jack 431 Report post Posted June 3, 2011 No worse than all the one-sided diaiwi we get subjected to. What a lack lustre response....Lift your game David...You know you and your croney mates post most of that racist garbage... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 3, 2011 What a lack lustre response....Lift your game David...You know you and your croney mates post most of that racist garbage... You're a bigger racist than me mate, I assure you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 4, 2011 And they signed to accept British sovereignty. Incorrect. Article 1 of the English version has Maori ceding sovereignty. Article 1 of the Maori version has Maori ceding governorship, which is an entirely different concept. Article 2 of the Maori version has Maori retaining sovereignty over their land, forests, fisheries and taonga. If one is unfamiliar with the language of another, how is one meant to understand what they are trying to convey? Clearly the Maori Chiefs understood that they were conceding governorship while retaining full rights to their land etc. True, the Maori Chiefs looked to the Crown for protection from other foreign powers, for peace and for law and order. They reposed their trust for these things in the Crown believing that they retained their own rangatiratanga (sovereignty) and taonga. The Crown assured them of the utmost good faith in the matter in which their existing rights would be guaranteed, and in particular guaranteed down to each individual Maori the full and exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands, which is the basic and most important principle of the Treaty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opo 182 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Incorrect. Article 1 of the English version has Maori ceding sovereignty. Sooooo who did the cede it to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Sooooo who did the cede it to? God you're thick! They ceded sovereignty in the English version. The word 'sovereignty' was translated into Maori and came out as 'Kawanatanga'. Kawanatanga = governorship; it does not mean sovereignty! But I suppose that you're going to blame the Maori for not being fluent enough in English to understand what they were signing. The Maori equivalent of sovereignty is 'tino rangatiratanga'. That phrase was used in Article 2 in respect to their lands etc. So I'll repeat what I said earlier: Maori ceded governorship, not sovereignty, whilst maintaining sovereignty over their lands, forests, fisheries etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opo 182 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 God you're thick! But I suppose that you're going to blame the Maori for not being fluent enough in English to understand what they were signing. Keep your saddle on Quarter horse! Few Mā]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Waitangi#Treaty_copies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bblunt 334 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Opo. I agree with nothing you say (Moko was a better dolphin too) but I give you bonus points for the respectful macron in Māori. For others wishing to make the step up http://www.tetaurawhiri.govt.nz/english/resources_e/download/keyboard.shtml Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Keep your saddle on Quarter horse! Few Mā]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Waitangi#Treaty_copies And you've just worked that out have you? Of course they didn't understand they were ceding sovereignty, when their version said governorship! Why else do you think they've been filing Treaty claims left,right,and centre since 1975? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Why else do you think they've been filing Treaty claims left,right,and centre since 1975? Because they are a bunch of lazy nillers, cashing in on what the white man has made of this country, as it is an easier path than making their own way in the world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 If one is unfamiliar with the language of another, how is one meant to understand what they are trying to convey? As with anything else, once you sign, it's pretty much a done deal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 True, the Maori Chiefs looked to the Crown for protection from other foreign powers, for peace and for law and order. Other foreign powers? No, Britain had already ensured French, Spanish had no claims on NZ. The chiefs' biggest fears were from other tribes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bblunt 334 Report post Posted June 4, 2011 Because they are a bunch of lazy nillers, cashing in on what the white man has made of this country, as it is an easier path than making their own way in the world. As with anything else, once you sign, it's pretty much a done deal. Other foreign powers? No, Britain had already ensured French, Spanish had no claims on NZ. The chiefs' biggest fears were from other tribes. ... and the prosecution rests Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 4, 2011 As with anything else, once you sign, it's pretty much a done deal. Oh dear. Out of your three replies David, this is by far the funniest. The Treaty was written in Maori was it not? So if the Maori version said Maori retain sovereignty over their lands, forests, fisheries etc, and then the British go and act otherwise, then Maori have a right to contest that through the Courts. That's what the English signed up for and, as you so rightly pointed out, once they signed up the rest was a done deal. Oh David, one more thing: the mail is that you were seen at Ellerslie yesterday...on your own...with neither of your two imaginary girlfriends in sight. What happened? Did you forget the foot pump? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 Oh David, one more thing: the mail is that you were seen at Ellerslie yesterday...on your own...with neither of your two imaginary girlfriends in sight. What happened? Did you forget the foot pump? Really? Actually, I wasn't there. My mail is , google ' craig kennett waimate' open season lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 ... and the prosecution rests Why's that, fuknukkil? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bblunt 334 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 Why's that, fuknukkil? a. Because they are a bunch of lazy nillers, cashing in on what the white man has made of this country, as it is an easier path than making their own way in the world. So Mā]As with anything else, once you sign, it's pretty much a done deal. Yep, it's called a contract. International law states that where a treaty is written in different languages, the binding contact is the one written in the home country's language i.e. the Māori one you clock. So wake up. Other foreign powers? No, Britain had already ensured French, Spanish had no claims on NZ. The chiefs' biggest fears were from other tribes. Are you making this up as you go along? Oh yeah you are. Please explain how Britain had dispelled France and Spain prior to 1840. Eagerly looking forward to your hilarious reply Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 So Mā] No, not at all. Although their gene pool IS smaller than most other races on Earth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 5, 2011 Really? Actually, I wasn't there. My mail is , google ' craig kennett waimate' open season lol You were there David. Don't go telling porkies now. You were working in the public stand, bottom floor, end tote...as always. And you were dressed like...well...as always. Some of the whanau spotted you cuz...that's how I know you were there. They also didn't notice any women hanging around so I guess you're lying about that as well huh? Don't give up on love David. They say opposites attract so I bet that one day you'll meet someone who's attractive, intelligent, humorous, and who isn't a racist. And you've got the cheek to call me a liar! Bro! I'm an honest-as Maori. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 International law states that where a treaty is written in different languages, the binding contact is the one written in the home country's language Sorry, who's making this up as they go along? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 You were working in the public stand Oh right you mean yesterday. Yeah, I always take all my friends to work. There were some smelly types hanging around, that must've been the whanau? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 5, 2011 Oh right you mean yesterday. David. I'll type this really slowly so you can follow, but this is what I posted this morning: "the mail is that you were seen at Ellerslie yesterday" So there you have it David. Yes I meant yesterday because that's what I friggin well said! I hope my cuzzies counted their change after placing those bets with you yesterday because you're not the sharpest obviously. But seriously David, whatever happened between us? We used to be such great mates. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC7 1 Report post Posted June 5, 2011 But seriously David, whatever happened between us? We used to be such great mates. I would say that your fukwit tendencies created an issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Quarter horse Report post Posted June 5, 2011 I would say that your fukwit tendencies created an issue. Enlighten us all David. What has big bad Craig Kennett done to upset you so much? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bblunt 334 Report post Posted June 6, 2011 Sorry, who's making this up as they go along? From On the Interpretation of Treaties - The Modern International Law as Expressed in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Contra proferentem rule - "if an expression contained in a treaty provision can be shown to be unclear ... [or] ... can be interpreted in two different ways ... then the provision shall be interpreted to the disadvantage of the party who once unilaterally profferred the treaty for acceptance" or what i said Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opo 182 Report post Posted June 9, 2011 Click both links for the full article http://www.box.net/shared/f98z94xo63 http://www.box.net/shared/e6dxhkrafs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaceCafe News