Maori Myths and Legends – Exposing the outrages of Maori racial supremacism
Rahui Hooey Series – Article #2
The New Zealand public has a right to answers and accountability
As we ease into lower COVID-19 Alert Levels, it becomes ever more urgent that official inquiries are undertaken into the actions of the Ardern government and public servants to determine what was done well and what was not so effective in respect of pandemic response. As a society that continues to shoulder joint sacrifices under COVID-19 rigours, we need to know what lessons can be salvaged for the future. A properly-resourced public inquiry headed by a respected and authoritative judicial figure would be a good start. Part of the brief of such an inquiry should be to examine the legality and justification of the government’s policies and actions throughout the Level 3 and 4 lockdown periods.
Other inquiries could be profitably undertaken, for example by the State Services Commission into controversial actions of government departments, including potentially the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, in public support and endorsement of Maori tribal road rahuis imposed during Alert Levels 3 and 4. Similarly the Independent Police Conduct Authority should activate an investigation into open Police complicity with and validation of these illegal roadblocks. Police and other organs of government colluding and conspiring with perpetuation of lawlessness should never willingly be condoned or tolerated in New Zealand. Independent investigations of what happened over the Maori tribal roadblocks have become imperative. Commencement of these investigations can be chivvied along by the public laying complaints with the relevant authorities.
Maori tribal rahui roadblocks instigated across New Zealand under COVID-19 Alert Level 4 lockdown and continued under Level 3 and even Level 2 are illegal. Any remaining such obstructions of freedom to travel demand not only immediate dismantlement, but prosecution of their perpetrators. Apart from Maori racial supremacists, potentially culpable facilitating parties who must be held to public account include Government ministers and MPs, senior New Zealand Police officers, and local government officials, along with me-too elements such as the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (HRC) aiding and abetting after the fact. The position of public officials implicated in supporting scofflaw rahui roadblocks has become untenable and those identified as primarily responsible should held responsible.
HRC self-compromised by supporting Maori road rahuis
One New Zealand organ of government apparently eager to besmirch itself in supporting illegal Maori road rahuis is the HRC, which perhaps in all honesty should rename itself the Maori Supremacism Cheerleader (MSC). Quibbles raised by the HRC on behalf of the rights of other racial and ethnic groups in New Zealand are drowned out by its seemingly obsessive preoccupation with advancing institutionalized Maori racism under the officially sanitized rubric of Treaty partnership.
The taxpayer-funded HRC has recently released a report entitled “Human Rights and Te Tiriti o Waitangi: COVID-19 and Alert Level 4 in Aotearoa New Zealand”. This document betrays the HRC’s ostensible role as a propagandist organ for converting New Zealand into a Maori supremacist apartheid state. Many New Zealanders have yet to grasp how morally, culturally, and intellectually paru their country is becoming thanks to contaminating Maori racial supremacism and its non-Maori kuri enablers. They can make a start by reading the HRC’s report and associated media release.
One pretext the HRC report has been published under is to advocate the essential role that human rights have to play in national health crisis emergencies such as the COVID-19 Level 4 lockdown. The report concludes with a rebuke to the government:
“One of the striking features of the government’s response to COVID-19 is the almost total silence about human rights. Yet explicit consideration of human rights could have prevented some of the shortcomings identified in this brief report. They help to strike fair balances and identify proportionate responses. At a time of crisis there is a heightened risk that mistakes will be made. Explicit attention to human rights can help to prevent mistakes, but not if they are absent from crisis management, decision-making and policy processes.
“During Alert Level 4, government sometimes talked about “a principles-based approach”, but human rights, agreed by successive governments and steeped in universally accepted principles, did not appear to be an explicit part of the discussion.” (p. 17)
Well said about the importance of universalistic human rights, but unfortunately for the HRC, these fine words and noble sentiments are completely undermined when elsewhere in the report it states not just once (p. 4), but twice (also p. 8) outright support for race-based illegal vigilantism on New Zealand roads. The second, longer example is quoted here, which in parts is word-for-word with the first:
“Positive practice on which to build
“Te Tiriti o Waitangi requires proactive support from the government for rangatiratanga, alongside ensuring equity of outcomes for tangata whenua. Te Tiriti and human rights provide for co-existing systems of governance: Crown kawanatanga authority and iwi and hapu rangatiratanga.
“During the COVID-19 crisis it has been encouraging to see examples of Tiriti partnership working in practice and strong leadership being exercised by both partners. Where responsibilities overlap, there has been cooperation reinforced by a strong sense of shared purpose to contain the coronavirus and to protect Maori and all New Zealanders.
“A positive example is the iwi and hapu-led rahui checkpoints, carried out in a spirit of collaboration with police, councils and civil defence [our emphasis]. The Commission welcomes the Police approach of recognising iwi concerns and seeking to model Tiriti partnership. The Commission encourages constructive partnership between Police, iwi and hapu as the response to COVID-19 develops over time.”
The brazen institutionalized Maori racism corrupting the HRC’s mission is betrayed in the quoted passage, which is nothing short of a charter for racial separatism in law enforcement across New Zealand. The HRC has effectively endorsed Maori tribal supremacists breaking the law by setting up illegal rahui roadblocks – coyly called “checkpoints” as a mendacious figleaf initially modelled publicly by the recently installed Commissioner of Police. This toxic position embraced by the HRC contradicts the basic rights of New Zealanders under, for example, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 to travel freely on public roads.
The Act’s relevant section 18 Freedom of movement subsection (1) reads, “Everyone lawfully in New Zealand has the right to freedom of movement and residence in New Zealand.” The HRC’s same position flouts the facts that only Police can set up temporary roadblocks as per section 35 of the Policing Act 2008 and that Police powers to detain people on roads under COVID-19 restrictions stem from section 72 of the Health Act 1956. The government and Police have set out these legal grounds for COVID-19 roadblocks and thereby the appropriate treatment for illegal roadblocks.
Puffed up Maori tribal vigilantes running their amateur, self-appointed rahui roadblocks have none of these lawful powers. What these racist roadblockistas have done instead – in deliberate defiance of COVID-19 national health crisis restrictions on non-essential movement and social distancing, and in some cases in open complicity with co-tribal patched gangs potentially enabled thereby to ply their criminal trades across these “border controls” – is to work towards Maori tribal sovereignty to the destruction of New Zealand’s constitutional framework.
The HRC’s pro-illegal roadblock stance does not just endorse exclusive race-based privilege for Maoris to break the law with impunity in pursuit of their private interests and political purposes. It also effectively whitewashes involvement by central government, Police, Civil Defence, and local councils at the unacceptable price of abrogating the human rights of all New Zealanders to be free of racial discrimination in how the law is applied. Without the enabling complicity of state actors, the Maori road rahuis could not have been sustainably maintained at the foreseeable and unacceptable cost imposed of raising the risk of COVID-19 community transmissions to New Zealanders, Maoris included, through indiscriminate interpersonal roadside encounters. Apparently all this is just fine and dandy with the HRC.
Wilful blindness to the dangers of institutionalized Maori racism
What the HRC wholly overlooks in its schizoid attempt to argue for both universal human rights in New Zealand and race-based Maori tribal tyranny concerning the COVID-19 national emergency is that in the former the law is upheld and in the latter it is violated. Effective enforcement of universal human rights is contingent upon determined universal application of just law. Human rights are among the first casualties of the state taking an arbitrary, pick-and-choose attitude to law enforcement and permitting race-based exceptions such as has been allowed to occur in respect of Maori road rahuis.
Letting this sort of outrage pass under the misguided notion that it is definitionally benign for New Zealand government authorities to co-operate unstintingly with privileging Maoris over the rest of society is just the thin end of the wedge. All that this kind of official kuristic complicity can lead to is creation of an anti-democratic, authoritarian, racially discriminatory state in which universal human rights have no real meaning or application outside of what is selectively granted or withheld at the arbitrary whim du jour of elected, uniformed, and bureaucratic servitors of institutionalized Maori racism.
Of all institutions in this country that should know that catastrophic risk and be most ready to warn and rally the public against the dangers of corrupting democracy and perverting human rights by carving out depraved race-based exemptions from compliance with the rule of law, it should be the HRC that steps out and sounds the clarion call. But not our MSC, which evidently believes that the official name for our country is Aotearoa New Zealand and that the Treaty of Waitangi is “the country’s constitutional foundation” (p. 17).
Absolutely, official inquiries are necessary into COVID-19-rationalized Maori tribal sovereigntist illegal rahui roadblocks and their fellow-travelling state enablers. One of the parties summonsed should be the HRC/MSC to answer for its hypocritical support of racially-sanctioned lawbreaking to the detriment of universal human rights in New Zealand. In the interim, the Chief Human Rights Commissioner has become credibility-impaired in his ostensible role as taxpayer-funded defender of equal application of the rule of law without fear or favour to all New Zealanders by signing off on the flawed, racist report. Like the Commissioner of Police, he has to answer to the New Zealand public on why there is apparently one law for all New Zealanders to follow except when they happen to have a Maori ancestor.