority (not racial minority - but belief minority) should not be allowed into government. Most Maori (well then ones I know) do not believe in all this crud that's going on - and it seems to me that a small (extreme) group seems to have way to much influence when then only represent a small fragment of their community. When are we going to say 'the past is the past'. The current 'Kiwi' had nothing to do with events that transpired so long ago - and really its only creating more racial problems on both sides.

D1023319

185 posts

Master Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 696856 5-Oct-2012 17:09
KiwiNZ: Remember if the Treaty is cancelled then New Zealand is returned to the legal state prior the signing of the treaty, that is, sovereignty is not ceded to the Crown and the territories are vested in the Confederate Tribes and non aligned Tribes. New Zealand Government as it stands ceases to be an entity. Good point. So you want us to return to the legal framework prior to the treaty, - Maori Law were might was right, - you only occupied land as long as you could hold onto it hence the phrase being able to "walk the land" - you killed or be killed. Under this system Maori lose - as the strongest tribe (non-Maori) will no longer have to share e.g. via the welfare system - Maori will have to chose to become part of society or live on reservations. Sounds like the USA treatment of redskins eh????

networkn

4730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 696857 5-Oct-2012 17:15
NonprayingMantis: BTR: While this does annoy me it is worth noting that this is only a small percentage on Maori doing this. I am friends with quite a few maori people and they all think this kind of behaviour makes their race look bad. I would hate to see people thinking all maori are the same... So where is the large majority of Maori protesting in the streets about how these people are giving them a bad name? We’ve seen Hikois over much smaller things than this, yet this provokes virtually no activity from the supposed ‘moderate’ majority. Why, for example, do they continue to vote in people like Pita Sharples who clearly believes that Maori have a right to spectrum? I see the same arguments about Muslims. You get the massive protests over something as minor as a drawing or an amateur youtube clip, but when the radical few do something really crazy (like 9/11, the 7/7 bombings etc etc) you get barely a peep from the so-called moderate majority. If they really want to call out these crazy few, then they should do it. You make some very interesting points.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10