• For those interested in our history

    From Tony@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 19 21:34:45 2024
    XPost: nz.politics

    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that result from the "treaty industry".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Sat Jul 20 10:33:59 2024
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that >result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret
    the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English
    version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation
    by English speakers in one night.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sat Jul 20 04:39:49 2024
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that >>result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret
    the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English
    version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation
    by English speakers in one night.
    No, it shows that the only one that matters is the one signed on the day. All else are irrelevant.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Sat Jul 20 20:30:19 2024
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 04:39:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that >>>result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret
    the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English >>version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation
    by English speakers in one night.
    No, it shows that the only one that matters is the one signed on the day. All >else are irrelevant.

    The majority did sign the treaty written in Maori, but some signed an
    English language version, and there are some conceptual differences
    between the two. There has however been a court determination that the
    Maori version signed by the majority should be taken as conclusive;
    the English version was explained to those that signed it in Maori in
    any event. I am glad you agree, Tony

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sat Jul 20 09:29:34 2024
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 04:39:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that >>>>result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret
    the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English >>>version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation
    by English speakers in one night.
    No, it shows that the only one that matters is the one signed on the day. All >>else are irrelevant.

    The majority did sign the treaty written in Maori, but some signed an
    English language version, and there are some conceptual differences
    between the two. There has however been a court determination that the
    Maori version signed by the majority should be taken as conclusive;
    the English version was explained to those that signed it in Maori in
    any event. I am glad you agree, Tony
    But I don't. You are deliberately ignoring the intent of the article. But we all know that you do that any time your political dogma is questioned.
    The article is clear, and you are rwisting it, the author is way more educated than you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Sun Jul 21 13:00:53 2024
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 09:29:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 04:39:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions that >>>>>result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret >>>>the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English >>>>version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation >>>>by English speakers in one night.
    No, it shows that the only one that matters is the one signed on the day. All
    else are irrelevant.

    The majority did sign the treaty written in Maori, but some signed an >>English language version, and there are some conceptual differences
    between the two. There has however been a court determination that the >>Maori version signed by the majority should be taken as conclusive;
    the English version was explained to those that signed it in Maori in
    any event. I am glad you agree, Tony
    But I don't. You are deliberately ignoring the intent of the article. But we >all know that you do that any time your political dogma is questioned.
    The article is clear, and you are rwisting it, the author is way more educated >than you.

    Tony, you said: ". . it shows that the only one that matters is the
    one signed on the day. All else are irrelevant."

    That version was of course written in Maori . . .

    Do you now resile from that statement?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 21 03:51:25 2024
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 09:29:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 04:39:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 21:34:45 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/07/bruce-moon-new-zealand-school-trustees.html
    Once more Bruce Moon writes about the real Treaty and the distortions >>>>>>that
    result from the "treaty industry".

    The article confirms that the Maori text should be used to interpret >>>>>the agreement that was made by the Maori Chiefs, and not any English >>>>>version, including one that was claimed to have been an interpretation >>>>>by English speakers in one night.
    No, it shows that the only one that matters is the one signed on the day. >>>>All
    else are irrelevant.

    The majority did sign the treaty written in Maori, but some signed an >>>English language version, and there are some conceptual differences >>>between the two. There has however been a court determination that the >>>Maori version signed by the majority should be taken as conclusive;
    the English version was explained to those that signed it in Maori in
    any event. I am glad you agree, Tony
    But I don't. You are deliberately ignoring the intent of the article. But we >>all know that you do that any time your political dogma is questioned.
    The article is clear, and you are rwisting it, the author is way more >>educated
    than you.

    Tony, you said: ". . it shows that the only one that matters is the
    one signed on the day. All else are irrelevant."

    That version was of course written in Maori . . .

    Do you now resile from that statement?
    You are completely ignoring the intent of the article. Read it again and get some help in understanding it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)