Posts by simon g
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: These things we must now change, in reply to Pete,
Pete, the advantage of our current voting system is that you would only need 5% to make sure you are represented in Parliament. Possibly even less, if you can persuade one like-minded MP with an electorate to represent you (David Seymour seems keen!).
You are opposed to legislation that (so far) Labour and National support, plus 2 other parties, so if there is the depth and breadth of feeling that you claim, then the dissenters have a clear and peaceful path ahead. Engage in the democratic process. Win votes. Get elected.
We won't be "two countries". Just the same one, with new representatives in Parliament, if you succeed. That's how it works.
-
From Christchurch terrorist to Canadian "free speech" fraud, Lauren Southern: one degree of separation. Linked by his cash, linked by their work.
"Free Speech Coalition", still nothing?
-
Hard News: These things we must now change, in reply to Pete,
Sorry you feel that way, Pete.
Many of your previous comments (under the name) suggest you are not an unreasonable person, so I hope you can reconsider in time. Not for Labour's sake - that doesn't matter at all, because all serious parties support the ban. But for the wider community's, and indeed your own. I see no cause for shame.
-
From Russell's original post:
I think the members of the Free Speech Coalition need to seriously examine what they became part of after they assembled to defend the “rights” of the nakedly racist Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern last year. Their pathetic rally in Aotea Square (which was promoted in advance by the National Front) was principally a fan club for Tommy Robinson, a violent Islamophobe with an extensive criminal record; more speakers railed against “sharia law” than fettered speech.
The coalition had multiple opportunities to repudiate what their rally became, and they didn’t take them.
So let's update that. What has the "Free Speech Coalition" done since?
The Chief Censor has made a ruling on the terrorist's manifesto. I personally think the ruling is questionable, perhaps a step too far (on possession, not promotion, and on the document, not the video), but reasonable people can disagree about that. The FSC has sent out multiple tweets condemning the decision, along with multiple retweets along similar lines. Fair enough: that's a legitimate issue of free speech.
But the FSC has not managed ONE single tweet about the massacre itself. They tweeted on March 14, the day before, and then nothing for 10 days. Not even free thoughts and free prayers. Now suddenly they are back in action, with an issue that they DO want to talk about. (Of course there are perfectly good reasons for being offline. In which case a simple explanation or apology might be expected. There isn't one).
I'm no fancy philosopher or lawyer, but I would have thought that 50 voices silenced was worth something, if you care about free speech. They were exercising free speech by praying. They aren't exercising it any more, on account of being dead.
Perhaps the Chief Censor's ban could be overturned. Maybe subject to judicial review. Maybe a change of heart, when time has passed.
But the dead will not be subject to judicial review. They don't get their rights back. Their free speech is gone forever.
If anybody had any doubt about the priorities of the so-called "Free Speech Coalition", they can have none now.
-
FFS Dennis, do you have to turn this blog into a repository for your idle reckons, just because you're bored on a Sunday? Can't you get a hobby or something? You have a responsibility to consider the consequences of what you say in a public forum. Can't you just get a Twitter account and collect 3 followers for this rubbish?
You and Farmer Green between you poison this place.
-
Hard News: These things we must now change, in reply to Farmer Green,
FG, I tried being polite to you upthread, and that didn't work so ... just stop being a dick. Stop treating this blog like your own personal waffle house.
Nobody will believe it's "all sorted". But one method of mass murder will be severely restricted. The method that can attract a terrorist to NZ because it is far more easily available than in Australia. The method that can be freely purchased without drawing attention, and practised legally at a gun club. The method that took 50 lives, because of all the available options for terrorism, this was the easiest to prepare and carry out.
There are lots of hypotheticals. This was real.
-
Hard News: These things we must now change, in reply to Sacha,
Superb effort. Seeing Americans online just gobsmacked at how fast we have been able to change our gun laws.
And seeing Americans online trying to swamp Twitter threads by claiming “our gun rights”, forgetting to pretend they’re totes Kiwi dudes living in Hamilton or wherever.
Apparently the 2nd amendment is not only sacred in the USA, it must also apply to an independent country they couldn’t locate on the map just a week ago. It’s a useful reminder to our own media: when they talk about “the gun lobby” who do they really mean? People who can’t even vote here?
Example: replies to Henry Cooke (a solid Stuff reporter), laughable if you're not crying.
-
On a more positive note, here are some of the events planned for today and tomorrow.
See you in the Auckland Domain on Friday (and/or Ponsonby Mosque if I can make it).
-
I find that I'm getting increasingly angry at this sudden discovery of far-right bigotry on blogs, social media etc. Gosh, who knew?
Anybody who f***ing wanted to know, that's who.
Sack real estate agents if it makes you feel cleansed, but let's not pretend we are changing anything, if there is simply a 'decent interval' (a month? a fortnight?) before all the enablers are being quoted as "political commentators", "centre-right bloggers", your friendly panelists on the AM show, Newstalk ZB and the rest.
If the media want to hear from Farrar, Brash, Slater and their ilk, then invite them on to be interviewed and challenged for what they do, not as wise counsel to be respectfully consulted.
-
Hard News: These things we must now change, in reply to Farmer Green,
FG, I don't want to get into a slanging match on this thread, on this subject, at this time. So I would respectfully ask you to think about the comparison that you have made in that comment, reconsider its merit, and edit accordingly. Thanks.