Subversion of democracy

In his recent letter in The Weekend Sun (December 22) on appointing Maori wards, R Bell, Omanawa states that “it takes nothing away from non-Maori.” He apparently considers that the subversion of the process of seeking office, as practised in all democratic countries, for racist advantage, to be acceptable. He also misplaces the source of inflaming passions to councillors M Lally and M Murray-Benge rather than the mayor and his complicit councillors. He fails to explain why, if Maori are not capable of ’running for office’, anyone would trust them to make decisions on councils. His phrase "in a completely non-contextual way" is an absolute non sequitur. He’s trying too hard.

B Johnson, Omokoroa.


Tutae you steadfastly ignore fact,

Posted on 21-01-2018 12:33 | By R. Bell

in favour of self serving denial. After Ngati Awa retreated south, chased by Waikato armed with muskets ( supplied by you know who) they sent regular parties back to Taranaki. They strongly opposed the fraudulent sale of their land and Gipps overturned those sales. Some returned by negotiation. Ngati Awa did NOT abandon their land as you claim. You also wrongly state that settlers had no redress for losses ( only applies to Maori) wrong again. The Taranaki Relief Fund Commission was set up during the wars of 1860 to compensate any settler family incurring loss. Maori of course had no such assistance. Robin Bell.

@ private

Posted on 21-01-2018 12:25 | By waxing

You have never, and will never, ever accept anything that conflicts with your own emotional bias and rigid opinions. It doesn’t matter how much the facts stare you in the face, your eyes glaze over. The more you throw epithets at people, the more it shows how much you have lost your arguments. Now it’s the Crown, not just Maori or the Waitangi Tribunal. It’s National. it’s Labour. They’re all socialists according to you. Is there anyone left in the world other than crazy and groutby for you to have an inner cabal with?

Holocaust not uniquely Jewish

Posted on 21-01-2018 12:16 | By waxing

While "The Holocaust" has been associated since WW II with the Nazi concentration camps and attempted extermination of the Jews, it is in fact a word from Middle English derived from Old French. Misadventure would like us to still think of it with primarily Jewish associations but she/he conveniently swaps the first and second historical meanings. "Destruction or slaughter on a mass scale" is the first meaning, not one added later (don’t be deceived by the reference to nuclear war). The Jewish sacrifice is the second. Both have an association with fire. This is the second time you have tried to manipulate meanings for your own ends Misadventure. Kind of tells us something about you...

@ Bell and Tutae turi

Posted on 21-01-2018 11:31 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Perhaps the actual definition od holocost is best looked at first (particularly by Bell, who is indeed very much inclined to and a favourite occupation of twisting the treaty. The definition of "holocaust", hisotically - pre-1940 perhaps? was historical: a Jewish sacrificial offering which was burnt completely on an altar. A second meaning added later is "destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, especially caused by fire or nuclear war". The first part is important, the latter part is more of an explanation to assist/understand (obvoiusly failed to suceed in Master Bell’s case). We all know that there was no ’mass’ scale in parahaka by red coats/setlors. What we do know is that the waikato part maori responded to ongoing invasions and wiped out the parahaka mob. The reports indicate a 1000 or so died, same enslaved, remainder made a run for it south as TutaeTuri states.

@ waxing

Posted on 21-01-2018 11:30 | By Captain Sensible

The "crown" apologises for anything the Waitangi Tribunal tells them to apologise for! Whether or not it happened is totally irrelevant as these fraudsters adore being the alleged victim...and claiming the compensation that goes along with it. Despite evidence to the contrary, the spineless crown, when it comes to maori claims, rolls over and does what it’s told for fear of being labelled the ’r’ word.

Dear oh! dear groutby,

Posted on 21-01-2018 10:44 | By R. Bell

When you get it wrong you really take the cake.Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Research Cnt’r explains the word perfectly for you and others. Jewish people generally don’t use the word, preferring the word Shoah a more accurate word. Holocaust came into general usage by non Jewish people around 1950. The word was used long before WW2 by Winston Churchill to describe the events in Armenia. The word is used here to denigrate Tariana Turia who accurately described the devastation to her people at Parihaka. As far as nutters go groutby, don’t pause for to long in front of your mirror. Robin Bell.

R. Bell

Posted on 20-01-2018 13:21 | By NZer

Going on your description of what a holocaust is it describes the sort of inter tribal warfare Maori are world famous for...

@ tutae.kuri

Posted on 19-01-2018 22:16 | By waxing

I just don’t know where you get your adamant views from since they are all wrong. The Crown apology for the atrocities at Parihaka in 1881 includes for the rape and molestation of the women and children and for the looting of food and taonga by Crown troops. And Robin Bell is correct. The Kahui people were the first living in the Taranaki ranges and coastline. By the time Europeans arrived, iwi had occupied the length of the Taranaki coast. So why create or perpetuate myths?

Mr Bell...

Posted on 19-01-2018 21:48 | By groutby

....I am not usually one to respond with degrading comments, but you are indeed a nutter. To think and actually suggest there was a "Holocaust" relating to slaughter in the same way as Nazi’s did to Jews (as per the accurate definition) simply beyond belief. Maybe there were Maori aboard several Waka, why?..who (apart from you) would know? suggest there is a similarity between this and the slaughter of six million plus humans is simply absurd, and I hope you are able to muster courage enough to apologise to families of the Holocaust for your inaccuracies...I somehow seriously doubt it though. The excuse for your comments in your last sentence is truly pathetic..

half truths again R Bell

Posted on 19-01-2018 20:37 | By tutae.kuri

Barrett and his Ngatiawa abandoned New Plymouth in 1839 over concerns about Waikato. He went to Wellington and greeted the first settlers arriving there. He and some of his male tribal members went back to New Plymouth to aid the New Zealand Company having gained protection from the Settlers. They travelled back by waka and it may be those are some of the vessels used. You cannot reasonably argue otherwise.The last sentence you used was Maori Revisionist nonsense designed to confuse and show superiority, Didn’t work at all sir. Your version of the word holocaust could refer to the fire in my log burner I believe.

Tutae and the rest,

Posted on 19-01-2018 08:19 | By R. Bell

Your claims are spurious. Tutae, Taranaki was not empty in 1841 as you claim. In March Richard Barrett had completed the receiving Barracks at Ngamotu with the assistance of many Maori. I know you won’t take my word for it, so view the lithograph held in the Turnbull library. It clearly shows Maori aboard several waka. Holocaust and its use is legitimate. Synonyms include, disaster, catastrophe, destruction,ravaging. All valid and cannot be subjected to your own form of multi generational nationalistic mono-cultural revisionism. Robin Bell.

@R Bell

Posted on 18-01-2018 13:25 | By tutae.kuri

Yes our land was taken, without compensation in Scotland. Same thing as here.I am not going to let you get away with your own half truths and Maori apologist statements .I said that in 1841 there were no Maori in Taranaki. The fact is they had all migrated south in the face of atrocities perpetrated by tribes further north.The settlement by Europeans made the area safer and some Maori moved back over time. There was no means of ascertaining whom the land actually belonged to and there were competing claims, not even settled today. The events at Parihaka occurred 5 November 1881, a full 40 years on .Holocaust as we know it, refers to the events during world war 2 and recently in Syria and Myanmar. Reference that to Parihaka is a revisionist joke.

@ tutae.kuri

Posted on 18-01-2018 12:40 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Absolutely correct.

@ Master-ette Bell

Posted on 18-01-2018 12:39 | By MISS ADVENTURE

The word "Holocaust" as used by Turie and by other obsessive/addicted to the cause bloggers here is referring to and implying deliberately the events of the like of WW2 Germany as imposed and inflicted upon the Jews of Europe. The means was gas primarily. The WW2 events have absolutely nothing to do with Parihaka at all. However they do assist greatly in how part maori have grossly and deliberately overstated/created claims.

Maori sold land many times over yet got to keep it!

Posted on 18-01-2018 10:36 | By Captain Sensible

It is well documented that maori sold their land many times over and then the crown stepped in and returned the land back to maori. But the money that maori had pocketed from selling the land many times over was NOT returned to the settlers. Funny how R. Bell tells tutae that his settler ancestors are "responsible for their own actions". Would R. Bell accept that overweight unemployed smokers, some of whom may be maori, are also "responsible for their own actions"? No, of course not....always blame someone else!

The Waitangi Tribunal,

Posted on 17-01-2018 17:35 | By R. Bell

Is specifically for the purpose of investigating immoral and illegal confiscation of Maori land. ( massive)Perhaps tutae and the cap’n can give examples of Pakeha land taken in this way. Other injustice can also be considered Pakeha can apply to the courts for similar redress. Tutae, all land in Taranaki was deemed Maori land, unless sanctioned by the crown. It is disingenuous to imply that because ownership could not be verified, it was o.k. to just take it. Robin Bell.

More made up and moulded half truths.

Posted on 17-01-2018 17:11 | By R. Bell

Firstly tutae and cap’n. Holocaust is a description of ANYTHING consumed by fire. The invasion at Parihaka (against unarmed, peaceful resistance) led to the burning of crops, buildings etc. Able bodied men arrested and imprisoned without trial. No one knows how many sick and disabled died from starvation and other illness. Tutae if your people arrived in Taranaki prior to the treaty, they are responsible for their own actions, not Maori. You simply cannot expect to walk into someone elses country, without repercussions. Robin Bell.

@ Captain Sensible

Posted on 17-01-2018 14:22 | By MISS ADVENTURE

You are correct of course.

Parihaka note waxing and captain

Posted on 17-01-2018 14:01 | By tutae.kuri

Firstly Captain, there was no Parihaka holocaust. This appears to have been invented by Mrs Turia.There were NO shots fired and the leaders arrested. The people were disbursed. Even claims of rape have been debated as the tribal people lived in squalid condition.Waxing, come on! The fact that no Pakeha claims have been made is simply because there is no means of doing so. WT refuses to entertain anything in this direction, don’t they?some of my people arrived in Taranaki , January 1841. No Maori were there and it would have been difficult to ascertain whom actually owned the land. There was plenty of skullduggery later, on both sides of the coin too. The Govt is paying today, in some cases, quite unfairly.

@ private

Posted on 16-01-2018 15:59 | By waxing

Please cite your sources for the research you say "has proven" nobody died at Parihaka. Do you have any? Please also cite when any Pakeha claims have been made to the Crown.

@ waxing

Posted on 16-01-2018 08:38 | By Captain Sensible

Many European missionaries were killed....including women & children by maori tribes and witness accounts were recorded. Not one European family has ever been compensated....yet the NZ taxpayers have had to pay out to Moriori descendents for massacres by maori on Moriori on the grounds that the Europeans didn’t do enough to stop the maoris....even though the Treaty was still several years off! European families were denied the right that maori have. Maori atrocities have been gotten away with yet stories like the Parihaka holocaust ( where research has proven nobody died!!) have earned $millions.


Posted on 15-01-2018 18:54 | By waxing

Wrong. Pakeha can seek rectification of a perceived injustice by a claim to the Government. The Waitangi Tribunal was established because the Government then, and all since, have recognised the widespread injustices done to Maori needed to be addressed. But all its decisions are simply recommendations to the Government who decide to approve them or otherwise - the same as they would for any direct Pakeha claim. Your assertions about Maori health etc rank at about the same level as all your other assertions and are equally not backed by studies or research. Nor are you in any way up with the play for international research that shows the best way to address the health, education, employment etc issues of the most marginalised low socio-economic groupings. And it is a pity you know nothing about iwi successfully spending Treaty monies providing health centres etc that the state should provide.

@ Captain Sensible

Posted on 14-01-2018 17:58 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Well said, and glad to see that at last Master Bell as accepted the truth of it now.

@ waxing

Posted on 14-01-2018 16:57 | By MISS ADVENTURE

I can only agree that part Maori have a terrible health, jail, criminal record compared to other cultures that reside in NZ. However that is not something that is the fault of anyone other than self. The choices made and the decisions made are the telling factor here. The statistics are horricfic, yet little seems to be able to be done to remedy anything here, certainly throwing billions of taxpayer monies at these issues has been a failure. In fact there is a strong correlation between increased spending and increased handouts and increased statistics. An example is part-maori youth sucides, they have increased by 4-5x in the last say 30-40 years. This isnt a historic issue, it is a current one and it is clear that funding to help and handouts galore for all manner of outfits, organisations and so on have not stemmed the statistical results at all.

@ Master Bell a-lector

Posted on 14-01-2018 16:52 | By MISS ADVENTURE

You say "rectify both injustice and the human frailty on both sides", it appears to be that your comment here is factually incorrect. There is no option available for non-part-maori to seek redress of past wrongs and breaches of the actual treaty.

Absolutely correct, cap'n.

Posted on 09-01-2018 08:07 | By R. Bell

Maori do not have a monopoly on poverty, nor do they have a monopoly on poor health or any other negative statistic. They do however vastly outnumber others, for obvious reasons. You see your own privilege as equality, you see Maori equality as privilege. I justify neither, I simply oppose your narrow minded approach to a very serious attempt by successive governments to rectify both injustice and the human frailty on both sides. You can laugh cap’n, that simply shows a paucity of understanding and care. Robin Bell.


Posted on 08-01-2018 22:18 | By waxing

Now let me see Capn - on your logic it must be a privilege to have the worst health of all New Zealanders and still getting worse. A privilege to have the highest unemployment. A privilege to have the lowest socio-economic level. A privilege to have the poorest education in the lowest decile schools. A privilege to live in areas with the poorest infrastructure and roading. I could go on but you still wouldn’t change any of your attitudes because they are based on prejudice, not fact.

@ R Bell

Posted on 08-01-2018 17:04 | By Captain Sensible

Hahaha priceless....denies maori privilege exists....and then again lamely tries to justify it!!!Maori do not have a monopoly on poverty but do have a monopoly on race based handouts = privileges!

Cm'on cap'n lets get real.

Posted on 08-01-2018 11:00 | By R. Bell

There is nothing new about claims Maori are privileged. It all started long before the treaty was signed. Trust us ( the British) we will protect you from yourselves and the French, you are so lucky to have us. Brash and co, insisting that Hobson magically transformed Maori and European into one people.How privileged is that? Now you and your mates claim there is privilege in people freezing to early death in winter.More privilege in Maori representing themselves in sport. Even more privilege in the poorest health statistics in N.Z. Lots more to come if required cap’n, and if Sunlive will permit. Robin Bell.

R Bell

Posted on 07-01-2018 14:41 | By the roofer

Do you think your funny by saying there is no Maori privileges? It is everywhere, and I have forgotten the number of times a very patient Captain keeps reminding you. Check out any Secondary School and their Maori Achiever Awards. Maori health services Endless consultation with local Maoris who call themselves iwi. Even our local Port has special scholarships only for Maori, and there are many scholarships out there for Maori who can prove their genealogy as Maori. Pakeha are excluded on racial lines. You know all this but for some reason get a kick out out of being shown up as wrong!! Believe me, your constant denials in the face of proof, are not funny.

@ R.Bell

Posted on 07-01-2018 14:10 | By Captain Sensible

I have given these examples numerous times and you are trying to be mischievous by using your age old MO...deny, deny, deny... However when maori get on councils bypassing the election process because they are maori, maori-only housing projects, maori only scholarships ( yes, special scholarships where only maori are allowed to apply) , maori trust tax free status, the Maori Supremacist Party ( thankfully voted into oblivion) , 3000 maori-only homes given free insulation, special anti-smoking initiatives for guessed it..maori only, maori only spaces on university courses despite unsuccessful non-maori candidates having better qualification standards, maori achiever awards in most schools ( no other awards for any specified race allowed), maori only rugby teams claiming to represent NZ, and sports teams etc etc. Now this is where you can’t deny these race based you try to justify them. Case closed. game, set and match!

Not so cap'n.

Posted on 07-01-2018 10:59 | By R. Bell

The last post on what you call Maori privilege listed Maori only hospital wards. Blatantly untrue. The only hospital in N.Z. that operates a Kaupapa ward is Tauranga. It is NOT Maori only. It is a ward where any ethnicity can request treatment given in holistic terms with an emphasis on tikanga. You, of course would not request such a treatment, in which case you can have the privilege of a ward more suited to your personal needs, all 99.9999% of them. Now that is privilege. You have never, ever given any legitimate examples of Maori "privilege"not one. Robin Bell.

@ R. Bell

Posted on 07-01-2018 09:44 | By Captain Sensible

For over two years, I have been asking you for one example, just one, of any race based laws or privileges, granted to non-maori but denied to maori. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of privileges granted to maori but denied to non-maori and I have given them so many times because of your lame MO ( deny deny deny...then try to justify !!), so as we hit 2018, is there a chance you can actually answer my question? No? thought so!

Yes cap'n,

Posted on 06-01-2018 17:45 | By R. Bell

and your constant claims of being discriminated against, are proof positive of your theory. Never mind, you will come to accept that equality for Maori, takes nothing from you. Absolutely nothing. Robin Bell.

Missy's Magical Mystery Tour,

Posted on 06-01-2018 08:22 | By R. Bell

around his personal Galaxy of alternative truth continues. I have never, ever said Maori will not vote for Maori. Yet another fiction. No doubt in his ever present confused state he believes the current demise of the Maori party, in favour of the Labour party is an example of his claim. At present all Maori ward representatives are voted into their position, by Maori, for Maori. The need for such representation is recognised in the treaty and reinforced by later constitutional legislation( totally ignored by later governing bodies). No matter how often missy repeats his trumpisms, the fact remains, he is completely out of touch with fact, truth and the reality that the only way to true assimilation is through respect for peoples rights, and the compromise that requires. Robin Bell.

Mr Johnson

Posted on 05-01-2018 15:00 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Master Bell’s explanation for mandatory race based seats is because not even part Maori will vote for their own people. He can provide no explanation as to why that should prevail when and indeed the quality and calibre of canddates should actually determine who gets voted in. Master Bell again has no rational explanation on this either. What we are left with is a simple case of a desire and his personal support of an idea that is indeed based upon an abhorant level of self proof - apartheid, racism, separatism. These things are based upon and only on the desired end result and completely ignoring the shocking path required to get there.

equality seems like discrimination

Posted on 05-01-2018 09:53 | By Captain Sensible

When a race is so used to race based privileges, being subjected to equality seems like discrimination!!!

Leave a Comment

Sorry, Sun Media is no longer accepting comments on this article.

Opinion Poll

Do you think free parking in the CBD on Saturdays will bring more business to retailers?

No it’s going to add to the parking problems
Yes and it should be extended throughout the week