Red Haired Mummies of New Zealand
The proof of a pre-existing Aryan race before the Maoris is one of New Zealands biggest coverups. But there is proof , however, that such a race of red and blonde haired peole did pre-exist the Maoris.
The proof is in the carvings, the symbols, the canoes, the nets, the weaves, plaids, mokos (facial tattoos) buildings, fortified positions, sculptured hills, trig marker mapping systems, canal and drainage systems, greenstone artefacts, oral traditions and ruined stone structures, such as standing stone circles, covering the length and breadth of New Zealand. A few centuries ago the former civilization was overwhelmed and annihilated by the Maori warriors and all possessions were taken over by the conquerors. Burial caves all over New Zealand contain the remains of red, brown or blond haired Indo-European skeletons.
Note: We have testimony from eye-witnesses and participants, that the New Zealand authorities have ordered that particular caves, known to contain non-Polynesian / Melanesian skeletons and artifacts, have their entrances covered & concealed... and in one instance, by bringing in a bulldozer.
This is one of 11 mummified heads repatriated to New Zealand in 1998 by Minister of Maori Affairs, Tau Henare.
The Maori warriors sold these heads to whalers about 200 years ago and the individual was born about the time of Captain James Cook's second exploratory voyage to New Zealand.
The light complexion, reddish hair and facial contours suggest a person of European descent. These people, who were once numerous, were referred to, by Maori, as "kiri-puwhero" (light complexioned skin) with hair that was "Uru-kehu" (reddish, golden tinged).
Note the spiral pattern to the side of the nose. These pre-colonial mummified heads, many of which still reside in foreign collections, should be subjected to DNA analysis.
European woman 'arrived in New Zealand before Captain Cook'
The discovery of a European skull dating back more than 260 years has cast doubt that Captain James Cook was the first Westerner to step foot on the shores of New Zealand.
Scientists are baffled after carbon dating showed the skull, a woman's which was found near the country's capital, Wellington, dates back from 1742 – decades before Cook's Pacific expedition arrived in 1769.
The discovery was made by a boy walking his dog on the bank of a river in the Wairarapa region of the North Island, an area settled by Europeans only after the establishment of a colony by the New Zealand Company in 1840.
Dr Robin Watt, a forensic anthropologist called in by police who investigated the discovery, said yesterday: "It's a real mystery, it really is. "We've got the problem of how did this woman get here? Who was she?
"I recommended they do carbon date on it and, of course, they came up with that amazing result."
The mystery of the skull, found four years ago, was raked over last week at an inquest in Masterton, the provincial capital.
John Kershaw, the local coroner, was told that police at first thought they had a murder inquiry on their hands.
"One of the reasons some work was done on the skull was because it had a number of puncture wounds," Mr Kershaw said.
"We don't know how this lady met her death, although the historian we used indicated drowning was a reasonable guess."
The inquest heard that the skull was definitely not Maori - the only race known to have inhabited New Zealand in the 18th century - and almost certainly of European origin.
The European discovery of the shoreline of New Zealand was made by the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman in 1642.
Tasman however had no women aboard his expedition.
The Maori are believed to have settled around 1200. The first white women known to have arrived in the country were two convicts who escaped from a penal colony in New South Wales, Australia, in 1806.
Gareth Winter, the official Masterton archivist who was called as an expert witness, told The Daily Telegraph that the possibility of a hoax could confidently be ruled out.
Mr Winter said that Captain Cook recorded, in the log of his second journey to New Zealand aboard the Resolution in 1772-5, a tale told to him by a Maori chief of a ship having been shipwrecked many years earlier.
Cook said the Maori told him that they given the ship's captain the name "Rongotute".
Early missionaries wrote of hearing the same story from Maori, who related that the survivors of the ship had been killed and eaten when they came ashore.
They said that many Maori had subsequently died in an epidemic, possibly as a result of exposure to a newly introduced infection from Europe.
Historians believed that the most likely site of such a shipwreck was Cape Palliser, the windswept southern-most point of North Island.
Stories that the wrecked ship had crockery on board, and that Maori wore pieces of it as pendants around their necks, convinced the missionaries that the vessel had indeed been European.
A skull found on the banks of a Wairarapa river has turned out to be a European woman aged between 40 and 45 years, who died between 266 years ago and 302 years ago, says a coroner.
"This suggests that the deceased may have been alive somewhere in the South Wairarapa in or about 1742," said Masterton coroner John Kershaw.
The coroner noted in his findings that despite radiocarbon dating by GNS Science indicating the woman was alive in 1742, historians said the Wairarapa was not settled by Europeans until after the New Zealand Company sent settlers to Wellington a century later, in 1840.
The European discovery of New Zealand was by Abel Janszoon Tasman in December 1642, and history records the first two white women to arrive in New Zealand as Kathleen Hagerty, and Charlotte Edgar, two convicts who escaped from New South Wales and arrived on this side of the Tasman in 1806.
Mr Kershaw said there were few facts available.
Sam Tobin was walking his family dog when he found the skull in October 2004 on the banks of the Ruamahunga River, south east of Featherston.
"We know the deceased was possibly a European female and likely aged between 40 and 45 years," he said.
In 2005, GNS Science indicated a radiocarbon age between 296 years – plus or minus 34 years.
Two Auckland forensic pathologists Dr Rex Ferris and Dr Tim Koelmeyer said the skull was an adult female, but was not Maori, and was probably Caucasian.
A Wellington forensic pathologist, Dr Robin Watt, said the woman was probably of European origin, aged 40-45, but he could not discount the possibility of Maori ancestry.
Masterton archivist Gareth Winter said there were no European inhabitants in the area 300 years ago.
Abel Tasman only journeyed along the west coast of the country and did not land anywhere in the North Island. And there were no records of a ship missing in NZ waters during this period.
English explorer Captain James Cook, visited Cape Palliser early in 1770.
Mr Winter noted that whalers used to visit the Wairarapa coast, but records of their activities were very rare.
Uncover the Ancients in New Zealand
View ancient sites near Hamilton
Revisit Ancient Celtic / Viking New Zealand (?).
Investigate the controversial subject of anomalies in New Zealand . New Zealand has a deliberately suppressed pre-Maori, pre-Taupo eruption history. Authorities have jealously hidden our pre-history. Evidence that contradicts conventional historical attitudes which are essentially that NZ has no pre-Maori human history is deliberately hidden, ignored or destroyed.
Maori secrecy aided by DOC and our National Archivists confound, obstruct and generally set about to prevent investigation. Maori spiritualist values, tapu, secret folk lore and general obstructions under the guise of cultural sensitivity are used to prevent investigations on land and in national archives.
More recent, unsavoury Maori history is being swept aside and forced into oblivion by socially engineered pro-Maori historical cleansing. Take the history of the Mori-ori. A pre-Maori people butchered and eaten into near extinction, as well as through forced integration by such means as rape and slavery. Oh yes didn't you realise, Maoris had slaves, yet were never themselves enslaved by the European. Maori slaves also provided meat and sustenance and they didn't necessarily have to die or be cooked prior to being consumed! Yes it did happen. Recalling such events it puts Maori history in a distinctly invidious position, but it is merely past history now. Anyway history is being cleansed by reclassifying Mori-ori as just another Maori tribe. Still a pacifist race was harried and eaten out of existence, however you look at it.
|As of Late August 2000. Maori are now claiming, even in parliament, that they are suffering from "post-colonisation trauma" and this is the justifiable reason that they bash their children to death! |
Can you believe it? Let's briefly mention something far more problematic. And for relevance read the books mentioned in one of the link options at the foot of this page.
The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 at the request of Maori chiefs and Europeans who feared for the continued existence of the tribes, sub-tribes, extended and immediate families (iwi, hapu and whanau) in the face of the Maori cannibal raiding parties, (and also from the growing interest of the French), to provide just cause for the British Crown to take control of a serious problem facing everyone in NZ. Maori warriors had been rampaging through the country armed with muskets and were destroying communities and forcing tribes to resettle in other areas of the country. This was displacement of Maori by Maori, not at this stage of Maori by the British - this did happen in time but there were huge differences. Land confiscation is totally different to stealing land from people you conquer and eat!
The Maori warriors not only displaced other tribal communities, they enslaved them. This enslavement was even more grotesque than whatever the American Negro slaves had to endure. Do you ever recall reading where American cotton growers forced their negro slaves to do a full days work, and then sat down to consume their slaves as the main menu item for the evening meal. and make the others slaves watch as they worked their way through them. This is exactly what the Maori did to slaves and prisoners. The Maori warriors went on to murder and consume thousands of their own folk, sometimes even kinfolk! and often any Europeans caught up in their way as well. You can be assured this is no exaggeration. Often the victims were not dead before being carved up and consumed. Imagine rolling around on the ground in agony with one buttock, or maybe the muscles of your arm sliced off, and seeing someone eating it in front of you. That's right they didn't necessarily bother to wait and cook it. Don't think they used a nice sharp knife either. A piece of half blunt sea shell was quite adequate, or a flake of obsidian if you were more fortunate.
A major consideration is that the Maori problem today is not at all related to the European colonisation but to the gross excesses of their own actions prior to European colonisation. We are only just entering the seventh generation of Maori since their appallingly and disgusting cannibalistic excesses. It takes generations for the curses and taint of such to be worked out of the soul of the people. Curiously one particularly vocal anti-European Maori belongs to one tribal group who perpetrated the heinous cannibalistic excursion to the Chatham Islands. Is this a case of trying to pass on the cannibal curses to the innocent European settler descendants? It doesn't work that way.
The cannibal descendants need to claim forgiveness of their kind and change their total attitudes to life and living, and join the modern world as working contributors. They need to accept what happened was in the past and to throw aside all the Maoritanga associated with revenge and counter settlement. Europeans are not to blame for Maori's self imposed predicament. Besides most of the Maori today are only people who like think they are Maori because they have the option of legally using that status in a racist and biased manner. There are many Maori who have phycologically moved on and become part of modern society very successfully - they are now New Zealanders first, and in many cases even Australian, and enjoy their Maori heritage just as other folk enjoy their Welsh, Scottish, Irish, English, Dutch, French, German or whatever heritage. These cultural identities add colour and identity to the people that use thenm for social and family events but they doen't convery any special status or preferential treatment. There are many people who could call themselves Maori but choose not to advantage themselves of the racist and preferential advantages and accept themselves as just ordinary New Zealanders.
In the 1950's a Maori guide at the Tarawera buried village, (buried by the volcanic eruption of Mt. Tarawera) used to tell of how parents had to watch out for young toddlers around the pa (village) lest they stray too close to the whare (hut) of an old cannibal warrior and be killed and cooked in the umu (oven), before anyone could stop it.
Maori are not the only peoples to have been cannibals, or to have decimated earlier peoples settled in a conquered land. The Maori of today are really NOT the race of Maori that were here at the time the modern Celtic/European arrived. Their genes have changed for all time due to intermarriage and significant assimilation within the modern New Zealand population mix.
One way to counter the modern political bias for the subjugation of our current Celtic, Viking and European New Zealand heritage, is to have an open, impartial, honest and total examination of ALL historical artifacts without imposing obstructionist pre-conceptions and mythologies. The current official attitudes are as bad as those held in Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany. Is that the aim of the resurgent Maori New Zealand? The Treaty of Waitangi, the national art museum Te Papa, the special committees set up to promote Maori with public funding. the list can go on and on.
We already have redefinition and renaming of features, regions and social customs with substantial funding stolen from our own pockets. What has happened to the thousands being spent by NZ Post* to rename all towns, streets etc with Maori names under the guise of equal opportunity and total bi-lingualism? While there is nothing wrong with Maori names for Maori communities and places, the prima face reason has been the assumption all features only ever had Maori names. Now there are real grounds for doubt about this. In a truly bi-cultural nation Mt Egmont would be equally able to be referred to by it's European name or it's Maori name, Taranaki. Not so in modern NZ. Use of the term Mt Egmont is considered culturally insensitive. Only Taranaki is permitted when referring to it. People are too scared (or complacent) to question this for fear of being insensitive or racist. Which is the racist attitude? What was it called by the pre-Maori populations and explorers? The term "Tara" also has celtic roots. Perhaps Taranaki is not originally a Maori name afterall? (*NZ Post is apparently no longer doing this, it may have been taken over by another agency).
To provoke further thought about NZ's pre-history.. and remember when students at school were once told NZ had no dinosaur history. Now there are books written about NZ's own dinosaurs. Delve into anything that may indicate or increase recognition of NZ's pre-Maori human settlement. Record it, write about it, photograph it, survey it (as in making written recorded land surveys/maps). Disperse this knowledge widely BEFORE official Government departments and DOC, Environment or Culture ministries can subvert such knowledge and destroy, obscure, reclassify or hide the evidence.
You don't believe this happens?! Check out ...Taylor's embargo
Then when you are walking, tramping, talking, or listening, keep an eye on or an ear out for the unusual, the taken for granted. Think about objects in and on the land with a new perspective. Learn more about the cultures here to-day, the cultures of recent history and those of long ago. The world is a big place. Man has always wandered over mountain and glen, moor and plain, hill and valley, river, ocean and sea, island and continent. We have always used the resources available to us within the means of our current technologies and we has always pushed the edge of understanding, endeavour, and investigation to the limit. It is NATURAL to do so, and we were made able to do so by design. Some people become enslaved by custom and superstition, by a lack of learning and education, inquisitiveness and loss of perception so that they reject open learning and truth and honesty. Their culture stagnates in rigid unremitting tradition. Fear, secrecy, deceit, deception and untruths multiply and gain control. In simple terms they go to the Devil, where darkness, lies, fear and retribution and apathy reign supreme. Question: Are we headed into another Dark Age? Or would it be preferable to have open knowldege of what we find out, about NZ's past?