That resistance took the form of persistent heckling which posed substantial difficulties for Batchelor to get through his three-hour plus presentation. When a heckler starting smashing Batchelor’s gear, police closed the meeting.
Iwi chair Barber’s interference preceded the meeting that was first booked at the HB Racing Centre. Without speaking to the racing centre, Barber released an open letter urging the centre to cancel the booking.
A church in Havelock North was the next venue, but threats cause that to be cancelled. Those wanting to attend were required to go to the Havelock North church to find out that the third venue, the former Dollarama shop in the main street of Hastings, was the place to go. (2)
Barber’s mob found out the address. When I drove into the carpark at the back of the shop, I could see familiar iwi faces already there so knew that we were in for a rowdy night.
At the outset, Batchelor explained that the meeting was private, like a wedding reception, and that he had the right to ask people to go, and if they resisted, police would usher them out. He said that the time for questions was at the end of his presentation.
That was perhaps too long to wait for a tall, young, and well-upholstered individual standing at the back who asked, politely, to know what co-governance was.
He did not seem to understand Batchelor’s explanation, early in his presentation, that it was a plan for tribal control of New Zealand, with the blueprint being the He Puapua document introduced covertly by the current government. Tall guy at back repeated his question a number of times.
Another well-upholstered individual addressed by someone as “Irishman”, who took a phone call from reporter Claudette Hauiti from Radio Waatea during the meeting, continued the early heckling.
When told that it was a private meeting, portly aged Irishman argued that he had been invited and held up a Stop Co Governance booklet with an invitation attached to it.
The early heckling got to a level that Batchelor would not start his Powerpoint presentation. He called police and waited.
The police took about 30 minutes to get there, which was a bit of a mystery because the police station is located just over the road. While waiting, the tall, young, well-upholstered individual at the back took Batchelor’s silence as a cue to give a talk of his own.
After about 10 minutes of waiting while the heckling escalated, Batchelor put on some techno music and displayed an island paradise backdrop featuring a bikini woman on the screen.
Police finally made their way over the road. Batchelor asked for the portly Irishman to be removed, along with another back-row male covertly filming the show, as well as a mouthy woman.
By that time, the tall, young, well-upholstered individual at the back had given a substantial talk of his own so he had to go as well. Police seemed reluctant to remove him.
Batchelor asked the head officer if he was scared of the tall guy at the back. Batchelor then pointed out that since the head cop had kicked out three people who were not Maori, and that if he was reluctant to kick out a Maori, for the same behaviour, he was not applying the law equally for the same behaviour.
The tall guy at the back was ushered out.
The gear smasher came in late. She took up a seat in the front row, which should have been a red light for Batchelor.
The corrupting influence of the Public Interest Journalism funding for media forms an early part of Batchelor’s presentation.
He screens News Hub footage of a public meeting held in Orewa that included an interview with a young woman who gave all the appearances of a victim of an attack on her identity.
Then Batchelor showed footage taken by his camera person at that meeting that showed the “victim” woman morphed into a perpetrator tearing up booklets while a constable looked on.
That was the trigger.
Gear-smashing woman was on her feet, Batchelor’s slimline Apple laptop was in the air and then crashed to the concrete floor, his projector was tipped on to the floor.
Batchelor jumped to get between his gear and gear-smasher woman. Police rushed over. The gear-smasher was pulled out of the meeting, shouting, swearing, threatening.
Police closed the meeting. So much for iwi chair Bayden Barber’s respectful protest.
Meanwhile, evictees did not quietly go home. They went around to the main-street entrance of the building and started singing, songs in Maori, and an old World War 2 song.
The singing escalated. An opera singer who had been evicted joined the street protesters. His is the loudest singing voice I have ever heard. It boomed through the venue.
Banging ensued. Street protesters forced the sliding glass doors open. A haka eventuated, shaking the building.
Police stood in a line inside the now partly open glass doors facing by that time more than 100 protesters on the outside. Police wanted Batchelor to leave before protesters tried to come around to the back door exit. Batchelor packed up his gear and was gone.
The mouthy woman evictee blamed Batchelor for everything. “If you were not here, this would not be happening. I’m worried that someone would bring a gun”.
Such a race pile-on is not new. That was what happened when Hobson’s Pledge first appeared in public by way of a mild interview on radio involving Don Brash, Casey Costello and Leighton Smith in 2016.
Albeit without the face-to-face grimaces and threats, the Brash-Costello pile-on operated out of the same playbook as the attack on Batchelor.
The target messenger is called a racist to distract attention from the message and to make it uncomfortable for likely supporters of the new message.
Many slink away when called a racist. Not Batchelor. He went through it all, on his own, when extremists in the Bay of Islands tried to drive him off his land. He has faced death threats and has sustained substantial property damage courtesy of “tangata whenua”.
I have attended two full Stop Co-Governance meetings, one in Invercargill about a month ago via live stream, and one in the Hastings area on July 25.
Incidentally, the Irishman at the July 24 meeting turned out to be a person named Dennis O’Reilly who has been a go-to person for media on the subject a crime and gangs.
He presents himself as a life-time member of Black Power, and is a social services entrepreneur, a professional go-between the government of the day and Maori, which currently includes writing cultural reports for crims at $5000 a report. (3)
O’Reilly wrote that he was “intrigued by the amount of disinformation in the booklet” and promised to “write a list of rebuttals” to discredit the accuracy of Batchelor’s Stop Co-governance booklet. (4)
The closest O’Reilly has got to a “list of rebuttals” so far has been in an article in E-Tangata in which he listed a number of statements by Batchelor and characterised them as “a muddle of misinformation and mischief”. (5)
O’Reilly did spot an error in the booklet, in which Batchelor wrote that “by 1865, Maori had sold 90 percent of New Zealand to settlers”.
In reality, total land sales by Maori, when all the selling had been done and not in 1865, amounted to about 93 percent of New Zealand’s total land area which is 26 million hectares.
A total of 1.47 million hectares remains owned by Maori (include,ing customary land). The remainder, about 400,000 hectares, was confiscated as a penalty for rebelling against the government during the 1860s.
These figures are all held in Government archives. These figures contrast with the claim by radicals that all Maori land was stolen.
Surprising is O’Reilly’s lack of awareness of the existence of the Busby February 4 draft of the Treaty of Waitangi, also known as the Littlewood Treaty, that was found in a drawer in Pukekohe in 1989.
Without looking further, O’Reilly declares that it does not exist because he “can find no reference to this document in Ned Fletcher’s The English text of the Treaty of Waitangi”
Sorry to say Dennis but the Littlewood treaty does in fact exist and has just two differences from the final text in Maori, Te Tiriti, being the date and the absence of the word “Maori” in Article 3.
The Littlewood Treaty remains controversial because it has no reference to forests and fisheries and, by being the mirror image in English of the Maori text, demystifies the contents of the treaty.
That Littlewood Treaty was on display in National Archives intermittently from 1992 to 2017 when it was filed out of sight, after a number of official attempts to discredit it.
The question should be why did Fletcher choose to ignore the Busby document in his recent Treaty book and why have governments tried to discredit and distance themselves from the Littlewood Treaty.
The government’s plan for co-governance is not a fiction.
The actual plan is for two governments for New Zealand, one by Maori for Maori and the other, a fully bicultural version of what we already have, subject to a tribal monitoring committee, is clearly spelt out in the government commissioned document titled He Puapua. (6)
Perhaps those who are shocked to hear Batchelor warning about it feel challenged by something new and unfamiliar.
The government definitely did not want anyone to know about the plan before the plan was publicised in dramatic fashion by ACT Party leader David Seymour and former National Party leader Judith Collins in April 2021.
Perhaps those who feel that Batchelor is attacking their identity have been mollycoddled too long and feel that their careers may be at risk.
Batchelor’s co-governance tour is a warning, a wake-up call. It is also time to decide which side you are on – do you want one government for everyone, or do you want two governments under a tribal monitoring committee.
Perhaps the behaviour of people under the direction of a local iwi chair may give you a hint of what tribal rule is going to be like.
And now is the best time to decide – in the lead-up to an election, the only time during which politicians have to listen to voters. And that’s why Batchelor is a threat. And this is why so much effort is going into denigrating Julian Batchelor.
Batchelor is drawing attention to an official race-based rort that involves massive amounts of money and political power, and the beneficiaries of that rort, as well as its enablers, want you to look elsewhere.
Sources
1. Event met by protest, HB Today, July 26, 2023
2. Venue warns others, HB Today, July 26, 2023.
3. Cultural reports in courts, November 1, 2022. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/kahu/cultural-reports-in-courts-dont-excuse-offending-but-they-do-help-explain-it-denis-oreilly/KPVHGSK3TPMWQ5PXYQE3RN5U5I/
4. Event met by protest, HB Today, July 26, 2023.
5. Julian Batchelor’s muddle of mischief, E-Tangata, July 30, 2023.https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/julian-batchelors-muddle-of-mischief/
6. He Puapua Report of the working group on a plan to realise the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Aotearoa/New Zealand https://www.nzcpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/He-Puapua.pdf
18 comments:
Where is the whakatane meeting being held?
I could deal with co-governance if it was done correctly. All Kiwis with a drop of Maori blood need to be on one side. There should be a compulsory DNA test for all of us. Any Maori markers and you are on the Maori roll.
Then the rest of us can get to wear an armband of whatever colour is chosen for us.
The scene is set. Imagine now that Labour's star is falling, when they are ousted in October, what happens next?
This government has bribed the media who have preached the propaganda and also bribed and primed the gangs and tribal groups. Do we get BLM style disruptions when they don't get the government they want?
MC
It's an outright disgrace that we no longer have free speech in NZ. I have nothing but respect for Mr Batchelor and he has every right to say what he does, but he is certainly up against it. Even getting venues is very difficult and, if you doubt it, go ahead and try? Our Council's and many other hall owner's are cowered into preventing him hiring a venue for a right to speak out.
It's not unlike what Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall found herself up against in her attack at Albert Park. This is not the NZ I want for my or my family's future and shame on these violent, 'racist'/identity discriminating protestors, and shame on our useless Police force.
Indeed, all those that do not uphold this as essential to our democracy and denigrate our right to freedom of expression, deserve our disgust and contempt.
To CXH:
That still does not address the issue of the veto - which means ultimate power is held by one minority ( i.e. ) Maori only.
Many naive people who support co-governance as a nice idea have no clue about this very dangerous aspect which would replace NZ's democracy by an ethnocracy.
No wonder the explanation is never clear and they are led to believe that there is nothing to fear.
Twitter CEO Elon Musk on Monday expressed outrage over a South African black party “openly pushing for genocide of white people” during a giant rally at a sports stadium over the weekend in Johannesburg.
“They are openly pushing for genocide of white people in South Africa,” Musk said. [South African President Cyril Ramaphosa], why do you say nothing?”
Is this the end result of the secular religion of wokeness and CRT plaguing the west today?
Nobody is suggesting NZ should be run under two separate governments with separate laws for Māori and Pakeha. This is the lie that SCG is promulgating and I’m not sure why Julian is trying to divide people by suggesting that. He claims CG is being orchestrated by about 1000 “elite Māori”, yet he has no idea who or where they are and never names them. Why not? because it is a fiction. If indeed he knew who they were and they are as corrupt as he claims, he would have them in a court of law. That has not happened once. Ask yourself why?
The reason the Littlewood document (its not a treaty) wasn't discussed in Ned Fletcher's book is because his book is about how the English version of the treaty was created and the environment it was created in.The Littlewood document was a translation of the Maori version of the treaty, this has not been disputed amongst reputable historians. In fact the only evidence used by people who claim tthat it is Busbys final draft is that it completely aligns with the wording of the Maori version, but so do other later translations of the Maori version.
Until we recognise Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter/Letters Patent dated 16 November 1840 as our true Founding Document and first Constitution, Maori will take over New Zealand.
Nice to have an independent accurate article Cleary portraying the reality of what is happening & bravely put forward by Julian .
Maori misinformation say they are the Indigenous peoples of NZ not so as they Butchered the prior peoples the Morori until extinction & those self same Māoris were migrants from Hawaii so another lie & fabrication of the truth.
Democracy is one one vote for all irrespective of Race Colour or Religion.
If Labour etc get returned we have only to look at most African country’s to see what Tribal rule brings.
Our friends in their late 50s in the medical profession leave NZ in October along with the last of our children in their mid 40s to better themselves feel safer & not being indoctrinated with the Maorification of our once great little country.
Sadly National will do little to repeal the massive legislative damage done under Labour.
Last one out turn the lights off.
Oh well nemind. You exercise your lying free speech. We will exercise our freedom to protest and speak. Cuts both ways buddy. Bratchelor, cancelled more, than a Te Moana O Raukawa waka. (Cook Strait Ferry). 😛
JJ is incorrect concerning the "Littlewood" document being a translation from the Maaori version of the treaty.
The "Littlewood" document is dated the 4th of February, whereas there is evidence that the Maaori document was written overnight by the Rev Williams and accepted by Hobson on the 5th. I would suspect that JJ has not read Martin Doutre's excellent book on the subject.
We live in a very strange world when It is clearly established that the Maaori Treaty is the one recognised by law, yet in the past couple of decades it has been ignored by our Parliaments whose laws all derive from the English version, written by Freeman following the signing. Of course that English version conveniently mentions fisheries and forests which don't get a mention in the Maaori version, or in Littlewoods.
Lets keep things simple.
The treaty was signed by the Crown and reps of the Maori population of New Zealand.
Overtime both the Crown and the grouping of Maori changed.
Nowadays everyone is part of the Crown and the Crown's links to Britain diminished.
Local Government is subject to the Crown and never was a party to the signing. Its not up to Local Government to figure what the treaty meant or by any other entity. Thats up to the Crown. Ridiculous that everyone has to try to interpret the treaty.
Local government assets are owned by all ratepayers and local citizens.
Seems to me that the protagonists of cogovernment need to read Article 43 of UNDRIP. :
Article 46
1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorising or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.
2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society.
3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.
Murray Reid is correct that Williams was given the English draft to translate on 4th Feb in order to present it to Hobson on 5th Feb to review before it was “read to the chiefs assembled at 10 o’clock. The date in the Māori translation would be the same date as the English draft he was presented with, 4th Feb. Of course Hobson, who couldn’t read the treaty in Māori, would have wanted to see an English translation of it, and Busby was quite capable of the back translation, hence the Littlewood document.
Further evidence of it being a back translation was given by Colenso who sent the wording of the Littlewood document to the USA government, clearly describing it as a copy of the native [Maori] document which varied slightly from the wording of the official English treaty.
Murray Reid, yes I have read Martin Doutre's book. Have you read Donald Loveridges rebuttal of it?
https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/stout-centre/research-units/towru/publications/The-Littlewood-Treaty.pdf
JJ, if the Busby February 4 document was a back-translation of Te Tiriti, as you maintain, why does it omit the word “Maori” in Article 3?
Sue, the idea that NZ should be run under two separate governments is not a myth, it is a reality. The plan is detailed in the He Puapua report. Click the link on the second para of this article here https://www.nzcpr.com/he-puapua/ A diagram depicting the two governments is shown on page vi. he He Puapua report was commissioned by the Labour led govt in 2019. Willie Jackson carried out the consultation with Maori prescribed in the report. The co-governed health system and Three Waters Plan were imagined in the report, as were the institution of Maori wards and the addition of tribal appointees to local councils, among other racist innovations.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.