Serious question.Absolutely nobody has said or written that.
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)?
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances butAgreed.
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all forYes there is, I believe. There were palestiine flags in the march, there were signs concerning gender matters. I watched television closely and those things did not show up when I was watching but those things were there because I saw them in person. That does not mean I agree or disagree with those other issues but yes, it was just an excuse.
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy >(unsuccessfully).
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill
2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
--
Crash McBash
Serious question.
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)?
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances but
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all for
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy (unsuccessfully).
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill
2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
On 2024-11-19, Crash <[email protected]d> wrote:
Serious question.
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
That is a given. The active Left do not give a reason, apart from all else >are racists, etc.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)?
The bit about saying that the principles in the Act will apply.
Also the Government shall pass the laws and Govern, no partnership needed.
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances but
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
It will remove the possibility of Maori sovereignty.
Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all for
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy
(unsuccessfully).
I think the anarchy promoters are larger than a small number.
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill
2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
On 2024-11-19, Crash <[email protected]d> wrote:
Serious question.
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
That is a given. The active Left do not give a reason, apart from all else >are racists, etc.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)?
The bit about saying that the principles in the Act will apply.
Also the Government shall pass the laws and Govern, no partnership needed.
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances but
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
It will remove the possibility of Maori sovereignty.
For perspective, the Hikoi that arrived in Wellington consisted of less than 1 percent of NZ adults, but in fact included lots of children. So total support is tiny, but they have a loud voice. Shades of TPM.Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all for
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy
(unsuccessfully).
I think the anarchy promoters are larger than a small number.
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill
2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
Crash <[email protected]d> wrote:Also didn't see one New Zealand flag in them march only Maori
Serious question.Agreed.
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)? >Absolutely nobody has said or written that.
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances but
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
Yes there is, I believe. There were palestiine flags in the march, there were >signs concerning gender matters. I watched television closely and those things >did not show up when I was watching but those things were there because I saw >them in person. That does not mean I agree or disagree with those other issues >but yes, it was just an excuse.
Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all for
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy >>(unsuccessfully).
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill >>2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
Seymour has consistently argued that he wants the issue discussed and debated -
I can only be suspicious of anybody who refuses to discuss an important matter >but goes further by trying to prevent other people from haveng the discussion. >That is happening, that is a major reason for the Hikoi.
--
Crash McBash
Serious question.I would suspect not. Just another anti government and pro Maori
No opponent of this bill has quoted wording from the Bill to support
the reasons why they oppose it.
Which bit seeks to 'rewrite the Treaty' (as if that was possible)?
Which bit disadvantages Maori? Well I can think of some instances but
this involves removal of privileges the rest of us don't have.
Lastly this Bill will not become law. There was no need at all for
any protest. The fact that protest occurred indicates to me that
there are a huge number of ignorant and gullible people out there who
could afford to take time off for pointless protest, or that there is
a small number of people who will use any excuse to promote anarchy >(unsuccessfully).
Lastly - this is not the first Treaty Principles Bill rodeo (apologies
if needed to Winston Peters). NZF put forward a similar Bill in
2005-2006 (Google 'Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill
2006') which everyone ignored then as they should have now.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 149:27:34 |
| Calls: | 12,091 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 15,000 |
| Messages: | 6,517,580 |