Aotearoa is now multicultural but te tiriti was between maori and the crown. Why is the government involved where is the crown

Garbage

And now I understand why I still like the DiCaprio Romeo and Juliet movie so much

Garcia Sharon Martin Laura Lopez Barbara

Love this song, Play your performance for my children on the weekends. Its good to see you all doing the actions too!

Hernandez Betty Garcia Shirley Harris Michael

Really enjoy all your songs, using your actions in our kapa haka rōpū. Ngā mihi. Noeline NCA Nelson

Love this song MANUNUI primary school did it and it was one the best performance I ever seen and my Koro dalvanius prime made Poi e so I've seen a lot of talent but that specific waits/haka stands out 💯

He is an asshole

This man should be in jail. He was a dictator,lier n Chinese CCP puppet to ruin Tibetan society for that’s what he did this idiot man

བཀའ་དྲིན་ཆེ། Thank you sir.

Colin explains this fantastic the management should be in prison

I think that the Donald Trump case carries both offences of attempt and battery and the intensity of murder mens rea is also relevant . Could the `but for ` rule the intervening event / the police presence / apply in these cases you mentioned ?

Without looking at the treaty ; THINK ; A people of warriors who continually go to war with each other agree to be governed by a minority of a foreign people they don't respect ? Racists useing racism to degrade and nullify indigenous rights !

Hello, do you have the chords of the song please ?

Propaganda. Yawn.

Oi am the Witchfinder General o' the Colenai o' Massachusetts Bay.

💌💌💌💌💌

Shes obviously bought into the marxist tribalist narrative, so even though she can research, write and talk and is intelligent, shes got the tribal blinkers on. Much like most of the woke academia.

What evidence does he have to be so sure of how Shakespeare actually spoke?

What part of giving absolutely forever the government over their lands does she not understand? How does the crown have absolute government over Maori land without chiefs, seeding sovereignty? In the Maori version article two it says Maori will get the protection and rights of British subjects. Do British subjects get to be Chiefs? Do they get to have sovereignty separate from the government separate from the crown? No, they get property rights and the right to develop and utilize the resources on their land. A property owner is a chief of the land of one’s family on that land, but not the government of the country article one clearly seeds, government forever to the crown over Maori land. You can’t have chiefs having total sovereignty and have a government with authority to govern over their lands. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever and chiefs at the time that didn’t sign clearly saw this and didn’t sign because of it. She promotes revisionism. She promotes presentusm. She promotes neo-Marxist activism masquerading as academia it’s not about narratives it’s about article 1 of the treaty. It’s very very clear what that says article one is the first an overriding article that sets the context for the rest of the treaty. That is the first time of the crown, absolute government over Maori lands meaning over the Chiefs over the Maori people it’s very very simple trying to whine back the clock and pretend that’s not the fact is disingenuous .

In the Maori version article two it says Maori will get the protection and rights of British subjects. Do British subjects get to be Chiefs? Do they get to have sovereignty separate from the government separate from the crown? No, they get property rights and the right to develop and utilize the resources on their land. A property owner is a chief of the land of one’s family on that land, but not the government of the country article one clearly seeds, government forever to the crown over Maori land. You can’t have chiefs having total sovereignty and have a government with authority to govern over their lands. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever and chiefs at the time that didn’t sign clearly saw this and didn’t sign because of it.

There’s nothing in the treaty about grievances. It’s astonishing that the focus is on grievances and not the benefits of colonization. The first thing that she starts talking about is grievances article 1 of the Maori version of the treaty of Waitangi clearly states that the Chiefs give total government to the crown over their lands forever. It’s very clear there’s no ambiguity. It doesn’t mention that the Chiefs give the right to Gavin over European settlers. It clearly states governance forever over their lands. The Chiefs lands, Maori land. When Maori breached this clause in the treaty, the crown acted to stop that rebellion, acting to enforce the governments that had been seeded via the treaty. Any grievances that did come about clearly need to be addressed. Those such should be addressed in respect to the transgression of Maori not just the actions of the crown. It’s curious that there’s no talk about the land theft and genocide during the musket wars. There’s no recognition of how that impacted Maori in the past and now.

🗻✨🪷Namo Buddha Namo Nama🪷✨🗻

A consittution should be worded to define how a country is governed. And should be based on democracy One man one vote, equal rights for all

The Maori version of Ti Tiriti is the only correct one. The English versions are rogue versions based on what James Freeman sent to England The Littlewood Treaty found in the 90's is Busby's final draft of the treaty which was translated into maori by the Williams

I love Sir Evans.

Wow what a fantastic video. I am so pleased some one has spoken out about the mine and what went wrong. On the day of the first explosion I said to my boy what had happened and what needed to happen next. I grew up in Canterbury. My father and grandfather owned the coalgate mine. I knew the old mines inspector Harry Bell.

I knew that there were sex jokes in Shakespeare, but I didn't know that some of them don't come off to most modern audiences because the performers aren't using the right accent.

BALDER DASH, ZIONISM.

Utu... balance and reciprocity. Disastrous for tribes.

Hardly surprising that the Tribunal came to the conclusion that chiefs did not cede their sovereignty when the 'two treaty' principle is the basis of the Tribunal view of the Treaty. Arguably, a projection onto the past rather than asking what the treaty really meant to them at that time [as oppsoed to what we think it means now]. In rejecting the authority of the Crown to make laws over the whole of the territory of NZ, the Tribunal's judgement is bordering on the ridiculous, for this was the only basis on which Britain was going to govern NZ. Maybe that's what makes it easier to believe... for surely it can't be ridiculous... but then again, tell a fib big enough... lol

If the Treaty is about one thing it is about the cession of sovereignty to the British. The missionaries and Busby responsible for translating the final draft would've had this uppermost in mind. Therefore there has to be something drastically wrong with this notion of 'two' treaties... that has only been foistered on this country since the '80s.

Justice will bring peace and prosperity to the common man , , ,🤙

Old school ❤

For the algorithm

Thank you so much. I'm a linguistics student with an eye towards pronunciation and accent training. The focus on accent and identity, empowerment, home, land, roots... It's incredibly valuable to me. The point on the "10%" filled in with the actor's voice is excellent. I've been interested in David and Ben Crystal and OP for years now, before I ever considered going back to school for linguistics, because of the video of the two of them discussing OP at a theater, so it's interesting to come back from a different perspective.

Hi there. Can you please share ngā kupu waiata?

If Hitler told his generals that he gave the order to the SS for mass murder of men, women and children. Why do people keep saying that no one has ever found a direct order for the holocaust? If he said this about the Poles, then certainty this applies to Jews as well. Because the NAZIS consider the jews to be even worse then the Poles in racial terms. So why do they say he never gave the order himself?

Civilians they were losing because the ' victorys' kept coming closer to home

I don't think the,"culture of death" worked very well. The evidence is seen by the fact that when war was declared, nobody paraded out in the streets like Ww1

The Reichmaster of injections, Theodore Morrel

Hitler literally thought his job was only to prepare the Germans for, and launch the apocalyptic race crusade that was it's destiny. the NAZIS and government generally was only needed to point the way. This is why they have no real 'theory of government', Hitler was almost totally uninterested in the day to day function of his own dictatorship, he couldn't care less about the details as long as it succeeded to launch the struggle.

In my opinion, I found Shakespeare to be stuffy and cold... this OP version i find warm, engaging and ENERGETIC!

Romantic ideas of what could've been, that ironically translate into veiled confessions of faith is amazing! Hence, Nazi sympathizers. Sympathize for them in what areas, considering the gargantuan enormity of their crimes against humanity? Speer escaped death to become a celebrity, Goring committed suicide like his leader and the rest were pursued by Nazi hunters. And if there's any alleged argument towards the legitimacy of national socialism; how so, when they were racists who practiced a religiopolitical form of Ariosophy? They turned on the people of the book, and enacted genocide on their own citizens. They are guilty of possibly the greatest art theft in modern history. Hitler as an antichrist tried to replace Jesus as Lord over Germany. I don't understand how the passage of time can assuage the rage, that stems from their cold and calculated effort for global domination? I thought that the Axis were the bad guys, and that the Allies were the good guys?

The "official" Treaty is "not" the Treaty that was originally written in Maori in 1840. People (mainly politicians) over the years, destroyed the message of the Treaty. For a start they are Articles not Principles. These Principles have never been defined. The Treaty was "never" a partnership!! The Maori words you use are a "construct" produced by the then missionaries to form a view for Maori as to what loss of Sovereignty meant. The settlers, immigrants and Maori are now not unique. They were made all British citizens with "equal rights" and subsequent property rights. Prior to 1840 Maori owned no property (land). It was taken and held by conquest...Tribal war. In fact the Treaty has outlived itself.The days of the then people, Native and settlers along with the "crown" have gone!! Its now a political football. Parliament rules the day. Not Maori. If this is what young minds are being taught. Then God help us!

Looked in for five minutes and stayed for the whole thing. Wonderful speaker. Fascinating.

Great Leader Dr. Lobsang Sangay la 🙏🌹🙏❤️🌹🙏

47:19-47:35: "He's from Halicarnassus". He might as well have said 'He's from Barcelona' (Fawlty Towers reference)...