Marae Investigates – but not fairly

Supposedly neutral news anchor Miriama Kamo is the latest part-Maori to disgrace herself by parroting the absurd notion that ‘Maori privilege’ is a figment of fevered Pakeha imaginations.

This is a bit rich, as I’ve always thought Miriama owed her job to a pro-Maori discrimination policy at TVNZ.

“Maori privilege is a ridiculous proposition”, she snorted as the parting shot of a typically biased Marae Investigates segment yesterday.

Most of the segment was devoted to Massey’s Peter Meihana and me presenting our views on the subject.

(More Peter than me, and with most of my evidence — like the above scroll-full of privileges — neatly edited out.)

Edited in was the extraordinarily definite assurance by Jodi Ihaka that “John Ansell plans to come here to Parliament as the leader of an extreme right wing party!”.

I don’t know how these people sleep, I really don’t.

But don’t worry!

You will soon be able to judge for yourself whether I said that, as I recorded the whole 40 minute interview and will soon post it.

You will hear that I made it very plain to Jodi that a single-issue political party was only one option to achieve my goal of a colourblind state.

You will not hear me say anything about leading such a party.

You will not hear me describe my upcoming speech as a ‘state of the nation’ speech!

I would never be so presumptuous as to liken a speech by a largely unknown copywriter to the annual set-piece oration by the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition.

But this, folks, is what journalists do.

As regards “extreme right wing”, you will hear me utter those words, but in the most light-hearted way that not even the most humourless commenter could possibly mistake for a confession.

It is grossly dishonest of Jodi to pretend that I see myself as an extreme right winger. I said that in jest, just as I said I am supposed to be a racist and the Grand Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan for having the effrontery to advocate racial equality in this “topsy-turvy la-la-land” of ours.

The segment begins 20.54 minutes in.

You probably won’t like it much.

But I think you will like the 36 minutes of unexpurgated Ansell that I intend to post next.

(I just need to get the clearance of a person I name, but I don’t think that will be a problem.)

Meanwhile here is the information on that scroll that TVNZ so desperately didn’t want you to read:

As I said in the longer interview, Griever Maori can argue that Maori privilege is justified, but how they can argue that it doesn’t exist is beyond me.

I hope my scroll full of random examples will make it harder for them to argue that point with a straight face.

My killer audio should be posted by early afternoon.

My challenge to all New Zealand media: POLL YOUR PUBLIC ON RACIAL EQUALITY

I challenge all of you — every TV channel, every radio station, every newspaper and magazine in New Zealand — to ask your viewers, listeners and readers this simple question:

Do you want a New Zealand where all citizens have equal rights, live under the one law, vote on the one roll, and have our taxes spent according to need, not race?

This is a question that your viewers, listeners or readers would dearly love to have answered.

You can do it simply and quickly. You don’t have to hire a polling company. It won’t cost you a bean.

So you have no excuse.

Thank you for your cooperation.

John Ansell

____________________________

I predict 80% of New Zealanders will answer Yes.

(Probably now. Certainly after they’ve seen my tsunami of Treatygate evidence.)

Your friendly TV channel, radio station or newspaper have probably already asked this question more than once.

But do they want you to know what they found out?

Are they in on the con?

Here’s how you find out.

If a TV channel, radio station or newspaper is not in on the con, it will have no trouble accepting my challenge to poll the public.

As I say, it won’t cost them a bean, so they’ve got no excuse.

If they are in on the con, they’ll first try to ignore me.

Then they’ll try to minimise me. They’ll say “Why should we listen to that [insert insult of choice]?”.

Then, when that fails, they’ll make up any number of excuses as to why they’re just too busy to conduct this simple poll.

But it won’t work, will it viewers/listeners/readers?

Because we’re going to keep on asking, aren’t we?

We’re going to keep on demanding that they POLL THE PUBLIC until they actually do.

Or until they prove beyond doubt that they’re in on the con.

So your job, next time you write a letter to the paper, or phone TVNZ or TV3, or ring talkback, is to ask them when they’re going to conduct their racial equality poll with the above question.

And yes, of course they could rig the results.

But if a range of media ask the same question, any cheating by the odd one will be swiftly exposed.

OK, go to it!

Before long, with your help, I should be able to publish a list of media are Treatygaters and which ones think truth matters.

We spend $1 billion on Kohanga Reo and Waitangi Tribunal demands an apology!

Earth to Waitangi Tribunal: you’re a Kangaroo Court, not a Supreme Court.

(And God knows our Supreme Court is biased enough.)

But this jumped-up joke court has the cheek to complain that the Crown — that’s you and me, folks — has failed Kohanga Reo.

And how did we fail them?

By only paying them a billion dollars over the last twenty years to do the job that Maori parents should have been doing.

The Waitangi Tribunal report released this morning found the Government breached the Treaty by not supporting the Maori-language immersion early childhood centres. 

Now I don’t know about you.

But I wouldn’t describe the shovelling of one thousand million dollars of taxpayers’ hard-earned cash into Kohanga Reo’s coffers as entirely unsupportive.

And I see nothing in even the fraudulent ‘Official’ English version of the Treaty to suggest that non-Maori are obliged to pay Maori to learn Maori.

(Especially when most Maori don’t seem overly fussed about learning it.)

The Tribunal … recommended the Government apologise to the trust, promote attendance, and create a policy and funding regime specifically for kohanga reo.

I recommend that the Government tells the Waitangi Tribunal to get stuffed — as its final message just before abolishing it.

Then I recommend that the Government reports itself to the Serious Fraud Office for taking notice of this kangaroo court for the last 37 years, at a cost to the country of many billions.

It also wants an interim independent adviser appointed to oversee its recommendations. 

Like hell it does.

This bastion of bias wants one of its tame Treatygater academics to fill that ‘independent’ role.

Someone, no doubt, like Ranginui Walker or Margaret Mutu.

Or, if they’re too brown, one of the many Pakeha make-believe-Maori who infest our halls of academe. (Not to mention the judiciary, the bureacracy, and all our other thoroughly Maorified elites.)

Dame Claudia Orange, Dame Anne Salmond or Dame Sian Elias, for example.

Rest assured, the Treatygaters live in fear of anyone truly independent — not that they’ve probably ever encountered one.

Trustee Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi said after decades of mainstreaming by the Crown, the report proved what the movement knew all along. 

A ruling by the Waitangi Tribunal is hardly proof of anything.

The Tribunal is nothing but an echo chamber and rubber-stamper for Griever Maori greed.

“Kohanga Reo is inexplicably linked to the revitalisation of Te Reo Maori. 

Can’t argue with that — but I think she may have meant ‘inextricably’ linked. 🙂

Education Minister Hekia Parata said the Government would consider the report and assess it alongside other work being done on her ministry’s Maori language plan. 

More than $1 billion was directed toward the movement over the past 20 years, she said.

A further $19.1m over the next four years had been set aside for Maori early childhood education. 

Allow me to offer another perspective…

I have a 19 year old Taiwanese step-son. He’s been in New Zealand since he was one.

In that time, he’s never had so much as a minute’s schooling in Mandarin.

Yet despite this, he can speak his native tongue well enough to get by when he visits his grandmother and uncles in Taipei.

Why?

Because his mother made damn sure she kept the language alive in him by speaking Chinese at home.

Why can’t Maori parents do the same?

But if they can’t be bothered — if they insist that their fellow countrymen must pay to keep their language alive — why can’t they summon up the decency to say “thanks” instead of “more”?

Who loves New Zealand more: poet Brian Turner or Prof. Ranginui Walker?

I met Brian Turner about the time he wrote this.

We were both appearing at a poetry festival called Poems on the Vine (which we called Poets on the Wine) at Gladstone Vineyard in the Wairarapa.

At the time, Brian was Te Mata Poet Laureate. New Zealand’s poet of poets.

(I was tacked on to the programme to provide some light relief for the less cerebral punters.)

Brother of sportsmen Glenn and Greg, Brian struck me as a most thoughtful, passionate, and down-to-earth New Zealander. A Southern Man with brains.

Here’s what he thought of (Constitutional Advisory Panel member) Ranginui Walker’s claim that Maori love his country more than he does.

(Subheadings mine.)

Mine or ours?

by Brian Turner

NZ Listener, November 29, 2003

A response to the recent open letter from Ranginui Walker.

Ranginui Walker, communist,
Treatygater, and now on the Panel charged
with Maorifying the Constitution by stealth

No one would doubt or challenge Ranginui Walker when he asserts that his sense of attachment and belonging to the place where he was born and brought up runs deep.

But when he says, “I have been here a thousand years. You arrived only yesterday”, he very clearly denies a similar depth of feeling to almost everyone else.

Are Maori feelings
more authentic?

Walker’s empathy with his surroundings, he implies, is more authentic and valuable than that of, say, farming families of the Maniototo, or the people of the Waitaki Valley, or the townsfolk of Dunedin or Timaru.

In New Zealand today, there is a relentless presumptuousness about the way in which non-Maori feelings for land and water are dismissed as less heartfelt, less sensitive, less spiritual.

In this regard, Walker, and those like him, leads the way.

I am indigenous

Living here, one often hears tiresome, incessant talk from Maori, and non-Maori urban-liberals especially, saying that if you are of European extraction, you can’t possibly truly belong here, in the way that those with even the most attenuated Maori ancestry do.

I vehemently disagree.

Try telling that to the people I live among, and others, who go back generations here.

I am indigenous.

Stop the bigotry

I say, stop the bigotry whereby one culture or another claims greater moral virtue and/or spiritual sensitivity.

Recognise the worth and strength – and the reality – of hybridisation.

Isn’t this what just about all of us are, hybrids?

This will continue to the point whereby, in less than 50 years’ time, it’s likely that more than half of the population will be able to claim some Maori connection.

Then what?

Who is a minority?

Who is a “minority”?

Recently, a friend drew my attention to a marvellous address by Susan Sontag, when she received the Friedenspreis (Peace Prize) from the German Book Trade Association.

At one point, she said:

“A good deal of my life has been spent trying to demystify ways of thinking that polarise or oppose.

Translated into politics, this means supporting whatever is pluralistic and secular.”

I hope that Ranginui Walker and anyone like him might reflect on that, in this country where a sanctimonious culture of reprimand is rife.

To disagree with Maori
is to be racist?

I have found that, for many years now, to disagree or take issue with almost anything that Maori assert guarantees that you will be attacked and deemed anti-Maori, Eurocentric and racist, among other pejoratives.

Some of those attackers, oddly, include a number of strange birds, predominantly of European ancestry, who insist that, in order to live here, we have to atone for the sins of some of our fathers and be prepared to keep on atoning until Maori say “enough”.

All nations, all societies, all families, all individuals know and accept that their pasts are murky, that, at one time or another, they have transgressed, often badly.

So, contrary to the remorseless line that we are fed by various, mainly government agencies, it is not ignorance of the past that makes most people unwilling to forever make amends, it is a belief that little of benefit is to be gained from it.

Shouldn’t assistance
be based on need, not race?

We all know that many people here live in, by New Zealand standards, impoverished circumstances.

Would it not be best to provide assistance on the basis of need, and remove the racial component?

For years now, I have heard people express resentment that goes something like this:

If Maori are down and out, the cry is, “It’s Pakehas’ fault.”

If non-Maori are in strife, “It’s their fault.”

It might be better if, instead of alleging that New Zealand’s social problems are racially based, we accepted that they are, principally and more accurately, related to ideology and the changes wrought as a consequence since the early 1980s.

All races can be racist

I hasten to add, before the ranting begins, that I am not saying there isn’t racism in New Zealand.

Human beings are often racist, and to varying degrees, wherever one goes.

In this country, there are racist Maori and racist non-Maori.

There is also a high degree of preciousness and a scary, sometimes farcical eagerness to take umbrage.

With respect to the issue as to who owns the foreshores and seabed around New Zealand, Walker in effect says that although he and his tribesfolk are happy, in the main, to share the seas and beaches with other recreational users, he reserves the right to exercise control.

He expects the rest of us to defer, which is patronising and unacceptable.

Tribal arrogance

He often seems to advocate a kind of latter-day tribalism, a society based upon a wish to replicate conditions and a world that no longer exists.

And what Walker is really saying is:

“What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine, too.”

It’s cake-and-eat-it country.

He reminds me, again, of how proselytisers, when referring to rights conferred by article three of the Treaty, seldom acknowledge their corresponding responsibilities.

Maori signed up to be British

Whether anyone likes it or not, they signed up 163 years ago to being British (read New Zealand) citizens.

As such, that means a responsibility to work to improve and safeguard this society for the social, cultural and economic benefit of all.

I can’t see any point in us reverting to a system that boils down to pitting tribe against tribe.

To me, the seas and rivers and coastlines and lakes are part of our common heritage.

It is time for us to confirm that recreational activities involving access to those parts of the outdoors are the customary right of all.

That is what the overwhelming majority of people who appreciate them want, and expect their democratically elected government to protect.

Not only Maori
have customary rights

A great many people would be happy to define a customary right as a practice that citizens who live here are accustomed to engaging in.

Walker insists on ownership, but it would be good to reconsider what it is that we have a right to own.

Our own property and personal possessions, but little else, in my view.

Ownership of things we have created or, possibly, had a hand in making: but who among us made birds, fish, native forests, land and water?

Give permits to use, in some cases, but more than that, no.

The vision to say “our”

And when it comes to recreational use, make the same regulations apply to all.

The date of arrival of one’s ancestors (or, often, a selected few of them) should be no excuse for the awarding of preferential rights.

Walker writes repeatedly “my coastline”, “my shores”.

This country will remain divided until he, and others like him, acquires the vision to say “our”, until he will say that not only “some … Pakeha intermarried” with him, but “some Maori intermarried” with Pakeha.

________________________________

Thanks to Trina for alerting me to Brian’s article.

I’ll now contact him down there in his remote piece of Otago paradise and see if he wants to be part of our campaign.

It's not just the young men who are angry

This just in from a supporter:

Thanks John, your new piece with the video of the tirade on the bus is interesting.

 I live beside a reserve that’s enjoyed by runners, walkers,  cyclists and families,  people walking dogs — all enjoying the natural peaceful atmosphere. 

One day two people decided to ride up and down the park on their screaming motorbikes.  

I was out walking at the time, so in passing  I pointed out to them that the motorcycles were really noisy and disturbed the peace, and they should know motorcycles were not permitted in the park as per the council bylaw. 

I know, it sounds grouchy-old-man and petty.

But I refuse to let the ignorant few spoil it for everyone.

The woman motorbike rider snapped,  “So what, we’re Tangata Whenua!”

And the man eyeballed me, thrust his face to within a few inches of mine and screamed abuse at the top of his voice. 

What he said was much less imaginative than the tosser in your video.

But  the abuse was like a tsunami of hatred. 

Since I was walking past them, I really had no reason to stay at that exact spot.

But I had to for a bit — I wasn’t going to be pushed away by his ridiculous Once Were Warriors attempt at intimidation. 

I was half expecting to get  decked.

But I refused to back off,  and calmly stood there and let his torrent of abuse wash over me. 

Actually he didn’t have much interesting to say. He kept repeating the same couple of sentences over and over. 

After a bit, his repetitive screaming began to sound quite comical.

As I said,  I had no reason to stay.

So eventually, after what seemed an eternity but was probably only a minute — and when I hoped he’d realised I wasn’t going to be intimidated — I moved on in the direction I had been walking.

And as I turned to leave he called me a “f***ing honky”. 

I turned back to him and calmly pointed out that if I were to refer to him using the same kind of language then that would make him a  f**king nigger.

I would  never use this word.

I was trying to point out his own racist language, but a wasted attempt on my part I’d say. 

Interestingly, as I write this, it seemed acceptable to me that I spell ‘honky’ in full.

But I hesitated over the word ‘nigger’,  even though both words are used as a form of  abuse.

I worked in a building that adjoined a crumby little flat and the walls between the two buildings are paper-thin. 

The flat was rented by a Maori couple who used to fly the Tino Rangitiratanga flag out of their window. 

They used to scream at each other in exactly the same way as I was screamed at, and much like the guy on the bus. 

One thing he’d scream to her, and which amused me no end,  was “I f**king love you, you c**t!”

And her abuse to him was no better.

Thankfully, they’re long gone now, raided,  arrested and probably in jail I think.

Now tell me Muslim and Maori fanatics have nothing in common

This is why I think I’ll stick to taxis when in Auckland :-):

Anakereiti and others were offended when I compared Maori radicals with Muslim fundamentalists.

What do you say now, Anakereiti?

Through constant brainwashing with fake history, a generation of young Maori has been dangerously radicalised.

Some are clearly beside themselves with rage at the ‘f***ing Pakeha’.

I’m hearing about state-funded Maori immersion colleges in the Waikato where the kids emerge unable to read or write English.

(As if illiteracy isn’t bad enough in the normal state schools.)

Surely this is child abuse?

English, not Maori, is the world language.

English, not Maori, is the language that more Chinese people are learning than there are people in the US.

And yet here’s New Zealand, an English-speaking country, with a government that’s depriving children of their right to communicate in the modern world.

Madness.

And what other doctrines are those Maori kids being immersed in in those schools? Is the foaming fool on this bus a graduate?

Might a Maori immersion college have more than a little in common with a Muslim madrassa?

This video is why we’re going to need security at our meetings.

This letter is why I may need some of my own:

Sooner or later, I suppose one of these angry young warriors will want to take me out — and I don’t mean to the movies.

But shooting the messenger would be sure to backfire, big-time.

For a start, they’d make me a martyr. (Not a bad look on the CV.)

Then my wife would get a nice insurance payout. (Financially, at least, I’m worth more dead than alive.)

But more importantly, voters would not tolerate such a violent response to a call for racial equality. The roar for a colourblind state would become too loud for even John Key to ignore.

Meanwhile, I’d really like to know why that bus driver failed to stop for the Maori lady. Was he being racist, as the ranter claims?

Or was there a more innocent explanation — like the woman being late to the bus stop?

If you know the guy, please ask him to leave a comment.

85% (and 61% of Maori) say Maori don't own water

‘… a Waikato Times scratch poll … found
a deep well of discontent with Maori claims …
with the question “Do Maori own water?”
netting a string of rolled eyes from the public.’

In keeping with larger formal polls, a quick poll taken by the Waikato Times has returned the same old 80%+ figure against racial favouritism.

In this case the number was 85% — with 61% of Maori also saying Maori don’t own water.

Good on you, Maori! This reinforces my view that more of you are Achievers than Grievers.

(If only the same could be said for those who claim to represent you.)

Excerpts from the story:

Maoridom’s top brass left Turangawaewae marae united in their bid for ownership of water, but a clear majority of Waikato people polled by the Times say iwi have no more right to it than anyone else.

… a Waikato Times scratch poll of 120 people in central Hamilton yesterday found a deep well of discontent with Maori claims on natural resources with the question “Do Maori own water?” netting a string of rolled eyes from the public.

A resounding 85 per cent of the 120 people asked said no, Maori do not own water.

Of the 28 participants who identified as having a Maori affiliation in the unscientific Times poll, 61 per cent said Maori did not own water, 36 per cent said they did and 3 per cent were not sure.

Rangi Solomon, who is of Maori descent, said all Kiwis had equal right to water.

“I think it’s a resource that’s available to all ethnicities, all New Zealanders.”

The government knows over 80% of us oppose their Griever Maori appeasement policy. Yet it does nothing, because it reckons non-Maori and Achiever Maori are too lazy to push back.

Well, as they will soon discover, the pushback has begun.

What started as a little snowball is building into an unstoppable avalanche that will consume any politician who stands in its way.