So they were interested in the likely skin colour, how can that be racist?
Printable View
Firstly, if we get rid of the British Crown - who signed a treaty with some Maori chiefs (they became the British subjects of their new sovereign Queen Victoria in exchange for Her Majesty's laws & protection) - then what does that do to the already tenuous ‘obligations’ we are supposedly under because of said Treaty?
Secondly, just because Me-gain & Obie Scobie say something is true then why should we take their word as the gospel truth? Were such things ever said, and if they were - what was the context? If it was said “geez, I hope like mad he’s not a little darkie” then there’s an issue, if it was said “I wonder what his complexion will be and will he have Harry’s red hair” then there is no issue. You weren’t there, but seem eager to believe the worst.
Primarily whether a British aristocrat is racist or not shouldn’t be an issue that the Head of State of NZ faces. That a British aristocrat has prejudices would hardly be surprising anyway.
Heirs and successors to Victoria are bound. Many pieces of NZ legislation refer to the Treaty, and are legally enforceable.
The King should be scrutinised more rigorously than a politician because he never faces an election.
No mention in the linked article that the UK and many Euro nations have raised concerns about the WHO's revised treaty. The article also says it is legally binding and then that it isn't in the next sentence. Which is it? Maybe our new government doesn't do virtue signaling bs like its predecessor. The WHO toadies quoted in the article (Clark, Baker, Verral et al) expose themselves for what they are, as do the ignorant and biased MSM.
The coalition's reservation is the wise thing to do before committing to anything. As Luxon has said, and not for the first time, he's not taking any lectures from Labour. If Labour had any brains they would at least give Luxon time to hang himself (or have Winston do it), but no, they are firing all their bullets from a position of zero credibility. Zilch.
https://www.msn.com/en-nz/health/oth...5e45b7d0&ei=11
Unless you're Balance, he's just too weak to say the quiet part out loud, so I'm happy to say it for him.
We all know anyway, even if he denies it, he can cry woke and blame Cindy or Te Reo all he wants, he's scared of a little pigmentation, pathetic armchair bandit
I ain't "woke", I don't like Cindy, and I disagree with a lot of Maori policy from Labour, yet anyone who calls someone primitive or accuses a race of being uneducated is lost in his self-importance and can't see beyond his snobbery
The article you linked and quotes attributed to Hipkins & Verral show how out of touch and dangerous they are. They don’t seem to even know any detail about the WHO’s proposals.
Luckily we got a new Government just in time to formally put any NZ adoption of this madness on hold
You know what. I have a cousin who is married to a black lady from Africa. When they have babies, we are naturally curious as to how dark or light the skin colour will be. Nothing racist about that. Just natural curiousness as there is a sliding scale of possibilities. Not like we are rooting for the whitest possible outcome, or any other variable. Just curious and interested.