In terms of political tactics, there's really very little difference in the way that Mao's ideological officers propagandised 1940's & 50's China into a totalitarian state, in comparison to the crude manner in which it's being done presently in New Zealand. Rather than using the naïve, emotive slogans and sterile "gems of wisdom" from Mao's "little red book", we have a bastardised version of the Treaty of Waitangi daily and continuously crammed down our throats. Treaty ideological officers enter freely into our educational institutions, government departments or general workplaces to force us into a state of compliance and sworn allegiance to their nouveau, revamped version of colonial history and the "treaty". Like Mao's so-called "happy workers" we are expected to smile compliantly and obey dutifully, in mock adoration of how wonderful everything now is, as our lives, futures and freedoms turn to pig-swill slop before our eyes.

Failure to admit our guilt as imperialists, or show appropriate contrition then acceptance of the "brave new world" ahead under Maori supremacy, can result in a career going belly-up, a qualification being withheld or a well-earned promotion being given away to someone who is considered to be more "culturally-sensitive". All over New Zealand we're being bludgeoned, enticed, cajoled or blackmailed into accepting the new, "revamped and improved" Treaty of Waitangi. The "Mission Statements"* of all of our government departments are built around compliance to the revised treaty, which was concocted, in stages during the last three decades by activists with a background in Marxist manipulation tactics. Many of the early era Maori activists (circa mid-seventies...Donna Awatere, etc.) went overseas for ideological training in, either, Cuba, China, the Soviet Union or for weapon's training in Libya. Our revamped Treaty of Waitangi and newly rewritten (revised) colonial history represent main strategic tools to disarm the New Zealand public and render them guilt-ridden, then vulnerable to dramatic social, political and economic (extortionist) change.

*Updated Footnote: In an unprecedented and very surprising move, The New Zealand Department of Health dropped all reference to The Treaty and its Principles from their Mission Statement in the early months of 2007. By late January - early February 2008, it seems that all other government departments followed suite. Departmental heads, obviously under advice from their lawyers and historians, realised that there was no documented evidence to sustain the "treaty interpretation" that had been forced upon them, to which all policy decisions had to comply. Government departments could now "tear this horrible grievance-industry monkey off their backs". They were now empowered to clear out the deadwood that had effectively crippled them, held them to ransom and divested them operational funding. For the first time in years they could get on with the job of running a department properly, without being subjected to exploitative grievance-industry extortionist racketeering, which stifled, milked and controlled their every move or policy decision.

But Treaty 2-con-U design executives and historians had been put "on notice" long before their Pandemonium Shadow show took to the road to spout Marxist dialectical pseudo-history in January 2006. For over two years The One New Zealand Foundation Inc., had many letter exchanges with the Treaty of Waitangi Information Unit, demanding that they address the outstanding issue of Governor William Hobson's final English draft of the Treaty of Waitangi. Although this very important document had been "lost" for 149-years, it was positively located again in 1989. The One New Zealand Foundation argued that, before any treaty-based educational roadshow could be undertaken, Hobson's final English draft, the mother document of Te Tiriti O Waitangi, had to be included, such that full understandings of the Treaty of Waitangi were possible.

What had Hobson wished to convey to the chiefs in the final English draft? How had Reverend Henry Williams translated those English words into the Maori tongue? In a fair and just world of checks and balances it was essential that the two documents, in the two languages, be included to sit side-by-side in any assessment of what the treaty meant. The One New Zealand Foundation Inc. stated in the plainest language possible, that it was utterly irresponsible for The Treaty of Waitangi Information Unit to initiate any programme to educate the public about the treaty and, at the same time, exclude Governor Hobson's final English draft.

But, to tell the actual truth about the treaty or to represent it in any form of valid historical context was never the purpose of the Treaty 2-con-U roadshow in the first place. Its "mission statement" or prescribed purpose was to distort, fudge and generally reinforce a politically-expedient Marxist interpretation of the treaty, so that it meant something altogether different than what its British authors or Maori signatories intended and clearly understood it to be in 1840. It had clearly been fashioned as a document of unification that provided the foundation upon which an egalitarian society could be built, which is exactly what our present gaggle of social-engineers don't want.

Again, The Treaty 2-con-U personnel were "put on notice" during their first day launch of the exhibit at Taupo. Members of the National Front Organisation pointed out to the media that Governor William Hobson's final English draft of the Treaty of Waitangi had not been included in the exhibit.

Beyond the time of the Taupo launch of January 14th 2006, members of the One New Zealand Foundation Inc. followed the Treaty 2-con-U exhibit from region to region in an attempt to alert local media about the huge omissions or fraudulent "history" being represented as factual, within the government exhibit. Regional newspapers were given documented evidence that Treaty 2-con-U was preaching pseudo-history and thinly disguised propaganda and spending large sums of taxpayer's funds in the process. The whole show was a sham and insult to the intelligence of the New Zealand public. How dare the government do this to us...and force us pay for the sorry, dumb-down exercise to boot!

Let's explore the so-called historical and treaty related "truths" or facts expounded by the Treaty 2-con-U exhibit and their "on-the-floor" personnel.

Under Marxism, it's obligatory to have "Imperialist" invaders and bogeymen to blame all of your daily problems on. Life used to be so good... until the land-grabbing, despotic "Imperialists" came and stripped away our pride, possessions, culture and freedom... right?

The general tone of the Treaty 2-con-U exhibit was that the British or Europeans from other nations, like the American whalers, were a pack of drunken, unruly or conniving bastards...the caste-off flotsam and jetsam, floating garbage of the European nations. The township of Kororareka in the Bay of Islands, before 1840, was exactly what Hongi Hika and other chiefs had allowed it and wanted it to be in order to run their lucrative business enterprises. Sailors, particularly whalers, after long and arduous tours of duty at sea, wanted women and unrestrained shore-leave-drunken-revelry. The chiefs gladly provided just such an environment at the Bay of Islands and catered to all such needs in exchange for muskets and other much sought after trade goods.

Apart from the comings and goings of itinerant, debauched, seafaring partygoers, there were also many landlubber settlers of dignity, morality and quality. They themselves formed into a reasonably strong vigilante force to police Kororareka and deal with abuses of law and order. Serious crimes could result in the perpetrator being cuffed and sent to Sydney to stand trial before a British judge. Less heinous, but reasonably serious, unsociable behaviour or offence could result in a session of "tarring and feathering", accompanied by a sound thrashing and permanent exile from the community for the offender. The stalwart residents of Kororareka weren't to be messed with and didn't allow themselves to be overly victimised. There was strong, underlying order amidst the chaos of "the hellhole of the Pacific".

In going through the Treaty 2-con-U exhibit, one gained the impression that the 1830's British contingent, in particular, were little more than robber-baron opportunists, constantly seeking ways to defraud the poor Maori and steal all that Maori possessed. Several panels contained carefully crafted language, the overall impression of which was to portray the British as despotic imperialists and the Maori as their innocent, duck-'n-dive unfortunate victims.

A Treaty 2U video depicts the British as gawkish-hawkish toff schemers, planning their impending rape and plunder of New Zealand. The actors and their antics for these clips were, quite obviously, carefully chosen and crafted to instil despise, contempt and a certain nausea towards the British, while at the same time depicting the Maori as noble and full of integrity. In truth, it was invariably the British purchasers that got ripped off, as Maori sold the same lands over and over to different people. It was this exasperating problem that Hobson attempted to correct in his wording of Article II of the Treaty of Waitangi, wherein he stated: 'The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs & tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property. But the chiefs of the Confederation and the other chiefs grant to the chiefs Queen, the exclusive right of purchasing such land as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to sell at such prices as shall be agreed upon between them and the persons appointed by the Queen to purchase from them.' (See Hobson's Final English Draft).

Most New Zealanders don't realise that "Full and Final Settlements" for all grievances were completed by 1947 by the Fraser Government, after long years of huis and discussions with Tainui, Hgai-Tahu and others. Beyond that time there were only a few WWII military bases to be returned to their rightful owners at the end of WWII hostilities. To see the 1944 "Full & Final" settlement Act of Parliament dealing with Ngai-Tahu's claim on the South Island, CLICK HERE.

For further verification of these "Full & Final Settlements" under the Fraser Government see the paper prepared for the Lange Cabinet by Richard Hill of the Justice Department, The Major Full and Final Settlements.

Most New Zealanders don't realise that we have, languishing in our archives and places like LINZ (Land Information New Zealand), full sale agreements for whole provinces like Taranaki, which was purchased by Hobson from Te Wherowhero of Waikato in 1842 (the pre-treaty conquerer and owner). The fact is that the same lands, throughout most of New Zealand, were sold many times over by Maori and paid for repeatedly by the government, the New Zealand Company or individual settler groups (as in Taranaki). Most present-day land claims are outright fraud that could not be sustained or proven in any fair and impartial court. Moreover, the settlements have already been paid out and finalised several times over in most cases. Dr. Michael Belgrave, former historian working on Waitangi Tribunal claims, states: ' is necessary to gain an understanding of how the Treaty of Waitangi has been subject to the same sort of reinvention as the particular claims of different groups'.

He goes on to say: 'It would come as a surprise to most New Zealanders to learn that for almost every case examined before the Waitangi Tribunal since 1985, there have been previous court proceedings, or commissions of inquiry (including royal commissions), recommendations, negotiations and even an extensive record of settlement or partial settlement. The Waitangi Tribunal hearings are only the latest in a long line of legal investigations of Maori claims...' (see Historical Friction - Maori Claims & Reinvented Histories, pp 3 & 7, Auckland University Press, 2005).

The only arena where these claims can succeed is in the exclusively "all-Maori" and very biased Waitangi Tribunal, where historical truth has to give way to Maori claimant expectations that are based on little more than emotional outbursts, recently concocted oral traditions, fudged history, fake wahi-tapu's, fraudulent whakapapas and no right to cross-examine or question the testimony of an elder, etc.


Near the front entryway was a panel depicting the British firing their ship's cannons, upon arrival at a harbour, solely to intimidate the local Maori. Of course the cannonade exercise had nothing to do with the customary practice of heralding one's arrival for trade or contact...sort of like knocking on the front door of someone's house, rather than intruding unexpectedly and unannounced like a thief or malevolent.

This picture looks more like a party celebration, where everyone is having fun, rather than any kind of intimidation exercise. In truth, the sounding of cannons was a gesture of respect by the newly arrived visitors from overseas and an invitation to communicate openly in an atmosphere of mutual safety, well-being and friendship. Treaty 2-con-U, once again, turned a positive into a negative.

In a panel devoted to "Trade" the ill-treatment of Maori crew on whaling boats is emphasised. The fact is that many Maori sought work as crew on various types of sailing ships for years and many made lifelong professions as sailors plying the world's oceans. Life aboard ship was always difficult and taxing for everyone, whatever their land of origin and discipline was generally strict. The tone of the exhibit is deliberately and unfairly harsh, once again, to accentuate negative elements and the expected, chronic, victimisation of Maori. This seafaring employment for Maori was, for the most part, positive interaction, beneficial to all, rather than slave-class exploitation as portrayed by Treaty 2U. Life at sea crewing the whaling ships was certainly preferential, for many Maori, to life on land in New Zealand as a constantly hunted adversary. It's quite certain that many Maori loved the seafaring profession and the opportunities for travel and adventure that it offered. Here are some quotes:

'Apart from trading goods, individuals could also acquire personal income and experience by joining the crew of foreign sailing vessels. Maori eagerly joined sealing and whaling ships once they appeared in New Zealand waters and acquired much sought after skills. Even the Nga Puhi chief Ruatara had spent several years working on whaling ships, although his chief purpose was apparently to reach England and visit George III. One Maori became chief mate on the Australian ship Francis, and Tupai, also known as Mr. J. G. Bailey, whom Pollack described as "Chief of the tribe of Waitangi", was chief officer of the 300-tons whale ship Earl Stanhope. Pollock also came across a man from the East Cape at New York in the 1830s. This man, who had represented himself as a superior chief, Pollock knew to be a slave who was very anxious that his true status should not be revealed. Some of these travelers did not return to New Zealand. Some died during their travels while others chose to settle overseas. Those travelers who did return typically brought presents for their relatives and chiefs to reaffirm their relationships with the home community. This seems to have been accepted in terms of utu for the loss of their labour while away

Whether as wages or on the lay system, which represented a proportion of the whale oil or sealskins obtained, Maori seamen were paid personally like other crew members. After British annexation, individual wages would also be paid to Maori quarrymen, masons, and labourers employed on government works' (See Chiefs of Industry by Hazel Petrie, pg. 38, Auckland University Press 2006).

Another panel titled: Political Relationships, in parts, uses carefully crafted language to portray sinister, behind the scenes, scheming agendas by the British. Within the panel it says: Getting Desperate - in 1837 intertribal fighting that also involved pakeha broke out in the Bay of Islands. Busby asked the British government to help. They sent a naval captain, William Hobson to investigate. Hobson knew his government didn't want to intervene. He reported back advising a scheme [good Marxist use of language, which seeds the thought that Hobson was a schemer] that would make just a few areas British. It would make a limited intrusion on Maori independence. Busby suggested a British protectorate over the whole country.

Hobson's Choice. Hobson admitted to his wife after his 1837 visit that he really believed New Zealand should be taken as a British colony, because the country had valuable resources. He commented...'the Aboriginal race are rapidly diminishing in numbers, the day is not far distant when that country will be wholly occupied by white people'.

Some Marxist really worked his or her propaganda magic over this panel to convey wrong impressions to the reader. Many sentences are so ambiguous that they can be read two ways, but if the social-engineer historian is challenged, he or she can retreat to a position of, "Oh no, you didn't understand what I said... I never meant it to be interpreted that way"!

So how should they have explained the incident? Firstly, war had broken out between members of the Confederation of United Chiefs, Titore and Pomare II. In this conflict the settlers were geographically situated dangerously close to the action, but they were not themselves combatants, participants or marshalling any forces to take sides [as much as the Marxist panel writers, by use of ambiguous language, would like you to believe]. British Resident Busby relayed an urgent message to the governor of NSW to send help, for the safety of the settlers.

Captain Hobson was sent over in command of H.M.S. Rattlesnake. Upon arrival he used the adept assistance of Reverend Samuel Marsden and other leading settlers, probably including Pomare II's close friend James Reddy Clendon, to bring about an end to the fighting. Titore had died in the intertribal conflict, but a delicate peace was secured by Hobson's timely intervention and experience in the art of diplomacy.

Hobson, after this time and at the behest of settlers, missionaries and chiefs alike, all of whom were sick and tired of the constant warring, wrote a lengthy report recommending that Britain should, finally and belatedly, agree to forming a colony in New Zealand. More than any other group, the signatory chiefs of the Confederation of United Chiefs wanted to move from their 1835 position of chiefly sovereignty, to a new position of sovereignty under the British monarch. Chiefs like Tamati Waka Néné and Patuone were convinced that Maori had no other recourse if their people were to survive. Danger lurked on every side for these northern chiefs and their tribespeople. Southern Maori were arming up with muskets to attack Ngapuhi in revenge of Hongi Hika's systematic murder of their people. The French government, from whom the northern chiefs expected reprisal for the murder of Marion Du Fresne and members of his crew were starting to look like a real threat and seemed to have colonisation ambitions for taking over New Zealand. Added to this, the solidarity of the Northern Confederation of United Chiefs had largely fallen apart, resulting in interbickering and bloodshed within its own ranks.

Hobson's statement to his wife in 1837 was soberly prophetic, as Maori inter-tribal fighting and the requirements of "utu" or revenge between tribes, threatened to exterminate the Maori people. Farsighted chiefs, aware of the worsening and very dangerous situation, needed a remedy to stop the fighting and establish peace, law and order.

Amongst it all there was only one reliable constant and that was the British, and especially the missionaries, who had been good trustworthy friends with deepset genuine empathy towards Maori for over twenty-five years. It was also well-known to the chiefs that the British were "the biggest gun on the sea" and had beaten the French at Trafalgar. The British King had answered a Maori call for protection from the French (the tribe of Marion) when the Northern Chiefs had petitioned him in a letter in 1831 to be their "Protector". The Monarch had sent a "British Resident" (James Busby) to provide a physical impediment or consular blockade to any French annexation ambitions and Busby had then written a "Declaration of Independence" for "The Confederation of United Chiefs" (a group of northern chiefs, comprised of Nga-Puhi). This incentive provided a strong, formalised statement and some recognisable semblance of a Maori governing body, for announcement internationally. The worldwide community were put "on notice" that New Zealand was formally recognised by Britain as a sovereign nation under the leadership of its many chiefs. Thereafter, any desire to colonise New Zealand by any "civilised" superpower could only be accomplished by negotiated agreement with the sovereign chiefs of New Zealand.

Hobson arrived again three years later on the 29th of January 1840, invited by the chiefs and with his commission from Queen Victoria to secure a treaty and form a colony. He carried with him a very detailed and humane set of instructions, issued to him by Lord Normanby, outlining the circumstances, conditions and criteria that had to be met before Britain would entertain the thought of forming a colony in New Zealand. The 4200-word brief forbade any double-dealing and demanded that all negotiations be entered into at a high level of integrity. The Queen's reputation and dignity would not be permitted to be sallied by anything underhanded and no chief would be permitted to sign or agree to anything until he fully understood the full implications. Thereafter, 540 chiefs around the country chose to "sit under the shadow of Queen Victoria and place the British Lion between themselves and the French Eagle".

The Marxist historians who put Treaty 2-con-U together are advised to carefully read Lord Normanby's brief to Hobson, but it's very doubtful that they'd want to acknowledge the existence of anything so diametrically-opposed to the nonsense they've tried to promote in their Marxist brainwashing campaign. Instead of according Hobson the dignity and respect that he deserves as a great statesman who worked in very difficult circumstances, with the added crippling impediment of very poor health upon his arrival in New Zealand, the Treaty 2U exhibit pumps out derogatory comments like the following:


In fact, the Treaty 2U authors seem to revel in making Hobson, Busby and Williams look like the "Three Stooges", Larry, Curly and Moe. They have to resort to these "low blows" in order to make their very stupid version of history and treaty interpretation stick. To say anything good about our founding fathers would defeat the purpose of the grievance-industry. Here's what actually happened, devoid of all the modern-day Marxist propaganda:

In short, three very astute, experienced and professional men, doing their assigned duty in the name of Queen Victoria, spearheaded an incentive that saw the treaty text successfully produced within the space of about five days, with a signed treaty becoming a reality less than nine days after Hobson's arrival. It was an excellent effort that produced an eloquent, all-encompassing, all-inclusive, fair and egalitarian treaty text, upon which to found a new British colony.


The tremendous work, empathy for his congregations and accomplishments of Reverend Henry Williams, within a long life of stalwart service, are suitably remembered within Christchurch Cathedral, where one of Henry's descendants, Alywn Keith Warren, was the fourth Bishop of Christchurch. A wooden statuette of Reverend Henry Williams adorns the centre left side of the Cathedral's sacred altar in honour and remembrance of Reverend Henry Williams' contributions to all the people of New Zealand.

Outside the Christchurch Cathedral, the Treaty 2U propaganda machinery "puts the boot in" and slags Reverend Henry Williams, his abilities and scholarship in order to push their nefarious political agenda. In a vain effort to give false credibility to the wrong treaty wording, it's essential for Treaty 2U Marxist manipulators to represent Reverend Henry Williams as a very lousy translator, who somehow??? turned the defunct "Official English Text" (the darling of the Treaty grievance-industry) into Te Tiriti o Waitangi Maori translation. Reverend Henry Williams did nothing of the sort, but used, instead, the words of "The Final English Draft" text, which document was relocated by the Littlewood family of Pukekohe in 1989 after being "lost" for 149-years. Three additional "Final English Draft" documents have now been located in overseas archives, all of which date to February - April 1840.

To see page 1 of Hobson's true Final English Draft CLICK HERE To see page 2 of Hobson's true Final English Draft CLICK HERE

The true mission of Treaty 2U is to con New Zealanders into forfeiture of any "treaty rights guaranteeing absolute equality for all", because of the government exhibit's misguided allegiance to something that is patently NOT the treaty. The content of the exhibit is little more than purpose-built and politically expedient, pseudo-history conjured up by opportunists and self-serving deceivers. It's all carefully crafted, run-of-the-mill, Marxist propaganda from one end of the exhibit to the other and everywhere in between. Helen Clark's worst fears have been realised, wherein she was 'worried about being accused of pushing an ideological agenda'. (See article by political reporter, Ruth Berry, 20/10/2003).