Ancient Celtic / Scottish
in New Zealand!(?)
Unbelievable to orthodox historical opinion? Yes! But so were any New Zealand dinosaurs thirty or so years ago. Now there are many books on such creatures and they have been accepted by orthodox institutions in NZ.
So what is the probability of old pre-Maori, Celtic sites?
If you have an open and inquiring mind there are many facts, artifacts and oral and written histories that confirm the existence of pre-Maori populations in NZ. Our archaeology has yet to be properly investigated by archaeologists that do not have pre-conceived or politically motivated agendas.
Very ancient written records in Europe and the old world confirm knowledge that New Zealand and Australia existed. However getting access to and acknowledgement of these records is difficult. Concocted historical opinion has been based on deliberate intent to discredit and cover up such knowledge. NZ and Australia are not the only countries bound up by such conspiracies. However this article is about a particular NZ example, with some general observations thrown in.
The following is an example of an oral history supported by records held in Scotland. A book about this particular story, with supporting documentation is due for release sometime in the year 2000. As information is slowly released and clarified the story on this page is kept updated. For now it is simply an interesting saga with all the intrigue, and bravery of any Icelandic Saga. The heroes in it eventually suffer horrific deaths though this does not prevent their genes from carrying on generation after generation in a new land. In that, perhaps it was a more successful settlement than was the Viking settlement at Brattahild in Greenland.
(Taine Rory Mhor ) Taine Ruaridh Mhor (the big cattle farmer) was delivered by three seagoing longships (birlinns?) to NZ in the 12th Century, with 95 of his family and kinfolk and followers. And sons Rory and Ruaridh. It was deliberate but not by choice. Banishment was not an uncommon feature of the times and in this case the term was for seven generations after he had been incacerated in a dungeon for three years already by his friend King Alexander I of Scotland (reigned 1107-1124AD). Both Islands of New Zealand were chosen because one of the criteria was that the land for the banishment had to be uninhabited at the time (? this seems strange). After 160 years (7 + 1 generations), Scots/Vikings (there were three ships, two of whose captains were Johansen and Christiansen - though the names are Nordic Scandinavian they were probably based in the Firth of Forth) were requested by folk in Scotland to call and see if any of Taine's people had survived. This would have been probably just after the reign of King Alexander III of Scotland (reigned 1249-1286) and during the reign of Edward I of England. He invaded Scotland in 1296. This was a turbulent time in Scotland. It was the time of Wallace, of Bruce, the battles of Stirling Bridge and Falkirk. The execution of Wallace and eventually the Coronation of Robert the Bruce and leading up to the battle of Bannockburn in 1314. Times perhaps when no-one had the time or resources to maintain communication with kinfolk a world away. So back to the story.
Men in Taine's lineage were often well over 7 foot tall and generally had red hair, blue eyes and fair complexions. They had been provided with a very small number of sheep and cattle, and enough provisions to last three months, but no tools. Why such treatment was metted out remains the knowledge of modern descendants. The survival of Taine's group was initially in their own hands and by the will of God. Their existence was meagre. Eventually some tools were obtained by trade with visiting Portuguese, and the colony grew. It is said Taine was responsible for introducing particular trees and that there may be connection between Taine and "Tane" the name used by Maoris for the God of the forest. Taine in old Gaelic is apparently pronounced the same as Tane in Maori.
(The written Maori language is just an Anglicised/Germanic spelling of the oral language Maoris were using when the English language oriented modern European settlement started. Early European documents and manuscriptions use quite different spellings for many Maori words and it is only through later standardisation that current spellings are used.)
The story goes that after sailing from somewhere on the east coast of Scotland (probably Perth/Fifeshire) the fleet of three ships sailed north ot Orkney. They then sailed the length of the Atlantic and around the south of Africa. The voyagers passed by the Australian coast indicated by a large land with a lack of fresh water and the presence of black people. The aim of the voyage was to deposit the people being banished in unpopulated land. The voyagers then reached what is now New Zealand and passed through what is now Cook Strait. This determined there were two separate pieces of land. The voyage then continued south and around the southern reaches of the South island until the land that was similar to Thule (ie Norway and also land west of Greenland and North of Baffin island). This is New Zealands region of fjords now known as Fiordland and it was passed as they again sailed north. They came to a region that had recently been subjected to earthquakes, such that much rock had fallen from high mountains. The outward journey had taken many weeks. On passing the worst of the earthquake damage they came to a narrow coastal plain from which the mountains rose steeply, but which permitted sufficient room between mountains and sea to set up a settlement. The cattle were able to be there without being able to wander away - the mountains behind, the sea in front and streams to north and south prevented wandering. There was plentiful loose rock suitable for building a dwelling in the style of a Scottish black house capable of housing 45 people plus animals. (In a black house the cattle occupied one end of the dwelling and the people the other which had a hearth usually no chimney or windows. The roof of such dwellings were vegetation over beams covered by turf - often quite thick. Smoke from the fire was often just left to filter out through the roof rather than having a full open chimney. This smoky environment provides inhabitants some protection from sandflies/biting midges as would definately be required in South Westland). An alternative temporary dwelling may have made by the typical method of overturning one of the Viking ships and supporting it on two rows of rocks which follow the lines of the ships strakes thus leaving the outline of a boat. This style is common wherever Vikings or seafarers of the time had stop overs. As there were 90 people to be settled in two separate places in the new land, when the initial dwelling was complete, it was time to leave 45 behind with their share of the animals and to take the other 45 north to the other separate piece of land (now known as the North Island). The two troublesome sons Rory and Ruaridh were to be separated and not to have any means of communication. A settlement was established in the North Island and it is quite possible a place somewhere near Kawhia or Raglan was chosen (or even further north near the Hokianga Harbour). The journal of the voyage indicates Mt Egmont (or Taranaki - it is possible Tara naki has gaelic roots, "tara" meaning a high place in gaelic) had smoke coming from it. Being aware what volcanoes could do, the voyagers with the second group of 45 proceeded further north for safety. There is sufficient evidence in the Kawhia Raglan region to suggest the probability of initial settlement in this area, but only the opportunity and execution of open archaeological investigation can confirm this.
(On suggesting lingual remnants within the Maori language of Gaelic/Celtic influences - such as "Tara". It could be mentioned that places such as Manaia peak at Whangarei Heads could also have an element of Gaelic linguistics. Possibly from the later Gaelic settlers from Nova Scotia, but who knows?. How far had a previous Gaelic or Scots lingo contributed to the language of pre-1800 European folk in this country? We could add Portuguese and Spanish to such a query.)
With both groups provided with a dwelling and their animals, plus some plants and seeds, they were now abandoned to the will of God and their ability to survive. The delivery ships sailed off to return to Scotland. The plants were the Orkney Beech (now extinct in Orkney and on the Scottish mainland - was this the tree called "iron wood" that Cumberlands men so effectively eliminated from Scotland?), the Rowan tree and the linen flax plant. There were also rye, oats, barley and probably the grain called beer in Scotland, as well a some grasses (seed) that would help nourish the cattle. Some grass seeds were also used for medicinal purposes and nettle would have been included (nettle grows in the NZ scrub and bushlands to this day).
The first settlement suffered immensely from incessant rains and was ultimately abandoned for better conditions further north. But it was a long time before communication between the two separate groups was achieved as the lack of tools meant conditions and any seacraft were very primitive until the opportunity for trade occurred - which it did with other voyagers (Portuguese?).
So began possibly the first European settlement of NZ. Genetic traces of these Scots folk are still evident in Maori - those of tall stature, red hair and fairer skin, even blue eyes. Often thought to be of modern European Maori interbreeding. Old Maori well know of this older genetic trait that predates modern European settlement by many generations.
As for voyagers across the Indian Ocean reaching the shores of NZ? The west coast of NZ is littered with ancient boat timbers. Those of Spanish or Portuguese caravels, possibly even Phonecian and Egyptian craft and even others. Even helmets, breast plates, and a tamil bell have been found. It appears that these early Scots eventually traded with Portuguese. So what is the honest and real history of our land? We haven't looked closely or intelligently enough and it seems if it is left to the Government and Official historians we'll all be left in the dark for ever.
NZ apparently had at least 4 different peoples living in peace (Waitaha constituent peoples), until the arrival of the later incoming aggressors and cannibals. Even so after 8 generations the returning ships commanded by captains with Viking names found Taine's people. They had survived and even prospered. The ships eventually returned to Scotland with some of the young men, descendants of Taine and his exiles. Some returned to NZ with wives they had taken in Scotland (dates around 1283-92AD). Some remained in Scotlandwith the written records. These records still exist and are carefully preserved. The incoming aggressors and cannibals seem to have eventually succeeded in driving just about all larger forms of life on the islands to extinction. Birds such as the Moa and Huia and even the four varieties of the original human inhabitants in a combination of cannibalism, enslavement and interbreeding / rapine . Will Maoritanga be considered such a benign institution and worthy social form when the time comes to reveal the the truths? The time grows near.
Click here to see ancient settlement site photos
|Remains of a typical Scottish/Celtic homestead. (from 12th Century New Zealand?) A modern native NZ Scottish/Celt surveys the ruins. Drystone walls have been pushed out and over. The typical hearthstone, the rock for the family's patron saint, the rock on which the dwellings protective God would have sat, and others are all still in traditional and recogniseable positions. Other such remains abound. This site is now difficult to reach by sea and little known. The original boat access is much changed and boat access is best achieved from an adjacent bay. It is also in the vicinity of a town, possibly of underground Scara-brae style dwellings, ancient Scottish/Celtic graves and sites of genocide and other atrocities.|
Houses were constructed from stone walls and stone roofs. Over these an overburden of rock, soil and grass was placed. This provided protection from the weather, grazing for stock, and camouflage from the cannibals that grew to power at a much later stage after establishment of the community.
According to one source, this is possibly a site where some of Taine's descendants may have lived before being enslaved and devoured by cannibals. Atrocities perpetrated at this site seem to have included the stealing of women. Insight at one grave (pit) indicated small children between the ages of 2 and 6 or so had been buried alive. It appears possible their mothers were taken, their fathers and brothers probably killed, and eaten. It has been recorded that the perpetrators of such atrocities often staked women to the ground through their feet so they could not run away. They were then apparently forced to watch horrific cannibal feasting on their kin (usually while the person being eaten was still alive - the more usual situation while pieces were cut off and then cooked or consumed raw) while being subjected to repeated rape. May God have mercy on all their souls, perpetrator and victim alike, and may we thank God that such times in this country have long since past. (When one actually consideres how long ago, it is only since the mid 1800's that cannibalism really ceased. Some quarters consider generational curses associated with human consumption are not cleared until the 7th generation later. So from some perspectives many people in NZ society descended from folk who indulged in cannibalism, possibly still suffer from such curses).
Activities such as the above are not unique to Maoris. It should be pointed out that atrocities of similar kind were also recorded as having been perpetrated by Celts during invasions of other lands such as Asia Minor (now Turkey). Head hunting of oponents and canibalism of young children etc having been mentioned by classical historians. There remains archaeological evidence of such and we have much to be pleased about that these things are reviled today. It is also an activity that was once reported to be widespread in the Pacific. We cannot conceal such did occur, there and much more recently here in NZ, even well into the 1800's.
Should descendants of the perpetrators of such heinous crimes as mentioned above, have been displaced from lands acquired by such barbaric methods? Should such people cry foul over land they "sold" to European settlers, or perhaps had confiscated, yet suffered little more than a perceived loss of dignity and access to land they never husbanded or owned? What recompense for their victims? The people removed by murder, rapine and desolation of the worst kind? Dubious land claims recognised by the Waitangi Tribunal have not addressed the situation that will arise when descendants of the early Scottish settlers make their legitimate claims as the original indigenous population. Their documented history of possession starting in the 11th Century when the land had NO other inhabitants will be revealed! Similar claims could no doubt be made against Maori by descendants of Waitaha, Moriori, by Portuguese settlers, even by the Patu-paiarehe or Turehu if any still remain alive. (And strangely enough it seems there may have been reasonably recent sightings of these folk.). How far back do we go do we go to make restitutions? Is the Waitangi tribunal acting out of fairness or has it become rampant revenge on the part of some Maori? Or a means to entrench a Maori aristocracy to overlord it's graft and corruption into a society already labouring under other inequities? Not all the inhabitants of the lands we know as New Zealand were even given the oportunity to view, negotiate or sign the Treaty. Where are the Moriori, Turehu, Patupaiarehe and Waitaha signatories? Unfortunately utu begets utu and ultimately all Maori may lose face and mana as more damming reasons for revenge are found on behalf of the earlier Celtic settlers. Forgiveness is much more appropriate, but some Maori entities, fully aware of the past are seriously endeavouring to destroy all evidence in artifact, land and access, that could re-establish common knowledge of the earlier groups of 'indigenous' peoples - the real Tangata Whenua!. It is interesting to learn that the term Maori only gained recognition during the 1800's and that prior to the expansion of European settlement, the term Tangata Whenua was used by Maori to refer to peoples here before they arrived!
There is much to be resolved, and much much more to be uncovered in New Zealand. Government agencies and Maori alike may think they have gained control but God has ways and means of correcting injustices. Patience, though it wears thin, has it rewards. To lost souls the wait may seem to take forever, but they are always soothed and welcomed by God when redeemed by love and blessings and kinfolk with forgiveness and reconciliation on their hearts, in Jesus name. God is the Judge and His judgement is final. Who will suffer most from loss of mana in this world when the truth is revealed? If the truth is handled openly the past can be let go through understanding and forgiveness.
The Brutal Lands
The books; "The Musket Wars" by R.D.Crosby, ISBN 0-7900-0677-4 (an excellent honest portrayal of the genocidal cannibalistic ravages perpetrated by Maori tribe against tribe during the 1806-1840 period of modern NZ history). In this period the Maori were at last able to decimate the remnants of the Turehu, the Patupaiarehe and Waitaha peoples and the Moriori) and "Pakeha Maori" by Trevor Bentley ISBN 0-14-028540-7 (a book about pre-settler European contacts and inhabitants. The number of "dissident Europeans" with no love of British rule in NZ certainly would have provided the Maori knowledge on how to construct Pa (Ruapekapeka) along the lines of embattlements capable of withstanding cannon bombardment, such as was used in the USA at Ticonderoga and Bunker Hill. Belich's history of Maori military brilliance starts to fall apart with this realisation. It would seem that American whalers would have had the knowledge as would any number of Irish/Scots/English vagabonds that jumped ship, escaped from Van Diemans Land or where ever could easily have exchanged knowledge and provided military knowhow.
These books confirm that some of the early Europeans had to join the Maori indulgence in cannibalism to stay alive. Many of them were eaten anyway. Cannibalism and infanticide, slavery and murder were rampant in Maori society, they threatened to exterminate the Maori (and the original tangata whenua, "people of the land") before the European arrived in significant numbers and Christianity introduced the concepts of value and respect for individual persons, and not just for self and kin. The old cannibalistic lack of value for fellow man or woman or child is a feature that has been contained but it emerges as the subject currently causing great concern in modern NZ society. That of child abuse. Especially the children of one particular sector of our society. The curses of cannibalism and murder carry on until the 7th generation and beyond if requirements of forgiveness and repentance are not met. We are not yet 7 generations away from the curses of cannibalism. The modern excuse by Maori of "suffering from post-colonial trauma" which the descendants of the European settler are being blamed for, is a load of nonsense. The problems lie with the very act of dwelling in the past, ancestral worship, and not having grabbed the opportunity to advance away from the ancient lifestyles and associated curses. Every nation in this world has been subjected to colonisation and immigration as well as emmigration. To use this as an excuse for the failure of many (not all by any means) Maori to adapt to a modern world with appropriate standards of civilised behaviour is reprehensible.
Question: Did any Carthaginians escape and found new colonies? They were after all a seafaring nation as they were Phoenician originally. Phoenician relics have been found in NZ. Apparently Rarotongans have a tradition of Maori being expelled from Rarotanga because of incestuous and canibalistic ways. Much the reasons that gave Rome cause to annihilate Carthage (?). During the First world war Maori troops in Egypt bore striking resemblence to native Egyptians, and apparently picked up the lingo remarkably well. Idle speculation may or may not have any relevance, but whether it does or doesn't cannot be proved until there is objective, serious, open and honest research. Our history is in desperate need of it.
Recent finds in Australia seem to indicate a Phoenician presence in Australia.
This is a precis of a recent report about findings in Australia.Did a Chinese Emperor deliberately have his fleet of sea going junks burnt to prevent contact with peoples with horrific traits that had been found on two Islands far to the South East? Chinese ginger plants grow naturally along rivers in the far north of NZ and some northern Maori often have an oriental appearance.
An ancient Queensland mine and port environs could change world history.
A 3,000-year-old mine and harbour discovered on the coast of central Queensland may change Australian, if not world history. Remaining structures have been determined by a resident to trace back to early mining by Phoenicians around 1000 BC. A closely guarded secret, the discovery was made four years ago. The area's rich mineral deposits may have attracted the Phoenicians to the northern Australian coast more than 2,700 years before Captain Cook. World scientific attention is focusing on the discovery at Freshwater Point, near the big coal ports south of Mackay. There are huge sea walls which appear to be designed to allow exporting by sea. One at Sarina is some 800 metres long. It is huge. The harbour wall and the boulders are polished granite set in place with iron slag cement and copper slags. It is so monstrous three, 200 foot ships could be moored alongside, end to end. The harbour is as calm as a mill pond and beautifully engineered. When archaeologists visit Sarina the structures can be dated more accurately. There is a typical Phoenician temple to their god Baal, and also a cemetery. No detailed excavations have yet proceeded until the archaeologists arrive. Various academics from around the world are intensely interested in it and whatever is disclosed could change world history, let alone our understanding of Australasian history and exploration
... Does this suggest the possibility of links with claimed Phoenician drawings on rocks atop a hill near Taupo in New Zealand?
One source of educated medical opinion suggests that the considering the "selective breeding methods of Maori", ie consumption and decimation / genocide of the less agressive peaceful peoples of the the land - of the real Tangata Whenua, we probably have a breed of genetically aggressive inhabitants that need to be greatly modified by inter-breeding with the more recent and less aggressive but more numerous immigrant peoples. Indeed modern social problems seem to support this opinion but the genes may persist for many generations to come. Perhaps discovery of the complete human genetic code may make improvement possible afterall. Adaption and education seems to show some success, but to-date is often slow and limited. The modern push of Maoritanga could be viewed as regressive and potentially fraught with major problems for the future. There is nothing sporting or civil in the modern haka. It's aggressive, boorish juxtaposition over considerate sporting influences and polite behaviour when greeting people to NZ, bodes ill for the future.
What happened to the tall seven foot plus, skeletons found in a rock cave, to which the entrance was conveniently detonated to cover up the evidence? What about the grave of a tall warrior wearing full armour?
Why are authorities now vociferously trying to deny the facts that confirm and prove the Moriori were not Maori?
Why are early Portuguese artifacts, Phonecian artifacts (or are they Carthaginian?), Celtic and Viking artifacts deliberately destroyed or handed to local Maori Iwi for displosal BEFORE legitimate scientific analysis, genetic DNA fingerfrinting and carbon dating can be done?
Why are all the strange wrecks around New Zealand, ignored, re-buried, destroyed, and not investigated properly?
Where did all the ancient fruit trees around the Kaipara harbour come from? Local lore has it that they have been there from the beginning!
Why are ancient Maori oral records about earlier peoples ignored, hidden, or conveniently supressed, yet equally oral records about land claims are accepted as gospel?
Why do so many early skeletons have characteristics that are definately non-maori (or even any sort of polynesian), when found, simply get handed straight to Iwi who immediatelty secret them away for destructive or secretive disposal?
Why are thousands of pre-Maori sites deliberately being engulfed by Maori claims under covert procedures processed by the Treaty of Waitangi tribunal? Or "by arrangement" with local bodies. or DOC or environmental and government cultural organisations?
Why was Capt. Cook using Portuguese charts when he visited NZ for the first time? Why did these charts show Cook Straight as Portuguese Pass? Why did the map have Portuguse names assigned to various east coast features and places? Why do the East Coast Maori look so Portuguese yet no research is funded to link the facts to the present historical understanding of our country?
Why are numerous constructed stone walls around the country simply written off as "natural rock formations and features"?
Why are strange writings, glyphs, and the like on rocks abounding in waterways and coasts not widely acknowledged as being pre-Maori and associated with known cultures and examples in the old world? Why are Maori given control over waterways where such items are found? Do Maori have or deserve exclusive rights to everything?
Do the Patu pai-arehe people still inhabit remote parts of our country? Some reports, suppressed or ignored of course, indicate they may still be there. Turehu? Te Roroa? Waitaha? there are many names for pre-Maori peoples. Maori elders know this, but avoid giving out the truth or deliberately convey opposite or missinformation about so many things if given a chance.
Why do so many so called Maori designs reflect a strong celtic influence? Were they borrowed from their Celtic predecessors? Or is it that Celtic design and Maori design had a common origin?
Why is "old Maori" suggested to have similarity to much older Celtic languages or an earlier common language? Why do so many place so called Maori place names have such similarity to Gaelic and Celtic language root sounds and meanings? "Tara" in Taranaki is a normal celtic Gaelic term for a place of significance. eg. Tara in Ireland. Can some ancient Gaelic and Celtic scholar investigate the so called Maori place names of NZ and give us insight into their origins? Modern spellings for Maori may inadvertantly conceal linguistic links or borrowed words. Dialectic variance may also add to the puzzle.
Why are some Maoris so scared of the truth? Loss of mana? Mana built on lies and deceit is rubbish! It will be a curse on them. Mana built on willing honesty and truth is far more valuable and beneficial. For people unfamiliar with the NZ term "mana". Mana is a term which covers a multitude of attributes about or concerning the worth of an individual, a family, a tribe etc. It encompasses such as charisma, esprite de corps, social worth, spiritual worth, general standing from personal and public perspectives, power in person, over family, associates, tribe, society, and also in influence over people, things, and events. Consequently there are varying degrees of mana. It can be gained, inherited, or lost.
Why are so many megalithic sites around the country being destroyed? Why is their existence unrecognised, ignored, or even denied ? Why do Maori deny any access to such sites even though public road/access ways exist? Standover tactics forcibly dissuade legitimate investigation.
Why did Maori once admit many many relics, skeletons etc, were "not theirs" or "not of our kind". Why is everything pre-the late 1700's or early 1800's now considered of Maori origin, or assumed to be so, and passed unquestioningly to Maori Iwi?
Why are stone cities kept secret? Why are pine plantations planted to cover and destroy such sites? Cattle, then bull-dozers and forestry logging operations break up, destroy and obliterate valuable ancient sites. Should trees should be removed from old archaeologically significant sites to protect them from obscurity and damage by root systems?
What could Kaiiwi lake reveal, in name and in it's lake bed?
What will happen when ancient 12th century Christian Scottish / Viking settlements are revealed?. Will the documents that record these settlements soon be accepted? Will international courts recognise the validity of claims that will arise as descendants request compensation, or make land claims against Maori and the NZ Government? Will the Maori eventually pay for the rapine, murder and cannibalism and other heinous atrocities? The Moriori have equal rights to make such claims, in spite of a deliberate Government cover up of Moriori society. So too the Waitaha have unresolved claims.
Why is not DNA fingerprinting done on dried heads returned to NZ after being reclaimed from overseas? Why are so many of these heads not of true Maori origin (except possibly having been orginally sold by them?) Many of these show Celtic and Portuguese features. Poor unfortunates perhaps from previous cannibalistic atrocities.
DNA research into Moa hunters reveals polynesian traits, but is that what the researchers were looking for? Did they deliberately or inadvertantly overlook other hybrid traits? Was it just one result that satisfies current opinion at the expense of other anomalous records at other sites aged in the same historical periods?
Unless Maori and the NZ Government come clean and put the records straight, any perception of real or accrued mana will be totally stripped from them and they will become a broken people for all time. Or they can join the rest of NZ on an equal footing and become just one people of a modern and enlightened NZ populace. Let the truth be known!
Why is Te Papa a grand deception, designed to project a deviant bias of what "our place" is? Why are we not permitted to know the truths about the history of NZ?
Just who's head is it?
Two heads among those returned to NZ through the efforts of Tau Henare (Henare = a Maorification of Henry), at the time an MP. These are claimed to be Maori. Where are the DNA test results? Who said they were Maori when they display obviously non-polynesian traits. The head on the left shows red hair, high cheek bones, the Celtic/Nordic teeth clench. Really far more likely to be a European or Celtic head. The head on the right is most likely to be Portguese-Moorish with negroid features. Some suggest the countenance on the latter shows the owner was enduring severe torture at the point of death. Perhaps these are only Maori in as far as they were slaves, or mixed blood from the pre-Maori ethnic groups. Perhaps, given a choice of life, they may not have considered themselves Maori at all? As it is now Maori have claimed them as Maori and that's where they consider forensic evidence should end. We need real and unbiased truth.
Just who are major negotiators, beneficiaries and recipients of Treaty settlements? Are dynastic families with ties in both camps, Maori and European, covertly feathering their own nests - for their personal families of future generations? Who decides to initiate particular claims, who processes them and who decides upon them? Is there collusion? Do the beligerent protectors of Iwi and tribal claims really gain control or are they being used?
Why do we stand by and complacently permit the complicity betwixt some Maori and some persons in Government and bureaucratic posts ruin New Zealand Society?
Why do so many people like myself express such queries? Mostly in private rather than publicly - are we that haunted by corruption in high places and amongst our neighbours? Does someone expect us to believe lies are the truth? Or that deceit and secrecy is open and honest? The fact is, such actions are referred to by most religions, cultures and organisations as corrupt and demonic. Frankly I would expect even an Alien from another world to understand this!
More and more authors are revealing research, facts, statistics, relics and collaborative details. Books raising these questions and showing details, oral and written proof will eventually have the power to alter dogmatic preconceptions. These books are coming as more and more archives reveal the truth. The international nature of the internet, and the networking of people, professional, amateur, cultural enthusiast and even sceptic, will have a real potential for exposure of the truth. The Word is more powerful than the Sword, and Light is stronger than Darkness.
In time answers may be more readily forthcoming and the truth may force itself to the surface in the new millenium. NZ archaeologists and government and local body employees may be freed from the current bondages to Maoridom, the demonic side of Maoritanga and the crazy cultural sensitivities that are such a onesided exchange.
Whether we like it or not the whole matter of Treaty Settlements, the imposition of Maoritanga in Schools, in Public ceremonies and the like, are simply the introduction of bondages to, and a dwelling in the past. It is a negative and demonic revolution that is driving New Zealanders overseas in their thousands, to places like Australia. The media and various Government agencies, even Parliament itself, seem to be governed by negative forces that are corroding and destroying the spiritual and social infrastructure of New Zealand society. A growing maudling, apathetic, un-Godly, Dark-Age and insecure society is threatening to engulf our nation.
The nation needs caring committed persons to foster and nuture spiritual strength against these problems. It also needs action to expose and contain the growing threat to the nation. But success depends on honesty and truth in information, research and attitude in strength by faith, hope and love.
Can you contribute? For a response form indicating your interest, and special experience etc, just click here.
Also, if you would like to add information for historical truth in New Zealand, please send details to: Taine_Response
A report has come through that Cambridge University in the UK released a publication in the last 4 years detailing information about a fleet of 10 vessels that came to these shores around 1340AD-1422AD(?). The names of the ships, lists of people aboard and other details about the voyagers are included. Unfortunately the book is not one most people would ever buy to read. It is a technical historical publication. On these ships were slaves who became by the passage of events and history, to be the modern day people who only since the 1970's now consider themselves tanaga whenua. No wonder they don't want history opened up and no wonder they want the stories of the true tangata whenua kept quiet. How can they this when there are people of the real tangata whenua still present in this country? Folk who are being oppressed and denied their rightful historical status. How can government provide such favouritism and preferential treatment to such people by deliberately misconstruing the intent and detail of the Treaty of Waitangi? At this time more details about this Cambridge University book are being sought. In addition researchers are now aware of lists of names of people banished to NZ in the 10th and 12th centuries from Scotland. This begs the question, Was NZ (whatever it was know by eg The Far Land, The Land of Seals??) a Scottish penal colony in times past? Is this another reason why "official historians" keep old documents secret?
Very, very rarely this web-site attracts some aggressive comments: Mostly these indicate a severe paucity of lingual and literate ability. Where possible (usually there is no return e-mail address) a response is sent and the dialogue opens up a new world and greater understanding to such correspondents. Return comments are often quite different in attitude and some have been very positive indeed! This is all about learning and knowldege.
People who do not learn and continue learning and absorbing new information are usually dead. Those folk who eat and breathe but do not learn, reason and and think with an open mind are the living dead. Keep yourself alive by not living the ways of your ancestors. Learn from their mistakes and remember, they were only people of their day. Don't carry their enmities forward into the future. People of today and the future are not to blame for the past. We can do nothing to change what happened in the past and attempts to do so by blaming folk of today and the future are doomed to create inequities, to forment discontent, hatred and unhappiness leading to civil unrest and war. We should be able to live without such problems, but when we look around the world we sadly see people and nations have not learned. Will New Zealand go the same way? Again? Because the government and certain members of our society are intent on making people of today and the future take the blame for some very selective yesteryear concepts. How can we be so selective about the past but by choosing to ignore so many other things that happened. The truth will be exposed and the current political philosophies need to be overruled so we can move back into the future with equal footing, for all who dwell in New Zealand.
How often do we have to remind ourselves of these concepts? For some, every day would be a good start.
See the original "Treaty of Waitangi" scripts in English and Maori as drawn up by Hobson and orginal translators. Not the significantly modified, post 1980's Labour Government version. We have all been deceived and are being administered in a manner contrary to the original intent of the document produced by Hobson, by which the the British Crown was committed and the Maorifolk of the day also.
Refer to, and read through the details found at web-page: http://www.celticnz.co.nz/hot_mail5.htm
Was Labour duping the population and securing long term power by buying modern Maori support through modifying the treaty. having dropped the preamble, and selective manipulation of the wording of clauses? It looks like it. The republican aims of people in power today, their desire to cast aside the true intent of the Treaty of Waitangi, to abandon the concepts of the Magna Carta upon which the Treaty of Waitangi was based, to force abandonment of the Privvy Council and the commitment the British Crown had to the Treaty, all cast an air of foreboding upon the future of people in this land. Who is behind this? Which multi-nationals or secret groups are pulling the strings? For one thing is certain, our current administrators/government are mere puppets. Which is not unusual in the state of mans affairs.