A tribute beyond measures!

The recent passing of Sir Paul Reeves stirred the whole nation, both Maori and Pakeha into national mourning. His contribution to the country has been beyond the capability of any person these days, being the Maori Govennor General of New Zealand, and the Archbishop of Aotearoa, plus many other positions. The tangihanga at the Holy Sepulcre and his funeral at the Cathedral drew many local and international media interest wanting rights to covering the funeral of this great figure of New Zealand. However it was Maori Television who provided the country with front seats to the state funeral of this great man. Covering funeral services is nothing new to Maori Television.

2006 the passing of Te Arikinui Te Atairangikaahu was the very first for Maori Television to broadcast live from Turangawaewae Marae. Scenes that are very clear to my mind are the multitudes of people standing on the banks of the Waikato River watching their queen being guided on the river by Waka Taua leading her to her final resting place on Taupiri Mountain. Barely a month later saw our relations from Tonga mourning of HM Taufa ahau Tupou IV who passed away here in Auckland and returned to Nuku Alofa to be mourned by his subjects. Again Maori Television had the priviledge to broadcast live, giving the opportunity for our Tongan relations who were not able to return for the funeral to watch from their homes.This also gave Maori and New Zealanders an insight in Tongan traditions and protocol. The year later, It was thought that all of the islands of the Pacific were in sorrow, as it was now Samoa who was mourning the passing of their head of state, Malietoa Tanumafili. Maori Television had the honour of broadcasting the funeral of this monarch of the Pacific. In 2009 Maori entertaner, Sir Howard Morrisons tangihanga at Tamatekapua, Rotorua drew many Iwi on to Rotorua to pay tribute to this rangatira. Maori Television again gave the country the opportunity to feel the atmosphere from the comfort of their homes by providing households with live coverage. From 2006 to present, Maori Television has provided the nation this resource, enabling those who werent physically present the chance to be part of these momentus occasions, giving everyone the opportunity to grieve with those who mourn. When the pain heals, family can reflect on these funeral services as being shared with everyone, knowing that the pain they are feeling, is heard by all. Maori television has gone outside the boundaries to provide this resource, something that Mainstream media has yet to consider. This is truly a fitting tribute beyond measures.

Waka Huia; A new direction. Is this the right direction?

Every Sunday after church, we would come home to catch the weekly dash of Waka Huia, which was a ritual. Being bought up heavily influenced by my maternal grandparents, I was priveledged to be explained what was being mentioned or discussed on Waka Huia. The most grasping aspect in regards to the show and in Te Ao Maori in general is that Maori Kaumatua never ever tell a story in great detail, which leaves the audiences wanting more. This was evident in all Waka Huia programs.

First aired on New Zealand telelvision in 1987, Waka Huia was born under the guidance of the late Ernie Leonard and Whai Ngata who after the great Te Maori exhibition of the early 1980’s felt that there was a need to set up a resource in which would firstly collate korero tukuiho (ancestral knowledge) from Kaumatua around the Motu, and secondly viewing these taonga on air for the country to appreciate.

From 1987 to 2010, Waka Huia collated 800 hours of 1 hour advertisement free episodes captured for ever, showing visual interviews of many kuia, koroua who have passed on. This resource will be here for future generations and for Iwi to utilise in the many years to come.

It saddened me to here that Waka Huia had been shortened from an hour to ½ hour episode which makes me wonder, does this mean that the whole focus of what Waka Huia was established has changed? The main objective that made Waka Huia unique was that, the kuia and koroua determined how the show would role. Now that there is a time constraint, does this mean that the information which is given by Iwi is now restricted? Is this the direction where tikanga Maori is overridden by convenience? Thoughts???

“Maori” an advertisers dream

Currently there are a few debates around Maori culture being used as an advertising tool. As Curtis stated below there are the Americans claiming a beer named: Maori King, (even though they have no knowledge that there was even a Maori King to start with). And the English with their new Nike “Maori-style” t-shirts that depict a Maori style rose on the front. Is this somehow ironic because the crown (English) are the opposition to Maori claims, with the crown imposing their culture upon Maori but now they want to claim Maori designs for commercial gain.

It amazes me that these products even made it to the shelves without some sort of consultation. Did the makers even bother to consider the implications and consequences that they may hold towards the culture they are “ripping off”. The fact that these products are gaining opposition is probably because; NO, they have not taken into account how this could affect others.

Willie Jackson and Tuku Morgan felt very strongly against these products. Morgan felt, “deeply offended and wanted to talk to the makers”. While Jackson, stated, “I’m bewildered by how cocky these people are, how arrogant.” Showing that yes, indeed it has sparked debate from our corner of the world. Jackson also made a point that, “They think they can do anything because what are those little Maori going to do? And there is not much Maori can do.” However, this does not excuse other countries to use Maori culture as they please.

It disheartens me to think that through mainstream media Maori are either seen in a negative way or as being used as advertising in other countries. Again as I stated before this links to the hegemonic model of mainstream media and how the views of the masses seem to be the ones that are shown in the media. Nevertheless, this does not make “ripping off” a culture all right. I am sure Maori are not the only indigenous people to experience this type of advertising but where does the UN’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples stand? Do they not have a right to say how their culture is used?

I think that if people would like to use an aspect of culture for advertising purposes they need to go about it in the right way. Maybe through consulting elders, or getting input from that particular culture, just to make sure that it is in no way offensive or degrading to that culture. If done correctly the use of different cultures could potentially have a positive effect, because this could get the culture known all around the world as well as symbolise an acceptance of that culture. But only if the advertising has been done correctly and there are no negative implications whatsoever.

Therefore, I am all for Maori culture being used as long as it is done in a respectful way: how this is achieved, I do not know but could probably identify it when I saw it. However, the two examples of product have been done in the wrong way and can be seen as offensive only because it is in the wrong context. The Nike one because it is England claiming an advertising scheme using a culture they have shunned for many years. The American one because they had no idea of the culture and that there actually is a king. So if aspects of culture are going to be used it needs to be done in the correct way.

subtitles

As discussed several times in the lectures, English subtitles are one of the controversial issues relating Maori TV and other Maori Medias. The discussion ranges from the necessity of subtitle itself to the accuracy of subtitles or the possibility of translation of Maori language into English.

Though Maori TV and other media should never give up improving the subtitle on the accuracy, we should be aware that universally we can never translate different language in fully accurate way. However, the fact does not lead the conclusion that we cannot communicate with each other or understand each other.
For example, it is simply impossible to express exactly same thing in Japanese and in English. You might see Japanese Animation with English subtitle, but it is never exactly same with Japanese version. Japanese expressions have unique nuances which are embedded in Japanese custom and culture, and English expressions are simply different from that in Japanese language. There are sometimes apparent mistranslations in movies or televisions and so on. Even if you think you can understand the other language through the subtitles, it is never fully attained. However, I do not think we should give up communicating with others, trying to know others. For example, even if the English subtitles of Japanese movie are just funny or even completely wrong sometimes, I do not think they—non Japanese speakers-- should not watch the movie, or they should not make English subtitles for Japanese speakers. That is because otherwise they cannot know anything about the movie and also about Japanese. Without subtitles, it is impossible to communicate with each other on media. Abandonment subtitles are giving up communication or the possibility to understand each other. It is naturally same with Maori and English (or Japanese or whatever). As discussed in the lectures, there are naturally difficulties to translate Maori to English (or English to Maori—though interestingly this direction of translation is not often discussed). It is easy to say “they do not understand Japanese/ Maori way”. However, we should not give up seeking the way to understand each other. I believe, it is possible to understand English speakers to know understand Japanese culture, as “Pakeha” or other ethnicities are able to know about Maori. It is not efficient to just complain how the subtitles on Maori TV are inaccurate. It is highly important to make accurate subtitles because it is only information for non- speaker of the language to understand the content. In addition, we should be more aware it is never possible to translate a language into another in fully accurate way (even about English to Maori though it is hardly discussed), and positively seek the way to improve the subtitles and communicate more, rather than giving up communicating.

I was always wondering why the translation from English to Maori is hardly discussed about. That must be a result of fact that almost all Maori speakers are able to speak English, too. (That could be also the reason of harsh complain on the inaccuracy of English subtitles of Maori language.) It seems unbalanced for me. It is also unbalance that there is no Maori language subtitles of English though Te Reo Maori is often attached English subtitles on Maori TV. It is obvious that Maori TV does not assume the demand of the Maori subtitles or the existence of Maori speakers who do not speak English. For me, the fact seems to symbolize the situation of Te Reo Maori and how people think about the situation itself. However, the number of native Te Reo Māori speakers is supposed to be increasing as the result of Kohanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa movement. It is possible that the Maori subtitles of English will be demanded in the future. If many Te Reo Maori native speakers who are not fluent in English come out, the issue of subtitle would be more and more serious.

In short, what I would like to say here is that it is necessary to think about the problem on subtitles seriously but positively as the tool of communication rather than just complaining the inaccuracy of the current subtitles. Otherwise we are just becoming apart from each other and confirmed into our own cultures or language groups.

What is “decolonization”? ――Decolonizing “Colonizers”?

As Hinerangi mentions, decolonization is one of the main topics in the first few classes. It is said that Maori TV is/ should be the tool of decolonization.
“Decolonization” is a key concept of indigenous movements in this postcolonial world. The word is widely used and it represents the purpose of the movement or the ideal situation of the world. However, I often wonder if the concept is clear enough and the meaning is shared. Though many people use the word like a magic spell, do people share the concept accurately? If somebody says “Maori TV is the tool of decolonization”, does everybody understand how Maori TV should be and what the goal is?

It must be efficient and essential to examine the meaning of “colonization”, because the word “decolonization”, which is composed of “de” and “colonization”, means “the opposite of colonization” or “remove something from colonization”.
Basically, “colonization” means “to take control of an area or a country by the outsider, especially using force”, that is originally about property or power over the property. However, “colonization” also includes diverse invasions in different levels, either “visible” or “invisible”.
In the case of the Maori, the visible colonization can be confiscation of the land, discouragement of the religion or belief system, suppression of the language/Te Reo Maori and the protocol/Tikanga, and so on. In this visible level, it is relatively easy to assume the content of “decolonization”. For example, the revitalization of Te Reo Maori and Tikanga Maori, which is clearly mentioned as the purpose of Maori TV, is obviously the process of resisting against the impact of Te Reo Pakeha or English and reclaiming their own language.
In addition, “colonization” can be about invisible domains, such as the value and the representation of colonized people, as presented in the lecture as “the historical processes of colonisation …racialised Māori as ‘deficient’ (as individuals and culturally), which in turn justified the transfer of resources such as land to settlers and the subjugation of cultural practices” (Paul Spoonley: Nga Patai 1996 p.62). At this level, the process of “decolonization” seems more complex. Though it is highly important to reclaim the value system and self-representation for resists dominant power, it is sometimes controversial what is a result of colonization and what is not. For example, cigarette is introduced by non-Maori after the contact, but is the idea that “cigarette is unhealthy” a result of colonization? “People should not have cigarette in maraes because of the tapu restriction” is a Maori value or a result of colonization although tipuna used to smoke in the marae? Because the value system has always changed, it is necessarily to redefine what the value system is to promote the pre-colonization or indigenous value as decolonization.
Although the decolonization at invisible level is not as simple as at visible level, decolonization of mind is often more emphasized. For example, Jessica Hutchings in the course reader says,


Decolonisation is also about my right to determine how I will live with and within Maori communities; to reject non-Maori analysis of situations and events that concern me; and to value myself as a Maori woman. Decolonisation is an essential part of being a Maori woman; it recognises the colonial reality we still live in and provides space for Maori women to be visible, by valuing Maori women’s on-going analysis of all areas of life, such as education, language and health systems.(Hutchings 2002)
However, the discussion on the invisible level of decolonization becomes more and more complex when she mentions about the decolonization of dominant non-Maori. It is obvious that she assumes the dominant non-Maori as so called “Pakeha” who is set against the indigenous people Maori as the colonizer.

This agenda is not confined to only indigenous peoples, but is also valuable for the unlearning that non-indigenous peoples, as part of the dominant colonial grouping, can attain. Decolonisation can lead non-indigenous peoples to examine how stories, history and worldviews are constructed and to understand their position in them. Non-indigenous peoples have an opportunity to speak out and challenge hegemony and the continual colonisation of indigenous peoples. Non-indigenous peoples also have a chance to understand how they themselves are being colonized by techno-industrial development.(Hutchings 2002)

What does Decolonization of Colonizers mean?? If it still can be called decolonization, is it part of the decolonization Maori TV seeks?


The notion of colonization or decolonization has been extended, and the meaning and the process which Maori TV is/ should be seeking seems becoming vague. What is decolonization? Who should be decolonized? What should be reclaimed? How is it become possible? Those details do seem still not clear neither shared, but they are often overlooked when people talk with the word “decolonization”. The word works like a magic spell. It is important to examine the notion itself and consider the role in the complex society beyond the “decolonization” as a widespread discourse in the indigenous movement.

He Timatanga tenei.

TE TIRITI O WAITANGI.




Te Tiriti o Waitangi is the founding document of New Zealand. Signed in 1840 by many chiefs of the North and South Islands along with Pakeha aristocrats. Overall it promises the ultimate chieftainship of a Pakeha law to a Maori lore. It includes the seas surrounding Aotearoa, everything special to the Maori people and everything natural on the land.

But... a Maori sees it being spat on to every side of the compass.

A Facebook page named TangataWhenua.com has recently posted a link titled "American Maori King beer is offensive and ignorant". A blunt overview is an American beer company named one of its beverages "Maori King" and subsequently there is anger amongst the Maori people. Personally these traits of ignorance, absolute arrogance and chauvinism annoy me alot and quite frankly Pakeha seem to be proud of these traits, because they are seen often today. What a people dont you think?

According to this post the company co founder Brad Lincoln has the cheek to say that "he found out there was a Maori King only when a New Zealander walked into their bar and told them". Shows how ignorant they are aye? He further adds "King Tuheitia would probably enjoy the beer and he is quite happy to send him a crate of bottles". Now this is absolute disrespect to elders. Do they know the simple rule respect elders? Obviously not!

Thank God Tuku Morgan has taken the role up to deal with these disrespectful people through establishing a "dialogue". They have already caused deep offense among the Maori. Under pakeha law we have our own "aristocrats" too.


KO MUTU.

Amazingly racist

Dont know if this made the telvision news so here goes.

Recently I came across a story online about people making racist comments about Maori on a tademe auction that was for a personalised number plate with "MAORI" on it. The writer also mentioned that the comments showed the ugly side of social networking, I thought it more directly showed the ugly side of New Zealand society rather than social networking. I think that social networking actually exposed the truth about some of the characters in New Zealand. For a point of clarity Im not saying that all mainstream or non-Maori are racist towards Maori but that racism present in New Zealand. I know that you didnt need anyone to tell you this but these comments actually proved that racism exist in New Zealand and it got a modern method of extending it tentacles, the internet.

This particular auction was listed for $99,000 and attracted a large number of racist and anti-Maori comments such as (this one is actually mild) "Any Maori that can afford this plate stole the moni" when i read this I thought rreeeeaaalllyyy, like how the Brits stole (or confiscated) Maori land, made millions and continue to use that money to maintain economic and political domination over Maori.

Another below the belt comment was "Maybe donate half the money to a charity to help prevent Maori throwing their babies into walls. I thought that this was a pretty sick comment, its like the writer searched for a level lower than pathetic and found it. Himself!!

Child abuse scapegoat.

Saw this online

Social work lecturer Raema Merchant said focusing on Maori parents diverts attention away from the fact Pakeha harm children too. When you come across child abuse in the media it is always presented in a way that portrays Maori as synonymous with child abuse while the mainstream have no mention or stigma that ties them to child abuse in any way. The media have created a norm of that type casts Maori as the 'bad guys' always abusing their children and it is these kinds of norms that facilitates further misrepresentation and oppression for Maori. Perhaps stories that involve child deaths or abuse in relation to Maori are like gold to a news gatekeepers as these are the types of stories that maintain primetime ratings so that viewers will stay glued to the tube in facination with advertising during hour, but also with repulsion towards Maori. So armed with an education of child abuse supplied by audio visual media such as television and news papers the mainstream use this as a further means to maintain their dominance.

Merchant stated "I'm not denying it's a problem for Maori, but if we're just focusing on Maori we're ignoring the Pakeha side," she said.

"It's almost as though Pakeha are putting their heads in the sand and saying there is no Pakeha child abuse." This sounds fairly accurate as many cases of child abuse conducted by the mainstream slip benneath the radar which extends the one-sided approach that the media adopt when dealing with child abuse stories.

Merchants master's thesis at Massey University found about half of the children killed in New Zealand died at the hands of a Pakeha abuser. Almost 9000 children were victims of physical abuse between 2000 and 2008, yet only 21 became "household names"' in the media, she said.
Just one-third of child deaths were reported in the press, and they were predominantly Maori cases. Finally someone has gone out and done the hard yards to literally prove that the attrocious stereotypes that the media have cast on to Maori are simply garbage.

Merchant urged the public and media to focus on real problems of child abuse, rather than making Maori the "face of abuse".

"The real danger I have seen from a social worker point of view is that there are a lot of children being abused but as far as the public are concerned they only seem to know about the ones that are Maori. "Child abuse is a problem for all people, not just for Maori."
Merchant is already planning her next thesis, which will look at a bigger issue: whether focusing on Maori child abuse victims leads to skewed views by health professionals and the public. Just noticing that the Nia Glasssie case was on the News recently in relation to a policy named after Glassie which proposes the state to set up authorities to inspect homes or families to search for signs of child abuse. Using a child with a Maori background as the face for a policy such as this shows that even the state is not immune to utilizing labels so the question is 'where does the abuse of Maori by both the media and the state end?'

Two Sides of the Story

Recently I stumbled across an old article written by Dr Pita R Sharples on the scoop website that caught my attention. The article refers to how mainstream media and Maori television have different views, particularly when it comes to Maori. The topic in question was the flying of the tino rangatiratanga flag at the Alinghi Base. Sharples stated that this was a proud moment for Maori everywhere as it represented Maori at a high level. However this was not the case when the story was covered on mainstream news, instead it was reported that the flag was only a mere scare tactic as it is a very competitive sport. It is very disappointing to see that this is clearly a case of one story but two very different outcomes.

In order for New Zealanders to make their own opinion, they must watch both shows like Te Karere as well as the mainstream news at six. Otherwise, they will only be getting one side of the story, making it biased. This could be a major problem because mainstream news is hegemonic. Meaning that all news is chosen in way that supports society norm at that point in time. This supports the majority’s views and attitudes. This is not so great for Maori as Sharples stated in his article that a study in 2004 had shown that Maori stories depicted in the media tend to be more 'bad' than 'good'.

Personally, I think this is wrong, only because we should be a nation that tries to work together instead of becoming divided in every possible way. Maori should not have to worry about how the story is going to come across in mainstream news because the stories shown by the media should be the same. It annoys me to think that something as significant as the flying the tino rangatiratanga flag can be put down to merely being a game plan to win. Why is it so hard to show Maori in a good light in the mainstream news?

Maori Television acting as a form of declonisation

Maori Television: Does Maori television act as a form of decolonization?

In the first few lectures of Maori 271 I was presented to the idea that Maori television was established to revitalize Te Reo Maori me ona Tikanga, this idea of Maori television acting as a tool of decolonization was however something new to me.

Initially when I think of the term ‘colonization’ in the Maori world, I think of loss of language, loss of culture, loss of resources and basic disconnection to who one is basically as Maori, more specifically disconnection to iwi and hapu.

Therefore to think about Maori television acting as a way of undoing or perhaps implementing change within Maori, I think to some extent yes, Maori television plays a role in decolonization.

Personally, Maori Television is a milestone and in fact a tool for te iwi Maori in the pursuit of reconnecting back with our people and cultural ties. With our ever-changing vast society the need for Maori to be involved within the media is essential to target and reach a larger audience. With the media being so influential particularly among taiohi, te iwi Maori needs a voice, this is what Maori television has initiated.

Although Maori television can be targeted at large audience, I would particularly like to focus in on potential influence it can have on a younger audience. Children today can now enjoy and be immersed in TV programs where cartoon characters and presenters speak Maori, something that was almost unheard of prior to the establishment of this network.

Immersion and engagement of Maori is something essential for the survival of our language and heritage. Maori Television has again contributed to the same thing that Kohanga Reo, Kura Kaupapa and Bilingual units have tried to embed among taiohi today; Te Reo Maori. Maori television can also aid in the process of speaking and practicing Maori at home, something which is not just left at school or kura but becomes a part of everyday lifestyle, the so called “norm”, something that we need. The upcoming generations are the future of Maori, the leaders of the future, if they are provided with the knowledge and language of our people in a mainstream-dominant culture, that in itself is a huge success.

The complexities of how shows and voices are presented on Maori Television are again another issue and obstacle to overcome. Some may disagree on how the shows are presented. The pressures of Maori Television are evident as they are in fact having to primarily focus in on reviving Te Reo whilst simultaneously fulfilling the expectations and outline of mainstream by appealing to everyone as a whole, not just Maori. This is where current issues lie, Maori are trying to regain and become in touch with who they are but within strict mainstream boundaries.

On a whole and wider perspective Maori Television is a great initiative for our people. It’s form of resource, entertainment, and insight into the Maori culture. The main objective of establishing something for Maori has been achieved, there is however always room for improvement and this is where the controversy of the network comes about.

Maori Television is a foundation for us to build upon, with continual developments sees a change within not only the media but within society.

Waihoki, he tino nui nga hua, nga taonga, nga ahuatanga o te iwi Maori kia pupuri e tatou, kia wananga, kia wherawhera hai tapiri atu ki te kete matauranga!

Hone Harawira - Radical or Racist?

I am sitting here twitching with fury as I haphazardly flick through a few comments on the "Get out of parliament Hone you piece of Crap" facebook page . Yet again, I cant help myself in replying to a bunch of ill informed time wasters who push my blood pressure to boiling point.

Anyway, my argument stems from media continuously portraying Hone in a term I learnt in last weeks lecture, as the "Wild Maori" They gather information and then portray it to the mass majority as the word from God. This then leads to hate pages on social networks, arguing that "Hone is a racist piece of crap" that doesn't deserve to be in parliament.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that people can have an opinion, but please get your facts right before defaming someone's character.

Before I go any further, let us define the word racist.

1. a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others

Familiarity information: RACIST used as a noun is very rare.

The adjective RACIST has 2 senses:

1. based on racial intolerance

2. discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion

Lets look at the other side of the argument - Why is hone racist? They refer to an email that was sent to a colleague in confidence that happened to find its way into the medias hands who then exposed it for all they could get for it. Yes, some or maybe most would agree that the content of that email was racist and uncalled for, some or maybe even most would agree that he is indeed a racist?

Then the NZ Herald article regarding the comment about his children. Hone said that he would be uncomfortable if one of his children were to come home with a Pakeha? Media have yet again misconstrued this in making Hone sound like he said " I don't want my children to come home with a Pakeha" Racist comment? Maybe in the eyes of the media.

Why is Hone seen as an Osama Bin Laden supporter? Could it be that his farewell and acknowledgement of Osama's life in Te Reo has been translated incorrectly. Translated to mean something that would be seen or read by the majority as more interesting than the actual truth. From this, some or maybe even most may agree that he is endorsing the actions of a man who arranged the mass murder of hundreds of US citizens.

These 3 examples just don't sit right with me. With regards to the racist comments, they were sent in an email to a colleague who then handed it to media out of spite. Not condoning to what Hone said, but he did have a point in expressing how he feels in private.

The osama incident is absolutely ridiculous. Talk about reporters needing to take a course in Te Reo before attempting to translate Maori phrases.

As for the incident regarding his children, pay close attention to the word "uncomfortable" here Hone is merely stating he would feel uncomfortable as opposed to the statement that was released by mainstream media.

How do these examples of what I will call "Hone Attacks" differ to the speech that Don Brash made in Orewa in 2004? What does he mean by the Maori Ethnic group is a very loose one? Remember, this speech was given in public amongst hundreds. Also on the topic of public speeches, what did Paul Holmes mean by "Cheeky Darky" Now refer back to the definition of racist and it can be argued that these statements are indeed racist. No hate mail on these issues though, no protests in the university of Auckland to stop Don Brash from giving a speech.

Here are some examples of posts on the "Get out of parliament Hone you piece of crap" page.

JUST IN... hone and supporters now want to be buried only 2 feet deep so even when their dead they can still get a hand out.....

Wots brown on the outside, that conceals a little white on the inside. And is full of crappy little suprises?.....and NO it's not a kinder egg!....

Wats up with Maori thinking they are special. Hone is just another puppet getting his strings pulled by a bunch of dole bludgers.

Come on, it almost makes what Hone said to be words from a saint. Its amazing at how many people have posted such comments aimed at Hone without really looking in the mirror.Hypocrites wouldn't you say? Its like a game of Chinese whispers. One person says one thing and by the time it gets published it means something totally different. These reactions have been somewhat initiated by media when they misconstrue information to suit their punters!! If you don't conform to what mainstream consider to be socially acceptable, then they will label you a radical, racist, bin laden lover. Or maybe there are not enough Maori swinging pois around to be considered worth writing about after all that's who mainstream media portray the good Maori to be isn't it?

Beware everyone, don't believe everything you read or hear about Hone, I could almost guarantee it has been manipulated to conform with what the majority want to hear.