| |
|
Empowering Men:
|
Avoiding Double Standards On
Race
(twice updated)
Peter Zohrab 2023 |
|
|
|
(Open Letter to the Minister of Treaty of Waitangi
Negotiations)
Dear Mr. Little,
It is clear that humans are warlike. The British and other European
peoples have famously been warlike, which resulted (amongst other things)
in European colonisation of large parts of the rest of the World.
The Maoris have also famously been warlike. Arguably, all, or
almost all human nations and tribes have been warlike, or have suffered
genocide -- which the pacifist Chatham Islands Morioris suffered at
the hands of Maori tribes, for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriori_genocide)
. Even chimpanzees are warlike (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War).
In New Zealand, the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi has been recognised in
law as providing the legal basis for the authority of the British
Crown, initially, and (since independence) of the New Zealand Crown.
You are the latest in a line of Ministers of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations,
who have been tasked with negotiating claims of violations of the Treaty
of Waitangi. I assume that all the claimants have been Maoris.
OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUESTS
-
For each of the Treaty of Waitangi claims which have been settled,
could you please inform me what the legal basis was for recognising
that the claimants in fact had had title to whatever it was, in
respect of which they claimed to have suffered a loss.
-
In cases where Tribe A is known and acknowledged to have conquered
land or other assets from Tribe B, is your policy to accept that
Tribe A, Tribe B, or both have title to that conquered land or other
assets, such that they could potentially make a claim against the
Crown in respect of what the Crown was alleged to have done subsequently
in respect of that conquered land or other assets?
-
Can you guarantee that none of the settlements of Treaty of Waitangi
claims has, in effect, rewarded tribes for the conquests which their
ancestors had carried out, to the detriment of other tribes -- including
conquests which the Crown does not know about and possibly will
never know about?
-
Since 1840, have there been any cases where tribes have been forced
to, or have voluntarily decided to return conquered land or other
assets to the tribe which was previously thought and acknowledged
to have owned them?
-
Since 1840, have there been any cases where tribes have been forced
to, or have voluntarily decided to pay compensation for conquered
land or other assets to the tribe which was previously thought and
acknowledged to have owned them?
-
In view of the fact that the genocide of the Chatham Islands Morioris
started in 1935, before the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, could
you please inform me what return of assets or compensation to the
Morioris has been carried out by the Maori tribes which committed
the genocide?
CONCLUSION
It is not equitable to take the position that it is alright for people
to conquer, enslave, and/or commit genocide on other groups, as long
as the perpetrators are not White. There has long been a fashion,
in our dumbed-down, female-dominated media and education sectors, of
demonising White Colonialism. Before the Whites arrived, was everyone
in the Third World constantly hugging and kissing everyone else?
Was Genghis Khan a White man, for example?
The Treaty of Waitangi is a short and imperfect document, but that
is not the fault of the Colonialists. The Maoris had no writing
system and no legal system of any sophistication, so it would have been
difficult to get them to understand -- let alone agree to -- a treaty
as lengthy as, say, the 1783 treaty between the United Kingdom and Great
Britain (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-40-02-0356).
|
I soon received the following response:
|
Tena koe
On behalf of Hon Andrew Little MP, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi
Negotiations, thank you for your request under the Official Information
Act 1982, of 13 February.
You have requested:
1. For each of the Treaty of Waitangi claims which have been settled,
could you please inform me what the legal basis was for recognising
that the claimants in fact had had title to whatever it was, in respect
of which they claimed to have suffered a loss.
2. In cases where Tribe A is known and acknowledged to have conquered
land or other assets from Tribe B, is your policy to accept that Tribe
A, Tribe B, or both have title to that conquered land or other assets,
such that they could potentially make a claim against the Crown in respect
of what the Crown was alleged to have done subsequently in respect of
that conquered land or other assets?
3. Can you guarantee that none of the settlements of Treaty of Waitangi
claims has, in effect, rewarded tribes for the conquests which their
ancestors had carried out, to the detriment of other tribes -- including
conquests which the Crown does not know about and possibly will never
know about?
4. Since 1840, have there been any cases where tribes have been forced
to, or have voluntarily decided to return conquered land or other assets
to the tribe which was previously thought and acknowledged to have owned
them?
5. Since 1840, have there been any cases where tribes have been forced
to, or have voluntarily decided to pay compensation for conquered land
or other assets to the tribe which was previously thought and acknowledged
to have owned them?
6. In view of the fact that the genocide of the Chatham Islands Morioris
started in 1935, before the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, could
you please inform me what return of assets or compensation to the Morioris
has been carried out by the Maori tribes which committed the genocide?
The information requested appears to be more closely associated with
the functions and responsibilities of the Office of Maori Crown Relations
– Te Arawhiti. Accordingly I am transferring your request to the
Te Arawhiti under section 14(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act
1982.
You have the right, under section 28 of the Act, to ask the Ombudsman
to review this decision to transfer your request for information.
Nga mihi
|
I then emailed the Ombudsmen as follows:
|
Dear sir/Madam,
Could you please review the Minister's decision to transfer my request
for information (see below).
My question was specifically about the treaty settlement process.
It was not about Maori Crown Relations in general. The Office for Maori
Crown Relations is about Maori Crown Relations in general and has a
specific agenda to move the relationship in a particular direction.
My question was about factual and legal specifics of the treaty settlement
process and does not fit within the particular ideological framework
of the Maori Crown Relations office.
The responsibilities of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations
include oversight of the treaty settlement process.
Moreover, some of my questions relate specifically, or by implication,
to the relationship between the Chatham Islands Moriori and some Maori
tribes -- in relation to treaty settlements. That issue falls completely
outside the competence of the Office for Maori Crown Relations. Indeed,
that office has a conflict of interest, since it represents Maori interests
and does not represent the conflicting interests of the Morioris.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Zohrab
|
I soon received the following reply from the Ombudsmen:
|
Dear Mr Zohrab,
I refer to your request for a review of the Minister for Treaty of
Waitangi Negotiations' decision to transfer your request for information
to the Office of Maori Crown Relations – Te Arawhiti.
Unfortunately this Office is unable to assist with your concerns about
this decision. This is because the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA)
does not give an Ombudsman authority to consider complaints about transfers
of OIA requests (refer s28 OIA). An Ombudsman can therefore only consider
concerns about a decision to transfer an OIA request under the Ombudsmen
Act 1975. However, Ministers of the Crown are not subject to that Act.
Kind regards
Marie Cochrane
Senior Investigator - Intake and Early Assistance Team
Office of the Ombudsman | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata
Phone 0800 802 602 (+64 4 473 9533) | Fax +64 4 471 2254
info@ombudsman.parliament.nz |www.ombudsman.parliament.nz
PO Box 10152, Wellington 6140 | Level 7, 70 The Terrace, Wellington
|
In due course, I received the following substantive response:
|
|
|
See also:
|
Someone has let women out of the kitchen -- and they have been telling
lies ever since!
|
| |
Webmaster |
|
Latest Update |
25 March 2023 |
|
|
|
|
