Cameron Slater (Whaleoil), Truth, Willie Jackson

Truth this week. (Lies last week.)

Truth cutting - John Ansell is a Racist and a Fool - Willie Jackson

After reading the above opinion in last week’s Truth, I phoned editor Cameron (Whaleoil) Slater to say I was surprised he’d be party to smearing as a racist a person who advocates racial equality.

As a result, the following twice-as-spacious alternative opinion dominates page 2 of this week’s issue:

Truth cutting - Willie Jackson is a chronic liar who fools no one

Ah, that feels better.

It’s not so much that Willie Jackson lies with impunity (and immunity, judging by the years of free airtime and column inches he’s had to spout his filth) — it’s that, on Treaty matters, he hardly ever tells the truth.

He doesn’t tell it mainly, I suspect, because he doesn’t know it.

(With no pushback, he’s never had to learn.)

So if we’re going to teach the public what really happened in the past — and how they don’t need to feel nearly as guilty as they’ve been told — we’ve got to push back against every one-eyed con artist like Willie.

Thanks to Cam Slater for giving me the right of reply.



Maori bully boys and extortionists like Willie Jackson like to get down in the sewer and call critics like me ‘racist’.

It’s just a trick. And it doesn’t work on me.

So why does Jackson throw mud instead of facts?

Because he knows he can’t compete on the history.

He hasn’t got a clue about what happened between the Crown and Maori in the nineteenth century.

So he just spits out an endless stream of half-truths and lies. And hopes you’ll believe him.

He’s a chronic liar.

There is, of course, a big difference between criticism and racism.

I’ve never said anything racist. That’s not me.

But I’m very critical of Maori leaders who have a financial interest in keeping their people at the bottom of all the bad stats.

That way they can keep claiming the big bucks — most of which they keep for themselves.

Jackson wants you to believe that I don’t acknowledge the Maori Tiriti.

I do.

Like Governor Hobson, I believe it’s the only Treaty that matters.

But unlike Jackson, I believe the Maori Tiriti makes it clear that the chiefs ceded sovereignty.

The Treatygate fraudsters would have you believe that the word ‘kawanatanga’ (governorship) was used in that Tiriti to mean some lesser thing than sovereignty.

They expect you to fall for the absurd notion that the chiefs were simply hiring the British government to run the country for them on some sort of management contract.

The Treaty translator, Rev. Henry Williams, was quite right to translate the word ‘sovereignty’ from Hobson’s final draft into ‘kawanatanga’ in the Maori Tiriti.

To see why, we have to go back to the 1835 Declaration of Independence, which Williams also translated.

In that document, he used a different word for ‘sovereignty’– ‘kingitanga’ (kingship).

Why the change five years later?

Simply because the sovereign had changed.

In 1835, the British sovereign was a king. And New Zealand had no governor.

But by 1840, the king had been succeeded by a queen. So Williams could hardly use the word ‘kingitanga’.

Yes, ‘kuinitanga’ might have served the purpose.

But by this stage, the queen had appointed a governor — or ‘kawana’. And the chiefs knew him personally.

(They also  knew the governor of New South Wales as the ultimate authority there. And they’d read in their Maori Bibles that the Roman bosses in Judea were also called ‘kawana’.)

So it made perfect sense for Williams to translate ‘sovereignty’ as ‘kawanatanga’.

Jackson said that I said that ‘taonga’ meant ‘spear’ in 1840.

As usual he wasn’t listening properly — or just lying.

What I said was that, according to the dictionary of the time — whose linguistic consultant was none other than Ngapuhi chief Hongi Hika — ‘taonga’ was defined as ‘property procured by the spear’.

(‘Tao’ meant ‘spear’.)

In other words, Hongi was saying his ‘taonga’ was his plunder from battle.

It was his stuff.

I doubt whether he had any plans to go spearing radio frequencies or wind farms.

Willie said I shouldn’t make a big deal of the many cruel atrocities committed by his supposedly hard-done-by Maori, because anything goes in times of war.

He ignored the fact that all too often the murderers were not at war — they were just massively overreacting to some perceived minor slight.

Marion du Fresne and his crew were butchered and eaten for fishing in the wrong bay.

The crew of the Boyd were massacred because one man was mistreated.

The Lavin children, murdered along with 70 other innocents at Matawhero, were thrown in the air and impaled on bayonets. All because Te Kooti thought he’d been wrongly imprisoned.

And, of course, the Taranaki tribes attacked, butchered and all but annihilated the welcoming, peace-loving Moriori.

That wasn’t war, Willie, that was unconscionable barbarism.

Willie also didn’t like it when I pointed out that the most revered Maori statesman of all time, Sir Apirana Ngata, acknowledged that Maori chiefs had breached the Treaty, and had only themselves to blame for having their land confiscated.

(As was the Maori custom too.)

The tragedy for Maori is that wise, honest leaders like Ngata, Buck, Carroll and Pomare are now a distant memory.

Today, the whole race is getting a bad name from the rantings of ignorant, loud-mouthed bully boys and extortionists like Hone Harawira and Willie Jackson.


87 thoughts on “Truth this week. (Lies last week.)

  1. I’m amazed that radio live unless they are getting funding ftom you and me ie moari quota get away with the out and out rasist comments of William Jackson whom has made all his wealth on the misery of the people he is supposedly trying to help. Give me a break. Where is the broadcasting standards when you want them? or are they in it together? Joking of course. On ya john keep up the good work on spreading the TRUTH Ron

  2. Excellent reply John. For someone as insignificant and unfollowed and ignored as yourself ( Willies words…not mine), he spends a lot of time on you!! Willie protesteth too much!! Willie can feel the truth getting closer and closer…and more people are listening…and Willie doesn’t like it. He, for obvious reasons, wants the status quo!!! I look forward to seeing your reply, as is, in the paper and then listening to the racist rants of that Willie the chump.

  3. Well done John,
    It is perfectly obvious to anyone who has half a brain, and the ability to research our history that Silly Willy Jackson is a stranger to the truth.
    He is an insult to his part ethnicity of both ethnicities..

  4. I think that jackson’s a nasty little bastard. He’s also a pig (the way he acts and speaks and writes) and a parasite (sucking off the NZ taxpayers) and a liar (eg about NZ history).

    I disagree with Derejk ( 7 March at 1.17 pm) that he (jackson) can feel the truth getting closer – I think that in fact

    he’s getting more confident all the time; aided and abetted all the way by our traitorous and treasonous politicians,especially key. key could have put a stop to all the separatism and apartheid and part-maori garbage by now but all he’s doing is making it all worse every day. He’s destroying our country!

    Thank you John for all you are doing.

  5. With someone like that odious person Christopher Finlayson as Treaty Settlements minister, people like Jackson can spout all the vitiol they like based on racial untruths about the Treaty, and the last person that is likely to object would be our Race Relations Conciliator, No doubt he knows not to rock the boat with the present political clout these treaty claimants have..

    1. He’s by far not the sharpest, but he’s got a Radio show, Newspaper column and near all pusillanimous politicians in his pocket, and all just because he’s part maori and part maori can do no wrong in modern New Zealand. They have carte blanche to be racist as they want with complete impunity.
      Thankyou John Key you spineless B..stard!!!!!

  6. After listening to Willie and JT on Radio Live it was obvious to me that Willie is by far the dumbest of those two failed politicians and he sounds the nastiest too.
    I suppose facts are an inconvenience for him, as they are to the big players. Why trouble yourself with some research when your mind’s rustling with million dollar bills.

    John, I look forward to reading your response to Willie so I’ll have to buy the Truth.

  7. That is a very good post from Rob Lees. Sums the man up, Willie, in a very succinct manner. Perhaps John could work that sentence into his article in reply, perhaps after the first sentence might be a good place to set the tone.

  8. On the partnership issue here is a quote from Reuben Chapple in an article entitled “The Partnership Fallacy” published on the NZCPR website.

    “Article I ceded sovereignty to the Crown “absolutely and without reservation.”

    Article II protects existing property rights under the sovereign power acknowledged as henceforth prevailing in Article I. It guarantees: “Te tino rangatiratanga/full authority over their lands, forests, fisheries and other property [the correct translation of this word in 1840]” not just to the chiefs but to “ki nga tangata katoa o Niu Tirani,” that is “to all the people of New Zealand.”

    Only by dishonestly ignoring the words “to all the people of New Zealand” does “tino rangatiratanga” becomes a claim that under the Treaty, Maori tribes retained their sovereignty, thus becoming “partners” with the Crown in some kind of sovereignty-sharing relationship.

    Article III further undermines this position in granting to “the Natives” (not just to the chiefs) “all the rights and privileges of British subjects.” Clearly, individual Maori could not enjoy such rights yet continue to be ruled in tribal style by chiefs.

    There can be no possibility that the Treaty of Waitangi created a Crown-Maori “partnership” or perpetual group rights for New Zealanders of Maori descent. Having signed the Treaty, the chiefs became not “partners” but subjects of the Crown, as did all other Maori.”

  9. Yep, Willie certainly seems to be obsessed over you, John.

    He is doing alot of over time fixing any damage you are doing to the Treaty pedistal and the industry he represents.

    Good on Cameron Slater for giving you a right of reply.

    Very satisfying indeed!

  10. Let’s put it this way. John, you have “made a few waves” via your talks around the country and radio pathetic.

    If I were your opposition, I’d find a talk show host who is “wily” enough to rubbish treatygate. That way all grievers, MSM and politicians etc could successfully ignore you thus providing treatygate no traction.

    “Let Willie the loonie fight John the loonie” they say. “Willie will always win as he has the mic, after all.” Irrespective of your own performance.

    May I be so bold as to suggest that after your retort in the “truth” (always found that name for a newspaper to be oxymoronic), that you move on to bigger and better things. Like a tidal wave, roll over Willie and let treatygate move inland. Now comes the questions….How, who, when, where? We know the why!!!

  11. Good on you John Ansell. Willie, Hone, ‘hand in the till’ JT, Turia and Sharples would be long term unemployed in any other western country in the world. Here they are politicians, shysters, liars, thieves and extortionists.
    And here, they command and get respect and put in positions of great power where they get to change the history of New Zealand for their own greed.
    And they’ve got the whole of the media in NZ sewn up and used PC and our weakness as their weapon of choice against us. The fear of the ‘racist’ word that Willie says as much as other people say the ‘the’ word has reduced us to the peripheral of any debate.
    The non maori and white New Zealanders are completely marginalised in this country as anyone with the slightest bit of maori in them are now the new ‘First class citizens’ with all the privileges that come with it

  12. John Key is a gutless, spineless dog who is going to bankrupt this country because he panders to these filth.

  13. If i were jackson i’d be worried , it’s not just that he is finally having to own up to the truth of maori leaders and academics polluting our young peoples tiny little minds with twisted lies of the past , he and all his bro’s are going to see their funding going the way of the Moriori.Hey william! we are waking up bro!(billy t james laugh)

  14. Many thanks to Cameron Slater for allowing you to reply. It’s a great response, John, and let’s hope the many Sheeple sit up and take note – for once in their lives.

    The mere fact that Willie Jackson is trying to denigrate you speaks volumes for our cause and I’m convinced he knows you are right and can see his gravy train disappearing, otherwise he wouldn’t bother to give you the time of day.

    I too will have to buy the Truth.

  15. I’ve just posted above the printed version of my reply — came out today.

    (Mind you, it looks better in situ on page 2, as it’s about twice as big as Willie’s article from last week on about page 10.)

    A rare example of disproportionate pushback in our favour – though I note Cam’s rider making it clear that the paper did not endorse my view, while voicing no such disclaimer about Willie’s opinion.

      1. Cam did comment on radio that John and his redneck mates were just a few old conservative clowns (or words to that effect). His attitude surprised me.

  16. Morning folks, off topic. But can i ask how long people here have been studying New Zealand history? The reason i ask is because my own study in to the matters we talk about here is in its infancy & every time i find something interesting that i did not know it tends to lead to something else interesting that i did not know. I feel like i am barely even scratching the surface & with trying to learn Te Reo Maori as well I am feeling a little overwhelmed.

    I want to keep learning, but i guess i am just wanting to know how long some other people here have been on this journey. I think i need to pace myself a bit. He he. Tena kouto.

    1. Some have been studying and writing about Treaty issues for decades, Glenn – which accounts for their frustration at not being heard.

      Others have no doubt come to it more recently.

      Naturally I would like to win my argument hands down, because I think I’ve got the correct facts.

      But really, a draw would be a win.

      If honest seekers of the truth like you realise that New Zealand’s history is not the one-sided ‘Maori good/British bad’ sob story they’ve been fed all these years, then they’re likely to say, “OK, let’s all stop dwelling in the past and move forward together as the one country we’re supposed to be”.

      I’m only highlighting the past because the Treatygater crowd are extracting billions of dollars from blameless Kiwis by misrepresenting it. While they tell lies about what really happened, I’m going to keep pointing out the truth.

      But I really hope that won’t be necessary for much longer, as more and more people become aware of the other side of the story.

      1. Hi John, thank you for your reply. I am going to start sounding like a broken record here, but i still don’t think anyone ever “wins” an argument. I have read numerous comments threads attached to varying articles & plenty descend in to argument. You have been involved in a few. He he. But i just don’t see anyone “winning” in those situations. I would be pretty surprised if anyone ever got involved in an argument & suddenly changed their mind & viewpoint. You & Dr Matthew Dentith are a good example of this.

        I am interested in your “Maori good/British bad” statement. I am not trying to get in to an argument with you here, but that is not how i see things. Hone Heke, Te Kooti & Titokowaru to name a few have never been painted as saints in my opinion. So in some cases “Maori bad/British good” is more applicable. But i actually don’t think “Maori” really have any problem with “British”. Sure a few do, but i think on the whole Maori have felt that they have been treated poorly by the “Government”, not “British Government”. You know very well that many Maori chiefs were extremely loyal to the government. For example Ropata Wahawaha, but the governments pension department did not show him the same loyalty. I know, I know, they eventually paid him what he was owed, but i believe it was grudgingly. This is just one minor example. Just my 2 cents worth.

        Back on topic, i believe Willie Jackson has zero interest in improving race relations in this country. If we had racial harmony he would not have a job. I do not listen to his show, i have read a few of his articles & i have been underwhelmed.

        What a massive rant, Friday afternoon. Bit quiet at work. Have a great weekend everyone. Mauri ora!

      2. Keep ‘ranting’, Glenn, you make some good points.

        You’re right, of course: those with entrenched positions aren’t likely to change.

        Some of us think we’ve done our homework and have arrived at what we believe is a correct and fair conclusion.

        Some people are motivated by facts.

        Others are motivated by feelings, and will not change their conclusions even if they realise that the facts aren’t what they thought.

        But a good many people, from what I can see, are in the middle, and looking for info.

        I call them The Convertible. Maybe you’re one of them.

        The Converted I’ve already won. (Like my friends here.)

        The Unconvertible I’ll never win. (Like Willie and Matthew.)

        So when I’m arguing in public with The Unconvertible, I talk through them to anyone from The Convertible who might be listening. (Just as Willie and Matthew talk through me to the same people.)

        I like to think you’re convertible if I do my job properly. I think you’re open to reason and fairness. But you’re weighing everything, and you’re also Maori – so you’ll be happy if you can find reasons not to agree with me!

        I don’t expect to convince you that New Zealand governments have been pure as the driven snow in their dealings with Maori, and that self-interest never entered the equation. Of course it must have. (On both sides.)

        But I do hope the evidence will demonstrate that it was far from easy for those governments to do the right thing in the chaos of the time (including inter-tribal and inter-hapu chaos), and that the British were well-intentioned by the standards of the day.

        (And indeed by the Maori standards of the day, where the only law was ‘might is right’.)

        I hope to convince you that there were many wrongs perpetrated by Maori that should no more be swept under the carpet than the wrongs of the whites.

        In short, I hope to convince you that the past was a complex stew of rights and wrongs, which we need to view with both eyes open.

        What is wrong, to me, is to appoint only one side to adjudicate on those rights and wrongs, ie the Waitangi Tribunal – and the various appeaser governments that have facilitated its one-eyed pronouncements.

        What is wrong, to me, is to have 85% of the public unrepresented in discussions that affect the core of our national being.

        What is wrong is to expend so much time and energy on the past that we lose the future.

        While I’m not Maori, and not speaking for Maori, I believe Maori lose more than non-Maori by the current habit of viewing the future in the rear vision mirror.

        There’s no mana in other people’s money.

    2. Well John i think we already agree that the Constitutional Review Panel should be listening to everyone & i mean everyone. If the National Front has an opinion let’s hear it. I find their views repellant, but i still think everyone should be heard.

      I already believe that the British only had good intentions when they decided to colonise New Zealand, even though they knew from past experience that it was likely to be detrimental to the native people. But the best of intentions sometimes go astray. As you say, it was a complex time. Things are still pretty complex, but i think we can reconcile the past. This is where we are likely to have a difference of opinion. So i will stop there.

      I could be convertible, but it will be bloody hard work He he.

      I suspect you may have some unlikely allies if you were to push for an abolition of the Waitangi Tribunal. I suspect some Maori groups would prefer to be able to take their concerns directly to a court of law. I could be wrong, & i am not sure exactly how that would work. But i do know that some tribes are extremely frustrated with the Waitangi tribunal & the processes involved.

      Anyway, thanks again for engaging with me. I really do appreciate it. Have a good weekend.

      1. Glenn, I agree with you about the National Front. (And other gangs.)

        As I know from advertising, nothing kills a bad product faster than good publicity. So let all these groups say whatever they like, as loudly as they like. I think we’d find they wouldn’t be saying it for long.

        (Or as someone else said, the best disinfectant is daylight.)

        I can’t see that the colonisation of New Zealand has been to the detriment of the native people. If the Maori hadn’t found the British, they’d have been extinct by 1860.

        If they’d somehow managed to curb their love of war and cannibalism, they’d have ended up either as citizens of a colony of France (like the Kanaks of New Caledonia), or as a stand-alone native nation like Papua New Guinea.

        I can’t see any scenario where they’d be as well-off as they are today.

        Can you?

        (Especially with this pack of mugs for a government.)

        Have a good weekend yourself.

      2. Hi Glenn.

        For me the issue is not just who is ‘wrong’ or ‘right’ as far as history is concerned.

        I have my own opinions,you have yours we could argue for the rest of our lives and one or neither may be right at times, we would probably never agree, no one would ‘win’ as you say.

        But for me by far the greater issue is not the past, but ‘where to for the future?’ And I think I am utterly correct in saying here that history from time immemorial has proved that there can NEVER be ANY hope of a peaceful and prosperous country ANYWHERE unless ALL citizens of that country are EQUAL under law.
        This may not guarantee peace and prosperity, there are still many things that can go wrong. But it is UTTERLY CERTAIN that without this principle there is NO possibility of it happening.

        And I think that virtually everyone in any camp in this country would agree that ethnic groups are no longer treated equally under law. And the differences are growing and becoming more profound. Some say this is unfair and some say it is the way it should be but virtually no one any more tries to pretend it hasn’t and isn’t happening.

        So I come back to this point. If equality of rights and responsibilities before law are critical for the success of a country and we are moving further and further away from equality of rights, then by definition we are moving further and further away from being a peaceful and prosperous country.

    3. Hi John, sorry for the delayed reply. I think the colonisation discussion has been done to death here & in other places. I tend to agree with you that colonisation brought some good stuff. But it also brought some stuff we were ill prepared to handle.

      I agree with you that we are better off now than we would have been if the British had decided not to colonise New Zealand. But that still does not make us well off. Our social indicators particularly poverty make pretty sombre reading, and this is not a recent thing. We have pretty much always been at the bottom of the heap in regards to poverty. Why this is i cannot be certain, but I think it is as you say, complex.

      One thing i have experience of & can make a comparison in due to personal experience is land ownership. Our family have owned one small piece of land that has been in our family since the 1860’s. Numerous members of our family have seen the benefits of this small parcel of land. We have owned other pieces of land as well & this has made us what I call relatively wealthy. One of my Maori grandmothers joined our family with no land but she was hard working & incredible with money. But many of my relatives have not been so fortunate and today find themselves landless & comparatively poor. I am not sure how this happened & it is one of the things that i am trying to learn about.

      So while colonisation was not all bad, I don’t think it was all good either. I also don’t think we should be patting ourselves on the back because we are “better off than we could have been”. I think we still have work to do. I think the Iwi leaders now have a lot of questions to answer in relation to this situation.

      Another massive rant. Maybe i need to find a new job. Clearly not busy enough at the moment.

      1. A lot of us are landless, Glenn, myself included. I lost my land in a divorce settlement

        But so what? What is so absolutely vital about owning land?

        There seems to be a view in Maoridom that unless they can live off inherited land – often by leasing it out and doing nothing, rather than working it – they can’t make a buck.

        But living off inherited leases is not the only way to make money, is it?

      2. With respect Glenn, I can assure you that land ownership has nothing at all to do with whether you are successful in life. Of course many people do make money out of land but when I grew up we always knew as we drove passed a bit of land covered in scrub that it would be Maori land and it usually was. They did nothing with their land to make any money from it in so many instances.

        What makes the difference between getting ahead or not, with bad luck being an exception, is motivation, education and attitude. These three will win out every time. I have a brother-in-law who is a half caste Maori and he came in from the backblocks to attend school, staying at a home run by the Anglican Church during the week and has ended up a very successful person, owning a business and several commercial properties – all from his and his wife’s (my sister) combined efforts. He also saw that his children (quarter caste) received a good education and now has three very successful sons. That’s all it takes. Land has/had nothing to do with it.

    4. Morning Mike, I don’t think I would stand a chance if I were to debate New Zealand history with you. I think your knowledge would make me look like a fool. But to be fair I think you may have a bit of a head start on me.

      We have had a discussion previously in relation to the lower entry standard to university for Maori & Pacific island students & at this stage my stance has not changed.

      In relation to other laws that could be seen as not offering equality
      I must confess my ignorance. I think John Ansell had a list of these laws that possibly favoured one race over another. But I cannot find it & have not had a chance to study them in depth. So at this stage i am not certain that the laws you speak of are completely negative. I believe our laws should be made to protect people, but without knowing the laws in question I can’t make an informed judgement. I am not trying to be evasive here, but i am admitting to ignorance (hangs his head in shame).

      Can you direct me to a list of the laws in question?

    5. Hi Helen, good to hear from you. You & John are correct here when you suggest that owning land is not the only way to make money & become successful. But it certainly doesn’t hurt.

      I shared my personal story in an effort to show how land loss may have led to some of the disparity we have now.

      I did not grow up in our tribal area. Where I grew up there was no Maori land that I am aware of. But there was plenty of land covered in scrub. So in my mind it would be pretty unfair to look at some scrub covered land & assume that it was due to Maori inactivity.

      John, I believe your family has been in New Zealand since the mid 1800’s also. Has any member of your family ever seen any benefit from land ownership? Some members of my family have not owned any workable land since they became aware of what land ownership was.

  17. I noticed in the article (and also on the talkback show) that Willie kept pointing out the lack of political support for John’s campaign when I far as I know, John has not sought any. Bit of the “nyah nyah” school kid there.

    1. Quite so, Robert.

      The solution is not to cuddle up to the current crop of politicians, who on this issue are a pack of gutless wonders.

      The only game is to get the numbers to replace them – or bully them.

      There’s no point asking John Key nicely to run the country as a democracy. He’ll only do the right thing if he’s forced to.

      There is no political Right in New Zealand. No people of principle on that side of the spectrum at all.

      I heard that the late Alan Peachey was seriously considering crossing the floor on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill. Pity he didn’t. He would have left a legacy of courage, and maybe inspired a few of his colleagues.

      Certainly the National Party is not Right.

      ACT is, but is more particle than party. ACT is what you get when you trade away your principles for a piece of the power, and communicate your principles spinelessly.

      The Conservatives claim to be Right, but they won’t stand up on this issue, only on socio-religious issues.

      NZ First are one man, who has achieved nothing in 30 years.

      So no, I’m not asking any present politicians for support. Why would you?

      1. Well John; if Together NZ gets into Parliament wouldn’t it be a chance to say that ‘you’ll’ or whomsoever will work with whatever party supports our aims of an equal NZ and backs this up with action? A strategy employed by other small parties.

        Winston Peters has value as a terrier on things that he commits to such as the unchecked immigration into NZ some years back. He also got close to forcing the Clark government to recognise the Littlewood Treaty.

        But yes, a loose canon but likeable . . . we’ll hear more from him in election year I’m sure.

  18. I have just spotted what i believe to be a grammatical error in my last post. For future reference, please note that i for one am happy to have my grammar, punctuation & spelling errors pointed out to me. I would actually appreciate it. My use of the apostrophe is particularly appalling. I know that is not the point of this blog, but a bit of extra learning doesn’t hurt does it? Thank you.

    1. Glenn, my first (non-human) love – apart from chocolate – is not Treaty issues. It’s language – specifically the crazy English language, about which I make after-dinner speeches.

      So I can help you with your apostrophes, and anything else of that nature. (Just don’t ask me about numbers.)

      I don’t see much wrong with your grammar, but you do seem to have a problem spelling “I” with a capital.

      But the word that English writers have the most trouble with, from my observation, is that itty-bitty, nitty gritty word “its”.

      (That’s “its” – no apostrophe – meaning “of it”. As opposed to “it’s” – with apostrophe – meaning “it is”.)

      And the reason for the confusion is simple:

      “Its” (no apostrophe) is not logical. It’s nuts. Its omission of the apostrophe doesn’t make sense.

      So if you apostrophise “its” when you shouldn’t, it’s not your fault. It’s the fault of the guy who wrote the language.

      After all, when you’re talking about a “dog’s breakfast”, you put the apostrophe after the “dog” and before the “s” – like I did there – because the breakfast belongs to the dog. The “dog” (one dog) owns the breakfast.

      If the breakfast was doled out to more than one dog, then those trays full of Tux and Jellimeat would be “the dogs’ breakfast” – the breakfast of “the dogs”.

      So far, so fairly simple. (I hope.)

      But then we come to the aforementioned exception to the rule of possessives. The reason for so many catastrophes with apostrophes.

      (No need for them there, by the way, since both “catastrophes” and “apostrophes” are plurals, which are apostrophe-free zones.)

      “Its”. (No apostrophe.)

      You use “its” when you get sick of saying “the dog’s breakfast” and you want to shorten the sentence to “its breakfast” – “it” being “the dog”.

      Now if you think that what I just wrote (“its” – no apostrophe) is wrong – if you think it should be “it’s breakfast” (the breakfast of “it” – just as “the dog’s breakfast” is the breakfast of “the dog”), then you’d be right: it should be.

      But it isn’t.

      It’s “its” – no apostrophe.

      Don’t ask me why. This language was, after all, invented by the same race of idiots who invented cricket.

      (Oops, I forgot – I’m supposed to be pro-Brit.)

      To other readers who think I’ve flipped, pardon me – but I’m allowed to have Fridays too.

      Glenn: if I can answer any more grammatical, punctuational or spellingual questions, by all means email me on Any more of this here and I’ll be banned from my own site. 😦

      1. I thought it was ‘its’ breakfast’ – apostrophe after ‘S’ as the breakfast belongs to the dog.
        The grammer that gets to me is when peps say “your coming to see”? instead of ‘you’re coming to see’?

        I’ll be quiet now as this isn’t the place but language is interesting even if you make ‘misteaks’ in spelling!

      2. Eats Shoots and Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation by Lynne Truss is an informative and amusing read on the subject

      3. Golden post John. I saw it yesteday, but i am only able to reply now. But one thing that grabs me is………………… you don’t like cricket!! Just as i thought we were starting to get along. He he. If i find out you don’t like tea or scones i will be seriously questioning your judgement. Thanks for the lesson though, i really appreciate it.

      4. Scones I like, tea I tolerate if offered, and cricket I like only when the Black Caps win.

        Mind you, I have a 19 year old relative who has just scored four centuries in a row in Auckland club cricket, so if he goes further I’ll be paying more attention.

  19. A sign of times to come??

    You will no doubt note the statement from Mr Kenny (kaumatua. is he elected or just aged?) towards the end of the piece when he states
    “If there is any problem with Ngati Toa, then you should come to Ngati Toa. We are now a very wealthy Iwi, and you need to consider that”

    They are indeed now a very wealthy Iwi, tax money from you, me, and all their neighbours have generously through our Treaty Settlement minister just been given some 70 million dollars, among other presents.

  20. The one-eyed perspective of Maori fundamentalists who conveniently ignore their own English and/or non Maori ancestry and who stridently claim rights based on Maori ancestry are the antithesis of democracy and therefore, ultimately a threat to the maintenance of peaceful co-existence of all the people of New Zealand.

    Willie Jackson enjoys a measure of privilege that he should perhaps be grateful for. But given that his lifestyle has been achieved by media coverage that encourages division and disharmony it may be too much to expect him to debate on the basis of facts rather than his usual techniques of emotionally laden rhetoric, interruption and character slur.

    Incidentally, the word “ilk” was used on Willie and JT’s radio discussion with Paul Moon to refer to people who share beliefs in common with John Ansell.
    “Ilk” means “breed or type”. I object to being classified in this ill -mannered way. And I will exercise my democratic right to post my opinion and make my voice heard wherever I choose. I consider that treaty issues and where they conflict with democracy, to be matters of utmost importance to myself, my family and the future of New Zealand.

    1. Willie had major heart surgery a while ago, a triple by-pass if I remember correctly. It’s a wonder that he submitted himself to ‘non-Maori’ technology and didn’t use the ‘wonderful’ health system Maori had before colonists arrived!!!
      Running with the hares and the hounds???

      Didn’t Corporate Maori claim for intellectual property rights on NZ grown ingredients for medicines?

      1. Yes, Carole – exactly. They complain about this and that and how bad the colonists are for various reasons, but do they ever thank us for what we brought them that they use every day and how their lot improved markedly from what it was?

        They are too busy living in grievance mode to even think of or acknowledge the benefits they have gained, not to mention their actual existence in this world. I’m sure if the colonists hadn’t come when they did, the Maori people would actually have long been extinct, given their penchant for continually fighting and eating each other.

        However, the irony is that they will eventually be extinct anyway through inter-marriage and the other bloodlines which will overtake their ‘Maori’ ones.

      2. Yes – and hone hawawira may not even see how ironic it is thar he wears glasses to see with! (“maoris” wouldn’t have invented them in a thousand million years.)

      3. They moan and groan about colonisation but never stop to think or even give thanks for what it brought them, Barry. They take what they have for granted and still call us all sorts of names and want to banish us forever. If we hadn’t all come under British rule and no-one else had come in, they would probably be like some of the poor Pacific countries – that is if there were any of them left given the continual wars, cannabalism and killing of female babies.

        However it is hypothetical because in reality if we hadn’t taken over, the French or Portuguese would have and life would have been quite different for them I’m sure, in a very negative sort of way.

  21. At some stage the combined Iwi of NZ will be more powerful than the government themselves, if it isn’t already. And all given to them on a Silver platter via spineless governments and the New Zealand tax payers.
    Democracy is being eroded and it’s going to get worse, driven by these radicals and promoted by the likes of Willie jackson and JT.
    Maoridom is now a very powerful machine in NZ and people power (Democracy) is worthless unless they unite together.
    The next move by Iwi, Jackson and a whole host of maori academics and white lefties will be to convince the government to make sites like this illegal, and anyone using it will be breaking the law for inciting racial hatred.
    We the vast majority are marginalised and our voices stifled and branded racist and small minority by a media bias, owned and payed for with Iwi money (our own tax money).
    This country is on the verge of being ruled by a maori oligarchy who no one voted for. That is where we’re nearly at. And no matter how John Key, Finlayson, Labour and the greens dress it up and try convince us it’s the right thing to do, we know it’s handover or partnership in government by stealth. No matter what government we vote in every 3 years, their power will be shared 50/50 by unelected radical maori council billionairs who will act and promote maori propaganda by fleecing the rest of us.

    1. It’s all built on dishonesty – their version of NZ’s history is dishonest and all of these maoris everyone is talking about aren’t even maoris, they’re only part maoris. Calling them maoris is dishonest. When they say they are maoris they are dishonest. Everything about part-maoris and all of the special laws and policies for them is colossally dishonest.Plus corrupt and immoral.

    2. Ask the Norwegians how removing non-violent democratic channels for their legitimate frustrations worked out.

  22. I fear you could be right, Marvin. We are almost there already. It’s unbelievable really that Key and Co can’t/won’t see the disaster they are creating. Key has a very cavalier attitude to everything from my observation. Is he really that thick or does he have an agenda?

    By all accounts he will probably be with the United Nations before long, is just looking after number one and to hell with the rest of us.

    1. They’re dressing this up so as to make an easy surreptitious transition of water owneship to maori. And no one will notice because the media will conveniently circumvent the story until it’s too late, maori have it, lock, stock and barrel.

  23. At the end of the day the spineless government and John Key in particular is going to give water rights to Iwi, and they will charge what they like. He’s dressing this up so as to look as if he’s not giving water to these filthy disgusting, greedy part maori, cancerous parasites.
    This is how it goes: They ask for the most ridiculous things possible and Key first says ‘no’. They threaten legal action and get their racist faces on our TVs saying that the government is racist and disrespectful of maori rights.
    JK then offers compromise maybe 1/4 of what they ask plus a few tens of millions to boot. But he has to dress it up as if he’s still saying an emphatic ‘NO’, but behind closed doors he’s done a deal.
    Maori radicals are happy as larry, but still calling JK and the government derogatory names to make it look good for JK. Everyones happy. Maori got what they want, JK knows the public still support him because he’s looking tough on maori, and the public are happy because it looks like JK is sticking it to radical maori. We’re happy because we’re all f..king stupid.
    Pardon my French, but I’m sure you know where I’m coming from.
    John Key should go down as the most spinless dog of a PM we’ve ever had.

      1. Call him what you like, it is not likely to concern him at all.

        The only thing that would concern him is the chance of losing political power. At this point in time that is looking very unlikely.

        It is not names to call him, it is how to get the votes to get him out of power that is the question.

  24. Proportionately, maori separatists are more powerful than all the mafia combined in the USA. And what’s more frightening is that maori separatists are legal and backed by politicians and media.
    JK is moving so fast and against the public’s will that the vast majority will have no time to react or even protest (as if) until it’s too late.
    Our cause is a mighty struggle.

    1. I absolutely agree with everything you have said in these last 3 posts Marvin.

      Our country is in a terrible situation and the future is perilous. A well known quote from early America says that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Well the vast majority of our citizens and all of the media have been and are still asleep or stupidly confused. And this has been going on for so long that the road back will be mightily hard.

      In my neck of the woods the Port company has just set up an advisory board for future decisions affecting the harbour that consists of 2 company reps and 5 ‘iwi’ reps. Doesn’t need a rocket scientist to see where this will go. The ‘iwi’ are having an internal battle as one of their number wants to hold out for even greater power and money.
      The bizarre thing is that the local paper’s (is the apostrophe in the right place John?) comment section is full of people praising the ‘iwi’ for trying to bring their greediest member into line. Robbing us of only 90% of our possessions instead of 100% is somehow worthy of praise and gratitude from Joe Public. Maori are laughing themselves sick all the way to the bank. They think the public are thick as sh!t and the fact is they are right.

      1. That is very interesting Mike. Any consultation with the shareholders regarding this arrangement?

      2. Dead right again Mike. You obviously live in the same area as I do. I have just seen in the local paper that to choose senior management positions at our local useless, PC, incompetent, maori-loving, thieving, out-of-touch, undemocratic, money-is-no-object, lying, group of clowns ( in NZ, we just call them a “Tga City Council” ), the unelected CEO, acting CEO, Human Resource management…and a local mafia (iwi) will be the ones doing the vetting!!! A local iwi???????!!!!!!!!!! WTF!!!!!! I hope I am wrong here but now our council must consult local iwi when hiring management?!!!!!!! I would love to know how much local iwi get paid, and if local iwi…qualified or otherwise, get management jobs with the council just because they are maori. Please, someone tell me that I am not correct… please!

  25. Mike and Marvin you’ve just said what I’ve been saying all along. The public haven’t yet clicked onto what’s going on. (Golly, all these apostrophes!!). They learned long ago that no matter how outrageous the claim from us, they will always get something. They are just creeping up and up, getting something each time. It won’t be that long before they have the whole country sewn up.

    I have also noticed some people saying (I think it was on Kiwiblog) that it was relatively quiet at Waitangi this year. Well, why on earth would they protest – they have the Government right in their huge pockets? Only a fool would rock the boat now that they more or less have what they want. They are almost there – what utter fools we are.

    Key and Co will go down in history as the worst Government in history and the one which put the final nail in the coffin for the rest of us. Previous Governments have been bad, but Key’s bunch have exceeded all the others put together especially with the lightening speed with which they have worked. However, Geoffery Palmer and David Lange also get huge black marks for starting the whole fraudulent business in the first place.

  26. Since August last year, Truth is the only newspaper I have read that highlights the real facts of what is going on in the treaty industry. Once again Truth has brought John Ansell’s concerns to public notice, as opposed to the waffle and double-speak from academics who usually have a doctorate in Maori Studies, egalitarian eugenics or other useless quasi- or pseudo-science.

    1. I was impressed the Truth gave JA a chance to respond to the emptyhead Willie Jackson. You’d not get many papers that’d do that. Well done to the Truth for giving both sides of a debate.
      That’s what NZ needs, real and fair debate. Instead we have debates where all are either maori or pro maori. If, and that a big If, they have an opposing view (Remember representing the majority) then he or she would be would be outnumbered 5 or 6 to 1.
      The race card would be pulled so many times during the debate, especially if Willie Jackson is there, it isn’t funny.
      Real debate on TV with the audience pro rata to the general public (86% non maori and 14% maori). When choosing the audience who will be asking questions, their political affilations should not be known before they sit.
      Now that would be fair and just and democratic.

  27. My next door neighbour was a Captain in the NZ army for 25 years or so.
    Only last week I was talking to him in regards to what’s going on in this country, what we’re saying on these boards. Bare in mind that this man was a Captain, and one has to assume him well above average intelligence.
    He was completely oblivious and couldn’t see what I was on about and what all the fuss is. I felt like shaking him out of his sleep.
    I think these people choose to be mealy mouthed and pretend it’s not happening. Then they can go through life like they’re living in some kind of fake utopia with rose tinted glasses.
    A micro microcosm maybe of what NZ is choosing to do instead of standing up and being counted.
    Funny as I’m from the UK and have been here for 11 years now. The amount of times I’ve raised these points with white NZers and the amount of times I’ve been told “If you don’t like it then go back home”, and that from white, gutless b..tards who won’t face the truth of what’s happening to their own country.
    God help New Zealand.

    1. Too true Marvin. I have told dozens of people about the Constitutional Review fiasco going on but I can see in their eyes, they do not think it’s as bad as I say. Also, they don’t want to get involved in race issues and also some say, well the British should have read and written the Treaty properly because now the maori are only getting what they are entitled to. In a nutshell, they don’t really want to know….there’s far better ways to spend ones time than researching this! Apathy rules in NZ…and the maori are well aware of that!

  28. I was amazed to hear of this contra proferentum rule :,
    from Wikipedia
    ..The rule applies only if, and to the extent that, the clause was included at the unilateral insistence of one party without having been subject to negotiation by the counter-party. Additionally, the rule applies only if a court determines the term to be ambiguous.
    I am not sure if we had duress in the treaty or if the so called ambiguity is a recent contrivance

  29. I agree with you Marvin. I’m convinced people just don’t want to know otherwise they would have to face that life as they now know it, won’t be forever. If they don’t acknowledge it, it will hopefully go away.

    I’ve been fighting this divisive racism since returning to this country in 1995 after 7 years living in the UK. I was so shocked at the changes that had happened in my time away that for the first time in my life I started speaking out and writing to politicians. I haven’t stopped fighting this creeping racist separatism but alas seem have achieved nothing. However, I jwon’t stop – it’s not in my nature to allow something wrong to occur without saying something.

    I do apologise to you, Marvin, on behalf of the decent citizens of this country who are trying to halt this disastrous racist/separatist trend, that you should be told to return home if you don’t like what is going on. Just view them with disdain and/or sympathy, if you like, for being so ignorant or too busy(?!) and not seeking out and facing the facts. We need more people like you to help wake the ingnorant/busy ones up. So please just take it with a grain of salt. You at least can see the facts from fiction and are so right.

  30. Owen at 11.27am is so right. Getting rid of Key is the ‘key’ to everything. It will be a big ask and we just have to hope we can either get some traction or Key will make such a big blunder that it will suddenly wake the Sheeple up.

    We need help from the media – we all know that but I’m convinced they are being silenced by powerful influences.

    Perhaps a leaflet drop into every letterbox should be done or advertisements in the major dailies but that costs heaps.

    1. I think that the time has come when all of those people fighting for the common cause of a race-free democracy in New Zealand should put aside any personal differences and form an alliance to combat the corruption that is destroying our country.
      People like Muriel Neuman, Colin Craig, John Ansell, Don Brash, Winston Peters, Elizabeth Rata, Bob Jones, etc., etc., etc. (and me and you).
      Never mind the personality clashes, other contentious policies that you don’t like, personal religions or body odour – everyone has to work together to save the country from impending disaster.
      We need full page articles in the NZ Herald, leaflet drops in letter boxes, and any other mass promotional avenues available.
      But all of this will require an enormous amount of funding.
      Just consider what we are fighting – the government sycophants, a controlled media, multi-million dollar funded Maori organisations, and a generation of brainwashed younger people.
      No single individual or group can hope to beat that kind of opposition on their own.
      I have no wish to be a wet blanket on this blog but I personally consider that a one-policy political party is doomed to fail – simply because of the amount of public apathy and the “She’ll be right – it can’t happen here” attitude that surrounds us.
      Just take a look at the polls and see what a nice guy the public think John Key is – apathy, stupidity and unawareness!
      While I have great admiration for John Ansell’s courage and efforts to date it is probable that he has managed to get the message through to several hundred people, whereas this campaign needs to reach hundreds of thousands – and very soon.
      I’m not knocking you as a leader John, in fact I am one of your biggest fans, but time is running out and we need to break into the big league fast.
      What we need is a special type of person to lead such an alliance, preferably part-Maori (to neutralise 90% of the enemy’s ammunition), and holding a respected position in society.
      In my view the ideal person would be Elizabeth Rata if she was agreeable, but that is just a suggestion.
      These are just my ideas and I am quite willing to be wrong if someone can come up with a better approach.
      Until then, “United we stand, divided we fall.”

      1. Agree with your comments Mitch, I would go with Winston though, he is a proven politician, knows the ropes, is very likely to get past the 5%. Pity John is not happy with Winston, if he could show NZF he could bring a swag of votes he perhaps could get on their list high enough to get a seat. A very big ask on his own and starting a new party at this late stage.
        If it is not done this time round it will be to late for any effective action.

      2. Elizabeth is not part-Maori, though her children are. She may well be the top academic on our side, but I’m not sure she’d relish a confrontational leadership role.

        Bob Jones has told me that he thinks a single-issue party would work, provided Key remains soft, and might have got behind it himself if he wasn’t so bloody old.

        Chris Trotter also thinks it’s a runner, and could do well.

        Money and willing candidates and foot soldiers are key factors. It would require more courage to join than ordinary parties.

  31. Albert

    The Principles of The Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill

    NZ First Had this Bill introduced into Parliament in 2006 as part of its Confidence and Supply agreement with Labour

    Basically the Bill specified to remove references to the Principles of the TOW from legislation

    The Bill was referred to the Justice and Electoral Committee for consideration and their advise was to recomend that the Bill not be passed.

    Commitee members 11 in number were
    Chris Finlayson was deputy chair
    Hone Hariwa also a committee member

    Labour members = 5 including Chairperson
    National ” = 4
    NZ First ” = 1
    Greens ” = 1

    Submissions received 171 no 161 (94%) were against the Bill

    No surprise the Bill was defeated, what with Finlayson/Labour/Green making up 64% of the votes on the committee.

    JA NZ First (I am not a party member) may have been in Parliament 30 years,however to say they have done nothing as the above attempt by them records is simply not correct.

    1. You are right, Albert. I should have said ‘achieved nothing’, not ‘done nothing’.

      Perhaps you could tell me what they have achieved.

      Unless I’m missing something, Winston has made a lot of noise, and he and his followers have earned many millions of dollars in salaries from the taxpayer.

      But what has the taxpayer received in return for that expenditure?

      You may prove my suspicions wrong by coming back with a long list – in which case I will happily acknowledge the party’s value.

  32. Albert
    “Perhaps you could tell me what they have achieved”

    I am not interested in promoting NZ First or its policies on this blog.

    However since you ask I can name a couple of items,

    SuperGold Card for pensioners,effecting approx 500000 Kiwis

    Toll free Tauranga Harbour Bridge effecting approx 1000000 kiwis annually

    The point of my comments above is,

    Nearly all the contributers to your blog, understandably so, keep venting their frustration at the priviledge in one form or another given to part Maori.

    To effect significant change to this situation will require an Act of Parliament

    NZ First an established Party in Parliament had the power in 2005 by being “Kingmaker” to Labour with an agreement by Labour to allow the above TOW Deletion Bill to be introduced,probably in the knowledge that with a stacked committee that it would fail and it did.

    Obviosly NZ First backed the wrong horse,should have gone with National,

    Brownley got up in Parliament and said that National supported the NZ First TOW Deletion Bill stating that the Bill was part of Nationals core policy
    However we all know now what National have transformed into with regard to “bending over”to part Maori.

    So JA my question to you is, Will your campaign be any different to the steps taken by NZ First.

    1. Also, Winston could not be labelled a racist when trying to abolish maori privilege…because he is a part maori. No non-maori can get away with that. As an example, imagine if a non-maori made those same jokes as Billy T.

    2. Boy, Albert, there are more people in Tauranga than I thought.

      Bribing pensioners at the expense of everyone else is not helping New Zealand, is it?

      While my mum enjoys her free bus rides, she doesn’t need to be bribed. She would vote for her grandchildren before herself.

      I suspect she might well vote for a party which said to her: “Help us get rid of this Treaty roadblock that’s stopping us from focusing on the road ahead – the job of creating a more prosperous and honest future for all New Zealanders.”

      Certainly any new party would need to be more successful than NZ First and ACT. It’s not about taking the baubles, it’s about making a difference.

      In a single-issue party, it’s about playing hardball for your core policy, nothing else.

  33. I agree with your comment Albert that NZF introduced the bill knowing that it would fail in a stacked committee.

    Thus they had a win-win. Be seen to be attempting something the majority of their supporters liked, be able to shrug and deflect the blame when it didn’t come off and not have to be part of the hard work that would have resulted had the bill been passed. Net result – waste of time and money, nothing achieved. Country had a lose-lose.

    We need a party and leader who will take this issue and run with it without compromise come what may.

  34. Albert

    Mike Labour allowed NZF to introduce the bill knowing that they Labour had the numbers on the committee to defeat it end of story

    What is needed is what NZF achieved in 2005 eg the role of “Kingmaker”

    They will be there in Parliament again in 2014

    Presently NZF are polling around the threshold of 5%

    Your call for a party leader ” without compromise” will in my view never eventuate, MMP unfortunately is all about compromise.

    If such a messiah does appear firstly he will have:

    a Form a credible party with the necessary funding etc

    b Gain enough votes to break the 5% threshold

    Only 16-18 months till 2014 election (excluding a snap election)time is running out in my opinion for this to be realistically achieved.

    I say more realistic to give NZF another “bite of the cherry”

    However JA says he is not pepared to “cuddle up” to any of the present Political Parties and therein lies a big political problem in my humble opinion

  35. Owen, I think you have hit the nail on the head.
    There is insufficient time to organise an effective one-policy party offensive before our pathetic government rams through a new Constitution containing the Treaty According To St Pita.
    Although I have my own reservations regarding Winston, the fact is that he has an existing political party that will most likely pass the 5% barrier in the next election.
    Putting aside any personal likes or dislikes, his part-Maoriism is a major foil against predictable accusations of racism-racism-racism that a non-Maori would inevitably attract from the separatist mob.
    At present Winston is in the cushy position of being able to promise anything while knowing that he will never have to accept responsibility. Thus he appears to have become very complacent and consequently ineffective.
    If John (or Muriel) could convince him that pushing Treatygate/NZCPR principles would gain him a crucial additional voting bloc then that may be enough to revive the Winston of old.
    There has to be a way of focussing the efforts of all who are fighting for equal rights – but it (unfortunately) must be carried out in a way that conforms with the existing political set-up.
    Winston attracts the older generation who are almost unanimous in their condemnation of the galloping apartheid that they can see is destroying the rights that many of them fought for in the past.
    Personality clashes are unimportant when the future of our nation is under threat. Small groups and individuals are easy pickings for the well-funded and media-controlling separatists whereas unity is strength.
    If Winston could be convinced that he may well be in a position to hold the balance of power in the next government, with the support of already extant (but dispersed) groups seeking equal rights, then we would become a force to be reckoned with.
    The end goal is the important factor – not the personalities involved.
    This is not a game. It is the survival of a free nation under threat.

  36. I don’t want to muddy the waters here or be a Joana, but I tend to go with what Mitch is saying re uniting with Winston mainly because there isn’t much time and it would cost a huge amount to form our own Party. It takes time to collect money unless a willing wealthy benefactor suddenly materialised. Whilst I had hopes for Colin Craig’s Party, Winston’s makes much more sense seeing he is already set up and virtually there as well as polling well enough to be able to achieve something.

    If he could come out and actively and forcefully campaign (but would he?) on a racially equal New Zealand I’m sure he would pick up many votes. It is crucial that we make our move for this coming election otherwise I feel it will be too late.

    If only Muriel and the others would all join forces, I feel we could achieve our aim. Who knows if Winston really ‘did the business’ there may even be a landslide and he might hold even more than the balance of power. I would hope that Muriel would put her reservations aside and fully support whatever direction we go in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s