Firearm-owning pastor's house in Christchurch, New Zealand—formerly a free country, now effectively a one-party state—raided on New Year's Eve, in his absence, for Thought Crime. You won't hear a thing about this from ACT or the Free Speech Union (except perhaps Seymour or Franks, who will say he brought it all on himself), who are in on it as maggots devouring a corpse. Soros's Soldiers.

This is 1984. Part of the problem is, the world is populated by illiterates who have never heard of Orwell, don't know what 1984 is and would not be able to concentrate for long enough to understand a paragraph of it.

https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/12/1...

I enjoyed your article very much and the imaginative employment of your analogy.

I have just one observation to make: the definition of "objectionable" in the Act has not been amended by the Bill. So I would be interested to understand why you think the Bill has somehow increased the scope and extent of the powers of government to decide what is objectionable (and include free speech).

Isn't the Bill simply to enlarge the existing censorship model to set up an office to censor the internet on the basis the internet now makes publication available to every person who owns a computer or telephone and has access to an internet provider? Thus more people are required now than before to supervise the existing law. I.e., The Bill provides additional bureaucratic manpower to remove objectionable material online but it doesn’t extend the type of material that is objectionable (as defined at least!) in any way.

The definition of objectionable in the 1993 Act (unchanged by the Bill) reads as follows:

3. Meaning of objectionable

(1) For the purposes of this Act, a publication is objectionable if it describes, depicts, expresses, or otherwise deals with matters such as sex, horror, crime, cruelty, or violence in such a manner that the availability of the publication is likely to be injurious to the public good.

(1A) Without limiting subsection (1), a publication deals with a matter such as sex for the purposes of that subsection if—
(a) the publication is or contains 1 or more visual images of 1 or more children or young persons who are nude or partially nude; and
(b) those 1 or more visual images are, alone, or together with any other contents of the publication, reasonably capable of being regarded as sexual in nature.

(1B) Subsection (1A) is for the avoidance of doubt.

(2) A publication shall be deemed to be objectionable for the purposes of this Act if the publication promotes or supports, or tends to promote or support,—
(a) the exploitation of children, or young persons, or both, for sexual purposes; or
(b) the use of violence or coercion to compel any person to participate in, or submit to, sexual conduct; or
(c) sexual conduct with or upon the body of a dead person; or
(d) the use of urine or excrement in association with degrading or dehumanising conduct or sexual conduct; or
(e) bestiality; or
(f) acts of torture or the infliction of extreme violence or extreme cruelty.

Do you have a problem with the meaning of objectionable and the law prior to the Bill? If not, why is it a problem to have some extra people employed to administer the law regarding publications online?

Or do you believe there should be one law for the magazines/newspapers who formerly had 100% control over publications and another for the private citizen? That, I think, is the issue for discussion.

Your article suggests that internet publications/posts/blogs/websites should not be considered a publication if written by an individual private citizen but "free speech" and should therefore be treated differently under the law from a corporation or other entity in the business of publication.

I would be interested to hear how (and why) you distinguish why a publication on the internet should be treated differently depending on which entity published it and also why there is a problem given the definition of "objectionable" (which has not changed since 1993).

Hi Linz

I read the following story this evening and thought you might appreciate it since it combines a few of your favourite topics: wokeism, humourless feminists/wimmen, and professors from universities - all in five short paragraphs!

It, including the title, is taken directly from the Wikipedia page of Professor Simon Sharoni, one of wokeism's feminist religious leaders.

Lingerie joke incident

"On April 5, 2018, while attending the annual conference of the International Studies Association (ISA), Professor Richard Ned Lebow, a Professor at King's College London, and Professor Simona Sharoni were on a crowded elevator when someone in the elevator offered to press their floor buttons; in response, Lebow jokingly answered, “ladies’ lingerie.”

"Following that, Sharoni filed a complaint against him, arguing that his use of sexual innuendo in a public space at an academic conference was a violation of ISA's Code of Conduct. An ISA committee found him in violation of its Code of Conduct and asked him to apologize to Sharoni.

"Following the complaint Lebow sent an e-mail to Sharoni explaining the context of his remark. In his e-mail he explained that in large department stores in the 1940s and 1950s there were lift operators that would request which department the customers wanted and it had become a standard gag line to reply "ladies' lingerie" when someone asked which floor you wanted.

"Lebow indicated that he will not apologize. Initial media coverage reported Sharoni's action as an example of political correctness. Columnist Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post sided with Lebow. "Let’s maintain some sense of proportion and civility," she said. Not every offensive comment was intended that way, and Sharoni should have checked with Lebow before bringing a disciplinary procedure, said Marcus. Marcus also quoted an email from Sharoni saying that “political correctness” was nothing more than a “blanket excuse by those who refuse to rethink and change their racist, sexist and homophobic beliefs and practices. From inappropriate jokes in public spaces to unwanted sexual advances and assault, men in positions of power are outraged when they are being held accountable, even if the sanction is as minor as a request for an apology.” Of more than 2,300 comments on Marcus's story about the incident, the vast majority condemned Sharoni.

"The incident went public. Sharoni said that in response, she had received hate mail, and that this was an example of “the impact on women and other marginalized groups” who witness abuse, and would discourage them from speaking up, even if they follow written policy and even if they are right. Lebow said that Sharoni and ISA should have tried to resolve the matter informally, since “international relations scholars know that dialogue is the first step in addressing conflict and coercion the last. Yet, ISA went right to coercion at the outset.”"

Don't speak to your neighbours. Rather, snitch on them!

Where are the Free Speech Union, the National Party, ACT and all the rest of the controlled opposition on this??!!

Sadly for us, jackass is the epitome of the very brainwashing that began in the '60's and has culminated in the manifestation of bad ideas rattling around the space where a brain should have developed. Yes, 'moron' is appropo: 'a person who is intellectually stagnant at around the age of 13' or 'has an intelligence quotient of around 50-69.' And this is what people voted for - possibly because it is a familiar face, espousing familiar bromides (albeit with a lot of arm-waving and facial gesticulations for psychological effect to distract from the vacuous content) - having all graduated the same government alignment centers.

The anti-dote of course is for each individual who has a clue, to work harder at his/her own self-preservation and value-achievement, until it's possible to once again breathe freely.

While it's still possible to exercise some choice: I choose a good book to read, to listen to great music, watch an old-time musical, contemplate the great works of art, or better yet: create something worthy of my soul. And I don't grant the morons a second more of my precious time than what they've earned . . .

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard jackass admonish everyone publicly: "You don't want to have your name on this list. We'll read the names out for everyone to hear!" - (so do what you're told you stupid 5-year-olds, or else!)

?Really.

I'm happy to say, Lindsay, we are not all as dumb as the rocks that jackass evidently projects us to be. It is a sad indictment on the population, though, that compliance with insanity is so compelling, versus fidelity to reality, truth and self-confidence.

I have been known to reject the idea of the 'kiwi' as a representation, for obvious reasons, of the nation's aspirations: small brain, big bottom, flightless bird, comes out at night, easily scared back into it's hole. However, of late, it seems more than appropriate.

As people, abandoned by Borderless Beijing Biden the Bastard, cling to the sides of aeroplanes, attempting to flee Islamo-Fascism; as Taiwan, abandoned by Borderless Beijing Biden the Bastard, is about to fall to the Chinese Communist Party (facilitators of the Wuhan Virus) just as Hong Kong has fallen; as fry-quacking Woke-Fascist Comrade Jihadi Jacinda Podesta, applauded by Borderless Beijing Biden the Bastard, commands Kiwis not to speak to their neighbours [but by all means snitch on them]—and Kiwis meekly comply—here's a salient reminder of what enabled Joseph Stalin to proceed with his tyranny unperturbed:

We lacked enough love of freedom. And even more—a consciousness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we made tiara to be submissive. We submitted with pleasure! We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

—Alexander Solzhenitsyn, 'The Gulag Archipelago'

Seeing the tyrannical news coming out of NZ; makes me sick! But...also well as the protests there and Australia...here's hoping that you Hobbits there take back the metaphorical Shire.

Jackboot Jihadi Jacinda: "Don't speak to your neighbours." But by all means snitch on them! Nazi Germany of the 1930s, Communist East Germany of the 1950s. The world is watching! Iran, North Korea, Communist China and the Islamic Emirate of Aghanistan applaud!

"New Zealand is now a police state":

Note, the following opening ten minutes from Tucker's show today has NOT been released by Fox (controlled opposition) while other less contentious parts have. This bootleg reproduction, oddly, has thus far been allowed to stay up on Woke-Fascist YouTube, but has been altered so that the images of Marie Antoinette Pelosi and her maskless Woke-Fascist rich white donors being served in luxury by masked slaves have been replaced by a still photo of Donald Trump!

Edit: boom!!

This one in the Australian Spectator by the indefatigable Amy Brooke, who has fought the good fight for decades to protect and preserve our sacred liberties, now under unprecedented assault by this evil Woke-Fascist regime and its lickspittles in the media and Academia:

https://spectator.com.au/autho...

The attack on free speech is extraordinarily damaging, because of course it is basically a totalitarian move, in line with George Orwell's chillingly prophetic NINETY EIGHTY-FOUR.

No - it's not that Orwell got the date wrong. The underground work of the far-Left to take over this country, hijacking our democracy, has been under way for several decades. The attack on our education system, substituting for academic learning propaganda directed at brainwashing children according to the agenda of Marxist activists - i.e. Communists - has been gathering in force from the 60s onwards.

Little by little the ramping up of incremental changes, in line with the Communist Gramsci's instructions to his followers to conceal their agenda of open warfare - and, instead, move to what has been over-late, at last recognised as "the long march though the institutions " - has brought about the situation we are in today.

The Labour Party leader, with her coalition of some equally as dedicatedly far-Left - assisted by the compliance of the usual patsies found within any political party, adept at keeping their heads down - is now bringing into fruition some decades of thoroughly undemocratic practices.

It has not helped the country that whenever the National Party assumed power in turn, its intellectual firepower was insufficient to make its members take on board the importance of reversing the Left' s power grabs.

In reality, in some ways National has been equally culpable in promoting divisive racial polities, and too easily rubber-stamping treaty settlements that arguably should never have been made - for example, the controversial "full and final" Ngai Tahu treaty settlement claim - which of course turned out to be nothing of the sort.

On very good evidence, described at the time as basically "a swindle, it was facilitated by inept Crown lawyers, admitting they had no knowledge of the tribe's history, and almost incredibly, accepting the tribe's far from accurate version of events ...

https://spectator.com.au/autho...

It's symptomatic of what Karl du Fresne writes about that you'll never see this in a New Zealand publication. Note the part about the media bribery slush fund. To say journalism is dead is to insult death:

"In his best-selling 1976 book The Passionless People, the late author and journalist Gordon McLauchlan characterised his fellow New Zealanders as ‘smiling zombies’: polite, cheerful and hard-working but smug and compliant. It was cruel but not inaccurate.

"It takes a lot to provoke New Zealanders politically. The last time it happened was in 1981, when a tour by the South African Springbok rugby team tore the country apart.

"Since then, Kiwis have largely reverted to their default setting of complacency and passivity. Which makes it all the easier for Jacinda Ardern’s Labour government to push through an agenda of radical transformation quite unlike any the country has experienced.

"New Zealanders returning after a few years abroad might wonder whether they’ve blundered into a parallel universe. A government that is pitifully thin on ministerial ability and experience is busy re-inventing the wheel, and doing it at such speed that the public has barely had time to catch its breath. To quote one seasoned political observer: ‘It seems like a hostile takeover of our country is underway and most people feel powerless to do anything about it’.

"The most visible change might crudely be described as Maorification, much of it aggressively driven by activists of mixed Maori and European descent who appear to have disowned their problematic white colonial lineage. Self-identifying as Maori not only taps into a fashionable culture of grievance and victimism but enables them to exercise power and influence that would otherwise not be available to them.

"In mainstream media, Maori place names, most previously unheard of by most New Zealanders and unused even by people of Maori descent, have displaced official names bestowed by British colonists — ignoring the inconvenient fact that New Zealand cities and towns are British, not Maori, creations.

"The government has done its best to ensure continued media support for this ideological project by creating a $55 million slush fund, supposedly to support ‘public interest journalism’ but available only to news organisations that commit themselves to the promotion of the so-called principles (never satisfactorily defined) of the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi. What has been framed as an idealistic commitment to the survival of journalism is, in other words, a cynical and opportunistic bid for control over the news media at a time when the industry is floundering. This is a government so shameless, or perhaps so convinced of its own untouchability, that it is brazenly buying the media’s compliance. ..."

https://www.spectator.com.au/2...

The landslide winner of the 2020 election rips in to election fraud and Woke-Fascist Critical Race Theory around the two hour mark. More fearless than ever! Watch before Woke-Fascist YouTube take it down!

Seymour is a loathsome, cynical Globalist reptile, but at the moment, in Parliament, he's all we've got:

https://freespeech.act.org.nz/

From Tim Wikiriwhi:

"I cant believe it!

"This must have been a bitter pill of Commy Marc Daalder to swallow!

"The whole bill is not dead, but a significant section of it is."

Internet censorship provisions to be scrapped

Marc Daalder

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/int...

... Tinetti told Newsroom that the volume of submissions against the filtering provisions helped shift her thinking.

"The filtering provisions have been the most submitted upon aspect of the Bill – and the majority of the submissions that mentioned the filtering provisions were opposed to it," she said.

"While filtering can be a useful tool to prevent access to and mitigate harms from illegal objectionable content online, currently the approach taken in the Bill does not provide sufficient safeguards to prevent potential impacts on freedom of expression." ...

But then, alas, we learned the Woke-Fascists are proceeding with their disgusting hate speech laws, under which opinions will be criminalised: the offended sensibilities of lobotomised snowflakes will, unless this Woke-Fascism is defeated, become law, and outspoken humans will be sent to jail for causing offence. To invoke Salman Rushdie again, "There is no such thing as a right not to be offended."

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Free Speech Union
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 at 13:40
Subject: Hate Speech laws will not make New Zealand a safer and more tolerant society
To:

MEDIA RELEASE: Hate speech laws will not make New Zealand a safer and more tolerant society

25 JUNE 2021
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Free Speech Union is reacting with concern to the Government's plan to make speech criminal and says the proposals will go no way towards making New Zealand a safer and more tolerant society.

The law would change so that a person who intentionally incites, stirs up, maintains or normalises hatred against any protected group of people, would be liable for up to three years in prison if they did so by being threatening, abusive or even insulting.

Spokesperson for Union, David Cumin says, “The government claims these changes to hate speech laws will promote social cohesion. The opposite is true — legislating hatred out of existence is a hopeless expectation. What's more, the government is yet to provide examples of the speech they intend these provisions to capture.”

“The ambiguity of certain words in the legislation such as ‘insulting’ imports a real risk that speech may fall within the ambit for prosecution that was never intended to be criminalised by those envisioning the proposals.”

“Free speech has to mean the ability to insult. Democracy can’t work if the powers at be can deem certain arguments or speech as illegal.”

“Alarmingly, being found guilty of hate speech would carry a higher penalty than some violent offences. In any event, a lengthy prison sentence is unlikely to be the best mechanism to make an intolerant person rethink their views, if anything, it will push them into dark corners that would make violence a more tangible possibility.”

“New Zealanders should prepare for the very real possibility that those who take offence to tweets, crass statements or unsavoury protests will run to law-enforcement to have their offence indulged. The Union has already been contacted by members of Police concerned about having to enforce these proposals. While the ambit for successful prosecution may be high, overseas experience has shown that the introduction of such laws has resulted in law enforcement consistently missing the mark, and has created a structure allowing for legal harassment of the state against citizens, even if they are ultimately found not guilty.”

“The Free Speech Union will be fighting these proposals and invite all Kiwis who value this human right to join us.”

ENDS

Media contact:
Dane Giraud
027 419 9641
Copyright © 2021 Free Speech Coalition, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you have donated to or shown interest in the Free Speech Coalition.

Our mailing address is:
Free Speech Coalition
90 The Terrace, Wellington
Wellington Central, Wellington 6011
New Zealand

This Pastor in Calgary, Canada wasn't taking any nonsense from the Police over Easter; ejected the Gestapo from his Church. They slunk away in disgrace and shame. This is how you fight back against the filth, folks! (hint: by standing up for yourself, not cowering away as you've been doing). Video is 2 mins 20 seconds and well worth watching if you are genuinely concerned about your freedoms being lost.

Everyone was dismissing the influence of Cage and Shoenberg, because most people really didn't enjoy atonalism, or take it seriously as a threat, etc, but here we are, with musical notation itself being called "racist". But I knew this was coming, as far back as when I was talking with lefty-university types back in 98-99, who were telling me that classical music was "colonial", imperialism, etc, because it mirrored political structures of oppression, invoking Adorno idea's of "total freedom" in music (re: noise), etc. So it's no surprise. Hell, they're attacking objectivity itself...

Well, you know what they say, "you can't reason with the unreasonable." And once they throw objectivity out the window, all bets are off...

When reporting the embrace last year of Only Black Lives Matter by the New Zealand School of Music and its enactment of a programme to "de-center [American spelling!] Whiteness," I observed that things weren't looking good for Bach, Beethoven and Brahms. Little did I realise what an understatement this was. We now hear that Oxford University, no less, wants to shove musical notation itself down the Memory Hole of 1984:

https://www.breitbart.com/euro...

The University of Oxford is considering proposals that would remove sheet music from its curriculum over woke claims that teaching the Western form of musical notation has roots in “colonialism” and “complicity in white supremacy”.

In response to widespread Black Lives Matter protesters and riots last year in the United Kingdom, music educators at Oxford University have joined the wider iconoclastic movement which has been sweeping through British academia.

The music department at the prestigious and ancient university has seen calls to remove music notation from the curriculum as professors seek to focus less on white European heritage and culture, according to documents seen by The Telegraph.

The woke educators went on to claim that musical notation itself is a “colonialist representational system” that has “complicity to white supremacy”. The claim is similar to leftist pronouncements in America that mathematics is inherently racist.

The Oxford academics went on to pronounce that teaching the piano or conducting orchestras could cause “students of colour great distress” as the skills involved are closely tied to “white European music”.

Professors at the university said that the classical music which is taught at Oxford, which includes Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert, among others, is too focused on “white European music from the slave period”.

The assertion is somewhat dubious, as Western classical music, as well as the practice of sheet music notation, predates the Atlantic slave trade, stemming back to musical traditions from the medieval period such as Gregorian chanting.

In response to student demands “arising from international Black Lives Matter demonstrations,” the Oxford faculty is also considering placing a heavier emphasis on “non-Eurocentric” musical traditions such as Hip-Hop and Jazz, as well as “African and African Diasporic Musics” and “Global Musics”.

The curriculum could also place more importance on pop music and culture, with suggested topics including “Artists Demanding Trump Stop Using Their Songs” at campaign rallies and “Dua Lipa’s Record-Breaking Livestream”.

Mocking the woke push from the university, London mayoral candidate and Heritage Party leader David Kurten said: “For goodness sake. Oxford is supposed to be one of our top Universities that promotes academic rigour and excellence. It should not be peddling woke nonsense like ‘classical music is racist and ‘sheet music is non-inclusive'”.

The proposals come amid a wider push throughout British academia to “decolonise the curriculum” in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement.

In February, for example, the University of Leicester caused uproar after it proposed cutting courses in Medieval English literature — removing seminal works such as Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales and the Anglo-Saxon epic poem Beowulf — in favour of focusing more heavily on texts relating to sexuality, diversity, race, and ethnicity.

The woke push has also seen the introduction of speech codes, with the University of Manchester telling staff to refrain from using gendered words such as “father” or “mother” in favour of more “inclusive language”.

https://www.breitbart.com/euro...

The moronry of this is unimaginable—but no lover of freedom and civilisation should content himself with faulting its utter brainlessness: it must be called out as the unspeakable evil that it is, with the only caveat being that this is being unkind to evil!

This is cosmos-shattering:

Nigel is taking on the "child-molesters of the mind," as I've always called them, the harbingers of 1984. The vicious legislation of which I speak in the primary post, not to mention the nauseating Woke-Fascism of the puke-making Meghyn Markle whom Nigel discusses here, is the culmination of decades of indoctrination by the child-molesters of the mind:

The ground you cover with this is both sweeping and detailed.
Free Speech emergency indeed!
And in all nations.

Lindsay! so, are you appearing before the committee in person? an oral submission?