google accused
there is a lot of bile in the world. it saddens me that this kind of evil exists in nz. it saddens me that the worst of some cultures has spread it's evil on our most beautiful land. it mystifies me that these seriously misguided people came to this place to poison it with their racism and their hate. i truly do not know how they were ever allowed to bring their "shit" to this country. these guys think that they own nz. they think that they can dictate to us all, how we will live, who we will live with, and at what level we will be allowed to exist. this kind of utter ignorance, motivated my people to go to war against hitler and his oppression. i am proud, that my uncle won the victoria cross for bravery, fighting against this type of bullshit. go home! you do not deserve to live in aotearoa.....or maybe it's a dastardly plot by the "donsta" and his deputy, "caligula keys."
google accused of harbouring nz racists
thursday , 26 october 2006
racist blogs targeting minority groups in new zealand and australia are springing up on the web, but google's blogger, the service some are hosted on, refuses to take them offline, says an anti-racism lobby group.
"blogger is absolutely insensitive to complaints about racist and neo-nazi content," said brian stokes, co-founder of fightdemback!, a group that monitors the activities of racists, fascists and other such offenders operating in australia and new zealand.
blogger, owned by google, enables anyone to create a blog or online journal, and publish their thoughts online using internet space provided by blogger.
mr stokes said his group had reported numerous discriminatory blogger journals to google, both through the "flag" button that appears on each blog and through an email form that mr stokes said was "buried in their site, very hard to find".
mr stokes said his appeals had fallen on deaf ears at google.
"most other outfits [that provide free web space] like angelfire and tripod actually do respond," he said.
"we have probably knocked about 25 or 30 nazi, white supremacist, racist in general websites off the web, in the two and a bit years [since the group founded]," he said.
he refers specifically to two blogger journals that google has refused to remove from the web - patriot alliance downunder and red watch nz.
"patriot alliance downunder comprises a number of patriots and nationalists alike from new zealand and australia," its blog reads.
"we ... hope to preserve and defend our heritage, culture, customs, traditions, morals, and values, as well as our blood itself, against hostile alien elements that are destructive to who we are and we as a race hold dear."
the blog posts photographs and full names of anti-racism activists from australia and new zealand, in effect making this information available to those who wish to do these activists physical harm.
it also publicly endorses and links to the recent racist online board game based on last year's cronulla riots, but it denies that it's a "hate" group.
mr stokes said that the owner of the patriot alliance downunder blog was ben weerheym, convicted for being a getaway driver in a racist graffiti attack by neo-nazi group australian nationalist movement.
patriot alliance downunder does not list weerheym as the owner of the blog, but he has signed certain postings with his name.
while the patriot alliance downunder blog says its musings are simply nationalistic, red watch nz is more overtly racist.
"red watch nz is here to combat communism and zionism within our borders," reads the blog, which openly endorses the nazi movement.
"today is a sad day for national socialists all over the world. today in 1946, the eternal jew managed to swindle the allied nations into hanging 10 of our comrades at the nuremberg war crimes trial," reads a post published on the anniversary of the nuremberg trials written by author "we hate the jews!".
mr stokes said red watch nz was operated by nic miller, "famous for stunts like publishing a photo of fdb nz activist asher goldman's mother's tombstone, leafleting goldman's neighbourhood with libellous material, publishing photos of activists's parents' homes and their street addresses, [and] much more".
the tombstone post mr stokes mentions is still online, as are numerous posts that include photos, street addresses and even phone numbers of various activists.
miller is not listed as the owner of red watch nz, but some recent postings have been signed with his name.
"i think what google intends is not to restrict people's freedom of speech," mr stokes said.
"but we're talking about bashing up brown people and defaming them. this isn't politics, this is terrorism."
both blogs appear to violate blogger's user agreement, particularly red watch nz.
blogger's terms of service reads: "member agrees not to transmit through the service any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or harmful material of any kind or nature. member further agrees not to transmit any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national or international law or regulation."
whether or not the blogs invite legal action under australian law isn't immediately clear, simeon beckett, president of the australian lawyers for human rights organisation said.
"the racial discrimination act [federal legislation] and anti-discrimination act [state legislation] both prohibit racial vilification. it doesn't make that a criminal offence, but it does make it unlawful for a person to do an act which is reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group. as long as that act is done because of the person's race," he said.
mr beckett hasn't visited red watch nz or patriot alliance downunder, but, based on our description of the blogs, he said their actions were probably in violation of australian law.
regardless, he said there might be difficulties in enforcing the law because it's highly likely that blogger's servers are located overseas.
"trying to enforce a right under australian law in the us makes it complicated and cumbersome," he said.
google refused to divulge where its servers are located.
mr beckett also said that, since the authors of the blogs have only posted names, addresses and photos of anti-racism activists, and don't appear to have explicitly incited violence against them (even if violence is implied), pursuing legal action would be difficult.
"i think there may be difficulties if all there was available was the name and address of the anti-racism activists," he said.
in its terms of service, pyra (the company that founded blogger, now acquired by google) says that it is not liable for the contents of user blogs, but mr beckett suggests that this might not legally be the case.
"if it's an australian server, and google itself has listed a blog that's racist in australia, it may be acting unlawfully itself," he said.
google, whose corporate motto is "don't be evil", says it will take the blogs in question offline only if ordered to do so by a court.
"blogger is a provider of content creation tools, not a mediator of that content," a google spokesman said.
"we allow our users to create blogs, but we don't make any claims about the content of these pages. in cases where contact information for the author is listed on the page, we recommend working directly with this person to have this information removed or changed. we would only remove content from this blog if ordered to do so by a court order," the spokesman said.
Labels: donsta, google, nic miller, racist, red watch nz
debating the maori bloodlines issue
dr rawiri taonuithis is interesting. i have printed the whole article, it's a bit of a read, but it gives a flavour with regard to how things are here in nz. in my opinion, as long as we have bigoted idiots (brash, haden) refusing to accept how we (maori) define ourselves, we will just have to keep up our fight for our own sense of who we are. as for their "one law for all" cry, i want it too. i am sick of reading about maori who are punished differently from pakeha in their [not ours] court system. one punishement for us [jail], various lesser degree punishments for them is not "one law for all." the donsta and frankee do not get to tell me who i am. i for one, am tired of their superior attitude. they were not born to rule.
08 october 2006
don brash's comments on maori bloodlines have stirred debate about the nature of maoridom and national's policies. sunday star-times columnist frank haden and dr rawiri taonui, head of the school of maori and indigenous studies at canterbury university, debate this divisive issue.
dr rawiri taonui
don brash's claim that maori are no longer indigenous because there are few, if any, full-blooded maori left is nothing but old-fashioned colonial racism in new-age disguise.
while whakapapa or descent is a prerequisite for identity, the exclusive application of the stockman's blood quantum in this way is deeply offensive. in colonial times the quantum doctrine, skin colour, and weird things such as head shape, the size of the penis and female buttocks were used to position dark skinned peoples along an evolutionary continuum between animals and europeans. black, brown and yellow were inferior and evolving toward whiteness.
the assumptions underwrote policy from 1840 to recent times. governor george grey, henry williams, richard taylor, elsdon best and percy smith -administrators, missionaries and teachers alike - believed maori were children in the lower stages of human culture. the infamous 1960 hunn report classified three kinds of maori: half-castes, who were more european-like, lived in cities, spoke no maori and were advanced; those who were still maori but lived in the cities and were making progress; and those who spoke maori, lived in rural areas, and remained "backward and retarded".
colonial governments and racist regimes used the doctrine to deny basic human rights. dark aborigines were deemed non-human so britain could possess an uninhabited australia. north american colonies classified indians, african slaves and mixed offspring. the united states graded hawaiians. nazi germany applied the same principles as racial science. in pre-1974 new zealand, maori who were less than half-maori did not always officially qualify as maori.
among its several assumptions, the doctrine presumed intermarriage accelerated evolutionary progress. adherents welcomed intermarriage as a way of obliterating difference. dilute dark blood, lighten the skin, create a more intelligent and evolved person. hence, post-korean war australia granted the franchise to aborigines who reached the half-caste threshold, although, as a check against residual pollution, they still had to prove they were "civilised".
these views drove the view that maori would and should die out or assimilate. but the opposite happened. the maori population recovered from 35,000 at the turn of the 20th century to over 600,000 today.
brash's belief that the arrival of his forebears in 1848 somehow negates the indigeneity of maori is an affront to the 6000 indigenous peoples who number 500 million in the world. indigenous is more than hanging around for a generation or five.
indigenous peoples are the descendants of the original first occupants. they are first nations, first peoples, tangatawhenua. later arrivals have nothing to lose and everything to gain by respecting that. in a weak attempt to regain the post-orewa popularity of 2004, brash threatens the reverse by appealing to the innate fears of those who have difficulty accepting brown people as co-equals.
indigenous peoples also descend from pre-state societies marginalised politically, economically, socially, culturally and ideologically through western colonisation. brash tramples the tragedy of this reality when he blames maori for the disproportionately negative social indices - it's their own fault.
this rhetoric ignores the cumulative intergenerational impact of colonisation. the present is shaped by the past. when the land was taken, maori lost their economic base. maori were excluded from political power. economic and political disempowerment impeded providing the basic needs of tribes and families. it undermined development, causing under-performance in education, the main avenue of upward mobility. education was also prejudiced. the barriers were insurmountable. one generation could not provide for the next. most of the next generation repeat the cycle. the dominant culture expected the subordinate culture to fail and condemned them for it, while garnishing its own table with the spoils from the land.
brash says poor maori choices cause poor maori health and a failure of maori to study law, despite having places reserved for them. however, the poor practice poor health the world over. poverty and despair level choice. affirmative action and equity initiatives in education fail because they assume deficits on the part of maori rather than institutions.
race versus need is a rhetorical smoke screen. maori have the greatest need and that is to be treated without prejudice. brash's cry of one law for all ignores the cumulative impact of a history of racist legislation, court decisions, government policy and continuing institutional barriers.
indigenous is also about preserving and transmitting to future generations cultural identities, social institutions, customary practices and spiritual values about ancestors, land and the natural world. brash diminishes and dismisses the identity of the descendants of a people who have lived here for 1000 years.
he mistakenly thinks new zealand is whitening. it is browning. the maori population is growing faster than the european one. children of maori descent will comprise 40 per cent of all school children by 2050. more than that, any person of maori descent can call themselves maori. there is new pride in doing so, less fear. gone are the days when people hid their maoriness because of the stigma and discrimination of mono-cultural white new zealand.
it is disturbing that a deliberately divisive person might be the next leader of a multicultural maori, pakeha, pasifika and asian country. archaic, antiquated, anachronistic, backward and inferior views have no place in a civilised society. i prescribe evolution.
frank haden
don brash's attack on demands for indigenous status for everyone who feels like a maori is one of the most effective barrages he has mounted in his campaign to lead the next government. by insisting maori people can't claim to be a distinct indigenous group because, after a couple of centuries of racial dilution by interbreeding, few if any full-blooded ones remain, he has struck gold.
if he follows up this success, summoning his best advisers to help join battle with adroit political stair-dancers winston peters and pita sharples, he will rekindle the fires lit by his memorable orewa speech of 2004, when he promised to dump laws that give maori people preferment based on the colour of their skins.
this time he has put his finger on the most vulnerable point of maori activists' claim for special treatment -that anyone can become a maori by choice as well as by birth.
we can work this out from the shrill reaction to his eminently sound assessment.
"there goes brash again, kicking us when we are down," cry the politically correct of all skin shades from pink to brown.
these people are left cruelly exposed as they flounder about trying to justify their proposition that because some maori settlers got here before the first white ones, all their descendants are entitled to regard themselves as special, as part of a separate racial group that automatically goes to the front of the handout queue.
they have no answer to people like brash who point out that many who claim they are maori have far more pinkish people than brown among their ancestors.
these off-pink people should logically be classified as non-maori when the goodies are being distributed, or when concessions are made to maori criminals whining that their race entitles them to special privileges.
brash also struck a nerve with the rest of us out here, already alarmed to hear the extraordinary statement by high court justice david baragwanath that maori people might need separate legal treatment.
we agree with brash that there must be one set of laws for everyone, regardless of skin colour.
the ill-advised crew attacking brash included senior national mp georgina te heuheu, leaving herself open to ridicule when she said that whether or not you were maori was a matter of practices, customs and language, not the proportions of your maori and non-maori blood.
it was not surprising she was joined by auckland university academic dr lynette carter in this desperate attempt to show that being a maori is a matter of how you behave, not who your parents are. carter, regarded as an expert in "blood quantum", said that what made people maori or non-maori was their degree of participation in and belonging to the maori community.
the bizarre conclusion both these women had come to, in effect, was that a person's race was not involuntary, as we had all naively believed, but a matter of choice. they would have been better off listening to highly-respected academic dr elizabeth rata as she told the annual conference of the skeptics in auckland last weekend that politicised ethnicity subverts democracy when it takes precedence over citizenship as a person's primary political status.
a former fulbright scholar with her own unchallengeable whakapapa, rata works in postgraduate studies at auckland university and knows her stuff. she pointed out that since the 1970s we have ignored our national identity by prioritising ethnicity disguised as biculturalism.
maori party co-leader sharples was intellectually dishonest when he said brash's argument would lead to the extinction of the indigenous maori nation once a certain blood threshold was reached.
brash has never called for the racially defined maori segment to disappear.
all he wants, and all we want, is for the privileges that now attach to the group to disappear.
sharples continued with a mysticism-shrouded claim that maori ancestry is indivisible, that no matter how many of your grandparents were non-maori, you are still mokopuna. this means if you are part-maori you are maori, never mind how many non-maori people lurk in the family tree. we out here are never going to accept such a proposition.
peters, the perennial jester, has made a mistake in conveniently forgetting his own history of objecting to special treatment for maori people, and deciding by his own tortuous thinking that brash's questioning of indigenous status is now somehow "evil". he showed he has lost touch with us out here when he attacked the brash view of maori blood proportions as a prescription for denying the minority race any legal status as maori.
too right that's what it would mean, and that's exactly what we want. if i go into a court with a maori, i don't want to have to allow for the fact that i will be fighting with one hand behind my back because my opponent has legal status as a maori.
Labels: bloodlines, don brash, donsta, frank haden, maori, rawiri taonui
