Freedom of Speech

Halfwit mayor Andrew Judd thinks being called a halfwit is hate speech, now he is just being a dickhead

The halfwit Mayor of New Plymouth has gone full retard thinking that me calling him a halfwit is hate speech.

A right wing blogger has labelled New Plymouth Mayor Andrew Judd a “halfwit” following the referendum on Maori wards.

Establishing a Maori ward for the district was voted down in a landslide on Friday, with 83 per cent of people voting against and only 17 per cent in favour.

Online commentary and debate came quick in wake of the decision with Whale Oil blogger Cameron Slater even calling for Judd’s head to roll.

“The halfwit Mayor in New Plymouth just can’t accept the result of a referendum he forced,” Slater said on his website.

“Instead of resigning, which an honourable man would do, he is now proposing other half baked solutions which will likely end up in the same place as his previous one…He should just resign and go lick his wounds in private – this wailing about a democratic result is pathetic,” Slater said in a post on his website.

Slater was one of hundreds who posted their thoughts across social media platforms and, like the poll results show, many were happy with the way it went.

[…]    Read more »

Face of the day

Art Barrios

Art Barrios is city planning commissioner for the town of El Monte in California.

Today’s face of the day is faced with losing his job because of making a comment on a facebook post from the website LouderWithCrowder.com  As we have seen over and over again in the Media he has been backed into a corner and forced to make an apology for exercising his Freedom of Speech. His crime? ‘ Offending ‘  an organisation with suspected ties to Islamic terrorism that is a powerful lobby group in America.

If you want to know who rules over you, find out who you cannot criticize.”

-Pamela Geller

Yet again we are faced with the irony of an Islamic organisation that believes that we Infidels are inferior and should submit to Islam ( an offensive, hateful and bigoted world view ) claiming that someone that criticises Islam should lose their job for being hateful and a bigot.

Yet again we see the Media portraying the critics of Islam as the bad guys and Islam as the poor innocent victim who needs to be protected from hurtful words at the the expense of Free Speech and a man’s job.

original

Read more »

Face of the day

Pamela Geller Photo-jewishtribune

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and publisher of PamelaGeller.com. Photo-jewishtribune

Today’s face of the day is a personal heroine of mine. She is a speaker of the inconvenient truth. As an ex teacher of History I know that it is people and organisations like hers that can change the world. I also know that her battle will be uphill all the way. The kind of opposition she faces I would expect in a non democratic country where free speech has no place. The fact that she has had to fight for the right to Free Speech in America of all places is a frightening thing. Pamela’s response to critics after this weeks Jihadist attack on the American Freedom Defense Initiative Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest is below.

Some are saying I provoked this attack. But to kowtow to violent intimidation will only encourage more of it.

Sunday in Garland, Texas, a police officer was wounded in a battle that is part of a longstanding war: the war against the freedom of speech. Some people are blaming me for the Garland shooting — so I want to address that here.
The shooting happened at my American Freedom Defense Initiative Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest, when two Islamic jihadists armed with rifles and explosives drove up to the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland and attempted to gain entry to our event, which was just ending. We were aware of the risk and spent thousands of dollars on security — and it paid off. The jihadis at our free speech event were not able to achieve their objective of replicating the massacre at the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine last January — and to go it one better in carnage. They were not able to kill anyone. We provided enormous security, in concert with the superb Garland police department. The men who took the aspiring killers down may have saved hundreds of lives.
And make no mistake: If it weren’t for the free-speech conference, these jihadis would have struck somewhere else — a place where there was less security, like the Lindt cafe in Australia or the Hyper Cacher Kosher supermarket in Paris.    Read more »

Face of the day

1430019318234

SBS presenter Scott McIntyre PHOTO-smh.com.au

Today’s face of the day has been sacked for exercising his right to freedom of speech. I do not agree that he should be sacked for saying what he said. If it is okay to do that to him it makes it okay for it to be done to us when we express a different view to that of our employers.

I will note however that he had signed a social media policy which I am not privy to. If it did make it clear that this kind of thing was unacceptable while employed by them then that is a different matter as it was his choice to accept those terms when he took the job.

He has the right to say things that are offensive and we have the right to mock him or disagree with him. That is what Freedom of Speech means. A contract with his employer specifically about the use of Social Media however, complicates the matter.

Read more »

A reader emails Jim Hubbard

hubbard

Jim Hubbard penned a disgusting cartoon about me and my travels to Gallipoli to honour my great-grandfather Harry Crozier.

A reader was incensed and emailed him.    Read more »

The real bigots in our midst

Bigot-300x227

Traditionally one calls a person a Bigot in order to silence them, usually when you lack a convincing counter argument.

facts-chick-fil-bigot-obama-boycott-homosexualmarriage-politics-1344179229

Traditionally it is the left and the liberals who like to call middle and right leaning people Bigots but I think that it is well past time that we acknowledged the real bigots in our society.

Bigots are those who are intolerant of others opinions. Bigots ridicule others for having a different point of view. Bigots use violence and confrontation to stop others from taking part in legal and peaceful protest. Bigots burn their own countries flag because it was waved by those whose views they don’t share. Bigots are intolerant of the democratic rights of others if the others do not share their world view. Bigots only support Free Speech when they are making their views known, they want opposing views silenced.

These are the true bigots of our society.

Read more »

Faces of the day

sideswipe_620x311

Holly from Dunedin writes: “My flatmate lost his phone on Saturday and a couple of police officers took a selfie and posted it on Facebook so he would know it had been found. It had over 11,000 likes in less than 24 hours.”

-The Herald

Today’s faces of the day represent how I feel about the New Zealand Police. Like every profession some are nicer than others but all up I think they are the good guys who put themselves in danger daily in order to protect us all.They are real people who choose to do a difficult and often thankless job where they can be easy targets for verbal abuse and violence. I admire them.

Not everyone shares my view and this week I was angered to see the below image posted on TDB.

Read more »

David Bain supporters stifle free speech

This is just disgusting

An author claims David Bain supporters are using bullying tactics to stop bookshops selling his book, which proclaims Robin Bain innocent of the mass murder.

Mike Stockdale, 79, of Palmerston North, has self-published 200 copies of The Bain Killings: Whodunnit? at a cost of around $5000.

But the two bookshops that agreed to sell the book have pulled it after being told they were exposing themselves to prosecution.

The bookshops, along with Trade Me, had received complaints from supporters that the book had legal faults.

Otago University Book Shop manager Phillippa Duffy said she had taken legal advice before withdrawing the book. Read more »

The Press on THAT t-shirt and being offended

The Press has a good editorial on THAT shirt in Canterbury Museum.

The offensive T-shirt currently causing a stir in Christchurch is not that easy to find.

It is tucked away in a booth by itself in a corner at the Canterbury Museum’s T-Shirts Unfolding exhibition – the booth itself would be easy to miss, and to miss it you need to negotiate your way past the warnings of offensive material at the entrance.

To get in to the booth, a security guard must lift a tape for you, and then you turn left, then right, then right again before the blasphemy of the shirt confronts you. On the front of it there is a nun who is pleased with herself, and on the back Jesus is described with a four-lettered anatomical noun. If the sight of the shirt offends you, you will have literally gone out of your way to be offended.

The shirt itself is offensive, of course, without a doubt and officially so. It was banned by the Chief Censor in 2008, so it would be unlawful to wear it in the street, where people have no choice whether to see it or not. A special dispensation was given by the censor to the museum to allow it to be shown in a curated exhibition charting the history and cultural phenomenon of the T-shirt.

Offence can only be taken not given…and for someone to be offended at the exhibition they must really, really want to be offended.

As I stated before I don’t find a t-shirt offensive, I find the designers of the t-shirt just a bit sad that they feel the need to try to offend people in such a crass manner.

So, why is the museum showing offensive material? The question is open to debate, and it surely is a debate worth having. And that is what museums and art galleries are for. The way the shirt is displayed is not in itself gratuitous, and those who have made a choice to enter the booth are perhaps those least likely to be bothered by it.

But some people will be bothered, not by viewing the shirt, but by the blasphemous nature of what it shows and the fact that it exists at all.

The offence they feel, which is real and sincere, is perhaps felt more deeply because the shirt is back on display and because a public body, such as the museum, has endorsed its inclusion in the exhibition.

Inevitable comparisons will be made – if the shirt had depicted the Prophet Muhammed, would it have been included? Why is it frowned upon to insult one person’s religion, but considered OK to denigrate another’s?

Read more »

The bully pulpit is destroying liberalism and freedom of speech

Jonathan Chait explains why political correctness and the bully pulpit of demanding silence from those whose ideas you oppose is creating a reign of terror on freedom of speech, and the worst offenders are those who should know better.

The p.c. style of politics has one serious, possibly fatal drawback: It is exhausting. Claims of victimhood that are useful within the left-wing subculture may alienate much of America. The movement’s dour puritanism can move people to outrage, but it may prove ill suited to the hopeful mood required of mass politics. Nor does it bode well for the movement’s longevity that many of its allies are worn out. “It seems to me now that the public face of social liberalism has ceased to seem positive, joyful, human, and freeing,” confessed the progressive writer Freddie deBoer. “There are so many ways to step on a land mine now, so many terms that have become forbidden, so many attitudes that will get you cast out if you even appear to hold them. I’m far from alone in feeling that it’s typically not worth it to engage, given the risks.” Goldberg wrote recently about people “who feel emotionally savaged by their involvement in [online feminism] — not because of sexist trolls, but because of the slashing righteousness of other feminists.” Former Feministing editor Samhita Mukhopadhyay told her, “Everyone is so scared to speak right now.”

That the new political correctness has bludgeoned even many of its own supporters into despondent silence is a triumph, but one of limited use. Politics in a democracy is still based on getting people to agree with you, not making them afraid to disagree. The historical record of political movements that sought to expand freedom for the oppressed by eliminating it for their enemies is dismal. The historical record of American liberalism, which has extended social freedoms to blacks, Jews, gays, and women, is glorious. And that glory rests in its confidence in the ultimate power of reason, not coercion, to triumph.

Read more »