| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 91055 | 2008-06-24 21:04:00 | Claims | Sweep (90) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 682124 | 2008-06-26 10:50:00 | I hope some people had a happy Matariki which happened this month. Maori New Year Known as "Matariki", the new year is marked by a cluster of seven stars which rise in June. Do Maori want an extra holiday which would be denied to others like Pakeha or Asian people for example? John H may be able to explain this to the ignorant among us. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 682125 | 2008-06-26 11:18:00 | home.nzcity.co.nz It is going to take until September to work this one out! John H may be able to tell other ignorant bigots why. That is those of us whom have not read Waitangi Tribunal Reports. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 682126 | 2008-06-26 11:51:00 | Do Maori want an extra holiday which would be denied to others like Pakeha or Asian people for example? Not that I'm aware of. But go ahead and come up with imaginary reasons to resent Maori for. The Waitangi Tribunal claims are legitimate. Both parties to a claim - whether that be Iwi vs Crown; or Iwi vs Iwi, employ their own historians and have to bring real and substantial evidence to bear on the process. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 682127 | 2008-06-26 12:35:00 | And of course there is a claim coming from Moriori who also did not sign. Well I hope they are going to claim from the Maori now that they have a bit of dosh. |
mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 682128 | 2008-06-26 14:04:00 | Not that I'm aware of. But go ahead and come up with imaginary reasons to resent Maori for. The Waitangi Tribunal claims are legitimate. Both parties to a claim - whether that be Iwi vs Crown; or Iwi vs Iwi, employ their own historians and have to bring real and substantial evidence to bear on the process. Deane F, History is what is written by the historians and once again which version of history does one believe. Any claim is legitimate but how do you prove it? Where is the evidence? I do not resent the Maori people as a whole anyway as I thought I had made clear earlier. So does an Iwi represent all Maori or just one tribe? I thought that the Iwi included all people but perhaps I was wrong in that. Some Maori can't do much for their Whanua never mind the Iwi. Even the various tribes seem to disagree about matters of importance to the Maori race in general. As I said before I have no problems with settlements if they benefit all Maori and go toward keeping some from committing crimes and also help toward education and health. The settlements go somewhere but my question is where. Who benefits? I live in a town where the majority of the population is Maori and Pacific Islanders but work can be hard to come by. I have still worked for the same company for the last thirteen years in spite of the fact that I am now over 65 years old. I really do think activists do not do themselves any favours or Maori for that matter. Why is it that Maori are over represented in the bad news? After all they do have equal rights as to education and etc. I might add that there are some people that would not be invited to my home and that would include some people of European descent and would also include some others. Your comments? |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 682129 | 2008-06-26 20:26:00 | Deane F, History is what is written by the historians and once again which version of history does one believe. Any claim is legitimate but how do you prove it? Where is the evidence? I'm no expert, but I believe that historians refer to sources as primary, secondary and so on. A primary source might be a document about the thing in question for instance, and so on. As to title to land, whenever there was a confiscation of Maori land, the Crown recorded it properly, as bureacracies are apt to do, so there are always good records of the Crown's misfeasance. So does an Iwi represent all Maori or just one tribe? I thought that the Iwi included all people but perhaps I was wrong in that. An iwi is a grouping of hapu - and a hapu is a grouping of whanau. In order to bring a claim to the Waitangi Tribunal an iwi must show that they have the mandate of the people. There is a fairly strict process for this that is set out by the Waitangi Tribunal. It involves hui at which a governance board must be elected for the iwi and representatives for the Waitangi Tribunal will attend hui and enter into dialogue with the members of the iwi and the governance board that the iwi has elected. Even the various tribes seem to disagree about matters of importance to the Maori race in general. Unlike Europeans who all agree about matters of importance to the European race in general...? As I said before I have no problems with settlements if they benefit all Maori and go toward keeping some from committing crimes and also help toward education and health. If the Crown accepts that there is an injustice that they must put right by offering a settlement - why is there some onus on the injured party to show that they are doing anything in particular with their settlement? Usually the amount that a claimant party has lost is vastly larger than the settlement that they end up with - in the case of Ngai Tahu the conservative estimates of their losses were around the $20 billion mark. They got $180 million cash and about $400 million in property. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 682130 | 2008-06-26 20:52:00 | Who does the estimate? Or is that imaginary too? | rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 682131 | 2008-06-26 21:21:00 | ALLLLLL A BBBBOOOOOOORRRRRDDDDDDDD the CRAVY TRAIN. Apart from you sir, Your white, You have to go and work to pay for the gravy train. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 682132 | 2008-06-26 21:29:00 | :lol: | rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 682133 | 2008-06-26 22:35:00 | With luck Jon H is in a pot,cooking and wondering was he taking the right side. | Cicero (40) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | |||||