Freedom of Speech

Rowan Atkinson on Free Speech

The Muhammad Cartoons

I doubt the MSM have the courage to publish them.

French embassies and schools around the world have been put on high alert in fear of a backlash after a magazine published cartoons mocking the prophet Muhammad and Muslims.

Paris has ordered special security measures at official buildings, including diplomatic and consular representations, and instructed those in 20 particularly sensitive countries to close on Friday, the Islamic prayer day.

Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister said he was “concerned” at the possibility of hostile reactions to the caricatures published in the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

The cartoons, some of which feature Muhammad, come amid continuing protests by Muslims around the globe over an anti-Islam film, Innocence of Muslims.

The offices of Charlie Hebdo were firebombed last November after it published an edition entitled Charia Hebdo, supposedly guest-edited by Muhammad.

On Wednesday, France’s prime minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault, said in a statement: “In the current climate, the prime minister wishes to stress his disapproval of all excesses and calls on everyone to behave responsibly.”

Questioned on RTL radio, he added: “We are in a country where the freedom of expression is guaranteed, along with the freedom to caricature.”

I agree with France’s Prime Minister….and so I will publish some of them. All the cartoons can be found at this French language site.

More after the break: Read more »

Free Speech wins, AUSA are still losers

Stuff.co.nz

Yesterday the AUSA tried to ban a group from campus because they didn’t like what they say. They contrived a vote…organised some treating…and lost:

Anti-abortion group ProLife has been allowed to stay as a club within the Auckland University Students’ Association despite complaints the group was harassing vulnerable students on campus.

The association had received two complaints about pamphlets containing “misinformed” health information on abortions being distributed by the group, and of students feeling harassed.

The association held a meeting yesterday to decide whether the group should be disaffiliated.

There was heated debate during the meeting, which attracted about 300 people, and students eventually voted 225 to 117 to allow the club to stay within the association.

ProLife New Zealand spokeswoman Rachel Wong disputed the club had done anything wrong in the first place.

She said the association failed to communicate with the club after receiving an “anonymous” and “unsubstantiated” email complaint.

AUSA hates free speech

NZ Herald

The leftists in charge of the AUSA hate free speech. They are trying to shut down a club and remove them from campus simply because they do not agree with them:

A free-speech battle is shaping up at Auckland University tomorrow over a move to boot out an anti-abortion group from university facilities.

ProLife Auckland, which claims more than 400 student members, faces disaffiliation from the students’ association after a complaint that it distributed a pamphlet containing “misleading health information”.

The students’ association is laying on a barbecue as an incentive to attract the required quorum of 200 students at a special general meeting to consider the motion in the university quad at 1pm tomorrow.

Association vice-president Dan Haines said the executive was not recommending disaffiliation but was just putting the motion to the meeting.

“People communicated to our women’s rights officers that it was an issue. It was the women’s rights officers who brought it up,” he said.

“Personally I think that maybe having a discussion is a good thing. It is a contentious club.”

They obfuscate by denying they are recommending disaffiliation…no club should ever have their right to be a club put up for a vote…perhaps someone moves that Princes Street Labour be dis affiliated and then see where that ends up. Universities are supposed to be the bastion of free speech and yet here we have jumped up little Stalinists decreeing who can and can’t belong.

The Forbidden History of Unpopular People

theforbiddenhistory.com

Learn about free speech:

In episode #1 of the ‘Forbidden History’ trilogy Topher takes a stand on freedom of speech, using some of history’s most unpopular people to show that free speech is worth it, no matter what the price.

Power capitulates

Good. Simon Power has had to capitulate over his attempts to remove the right to silence.

Justice Minister Simon Power has raised the white flag on his controversial criminal justice reforms, committing to preserving the right to silence and substantially watering down other aspects to pass the bill with cross-party support.

The concessions – which include compromises with the Labour Party on the rules around jury trials, having a trial proceed in the absence of the accused, and the ability of the court to impose fines – follow a week of intense and fast-moving negotiations with several parties.

 

NBR on FIGJAMs assault on democracy

The editor of the NBR has launched into Simon Power and National over his/their egregious betrayal of New Zealanders by stitching up a back-room deal with Labour to suppress our right to freedom of speech.

The worst fears that MMP has had a dampening effect on decision-making have been realised in the “consensus” on new electoral funding laws and the reported back bill on next year’s referendum.

On the former, the government has made a deal with Labour that retains some of the worst features of the notorious legislation that National successfully campaigned against.

This includes a $300,000 limit on campaign spending by so-called “promoters” or third parties. This is a little more than double that Labour’s law had imposed ($120,000).

National originally proposed no limit but this has been traded off for a higher level before party donations have to revealed. Disclosure would instead now apply only to donations above $15,000 (previously $10,000).

Other changes are equally mean-spirited and inhibiting of public debate, which suggests the writing of electoral legislation remains largely to further the self-serving needs of politicians rather than what’s in the public interest.

Most lobbyists from the Left, and their parties, see danger in any form of political funding (ecxept their own). Despite a lack of hard evidence, they associate large donations with political paybacks (for their wealthier opponents).

The public has never accepted this and it is disappointing to see the revamped law is only marginally better than the one that was a major contributor to Labour’s demise in the 2008 election.

Nevil Gibson blames the MMP environment for this, I think that is overly harsh. The real problem is liberal, wet, panty-waists like Simon Power who stand for nothing and fall for everything.

However one overlooked aspect is the spiking of any attempt to mount a campaign against MMP by Simon Power. He is of course a big proponent of the system that has ham-strung New Zealand ever since it was foisted upon us. The very system that was supposed to protect us from the excesses of politicians has been masterfully manipulated by them, both sides of the house to maintain their arrogant hegemony. Now because of Simon Power‘s treachery we can’t even mount a campaign against the system that so cripples our nation.

The money question also undermines the final form of the MMP referendum bill. The same $300,000 “third party” cap has been imposed, presumably to limit any campaign against MMP.

It is assumed, of course, that this would be mounted by a well-funded business-backed lobby, though signs of one are not yet apparent.

A review of MMP is said to be high on the agenda for some in the event it is retained in the first referendum. This review would attempt to reduce some of MMP’s worst features, such as weak electoral candidates still getting into Parliament through the list, and a party having more electoral seats than its proportional vote.

Also, it is likely some would favour a change in the threshold, which at the last election allowed Act to get four seats because it had an electoral seat, even though it polled below the 5% mark, while New Zealand First got no seats but received more votes.

Excluded from the review are other issues where public feeling runs counter to the political establishment – the future of the Maori seats, which effectively double the vote of those on that roll compared with the general roll, and the overall number of MPs.

Pro-MMP campaigners will be keen to highlight this review in defence of a system they say should be “improved” rather than discarded.

We are being systematically shut down and controlled by politicians who wish that people like me would just STFU. All Simon Power has now done is provide a mechanism for labour or any other anti-democratic politician in his mold to easily lower the threshold from the arbitrary $300,000 limit he has booby-trapped into the legislation.

What they said then – John Key

At the time of John Boscawen’s EFB protest marches, John Key, as Leader of the Opposition at the time, did not attend a march, however he did send John a message to be read out to the protesters. In that message he said, with regard to the Electoral Finance Bill;

Labour is not listening. National is.
Today, I give you this assurance. If I have the privilege to be the next Prime Minister I will overturn this law. I will set about building a proper political consensus for fair changes to our election rules. I will listen to what people like you, and many thousands of others are saying.
You are fighting for a principle.
You are fighting for THE most important principle.
You are fighting for democracy.
I salute you
John Key

I was there when John Boscawen read out that message, and more importantly, I put it on Youtube.

Well John? What happened to your principles? Did you drop them along the way as you were fighting for democracy?

Why has John Key allowed Simon Power to sell out National and the thousands who marched for our freedom of speech and democracy?

Sure National repealed the law but they have effectively re-instated it. they have protected the hegemony of politician to pretend to speak for us and spend our money telling us what they think, yet prevent us telling them how we think.

What is even more ridiculous is the spending limits they have decided upon for standing for parliament. In the recent local body elections people were able to spend up to $40,000 to secure a ward councillor position. Yet Simon Power and his Labour party pals think that $25,000 should be the limit for an individual to spend trying to secure an electorate seat. Why the difference…are council seats more important that seats for members of parliament.

Yet another example of the paucity of Simon Power‘s intellectual abilities.

John Key - Enemy of Freedom of Speech

John Key - Enemy of Freedom of Speech

If I was…

…John Key, I would be very worried about my caucus backlash tomorrow.

…John Key, I would be giving  FIGJAM a very public dressing down and instructing cabinet to overturn his The Electoral (Finance and Advance Voting) Amendment Bill.

…a National party caucus member, I would be very angry that my caucus never got a chance to discuss FIGJAM‘s stich up of the selecto committee, yet Labour’s caucus did.

…a National party caucus member I’d be wondering just which team FIGJAM is on, because it sure isn’t mine.

…Steven Joyce, I would be very annoyed that two popular and well read bloggers may very well run a third party campaign against National.

…Steven Joyce, i would be very annoyed that FIGJAM has once again tried to de-rail National’s election chances next year.

…a National party cabinet minister, I would be concerned that FIGJAM seems to have stuffed up everything he has touched.

FIGJAM, I’d be worried what The Whale has planned next.

…Tau Henare, I would have a chat with FIGJAM about drinking a gumboot full of knuckles and sandwiches.

FIGJAM, I’d start listening to people in my team and not pinko liberal handwringers like Jon Johansson.

…a National party member I would be asking my local MP whether or not they supported FIGJAM‘s position on freedom of speech.

Kim il FIGJAM

Simon “FIGJAM” Power. The one and the only. This is a bloke who is well known for running around telling his childhood mates that he was going to be prime minister and the greatest leader of the National Party ever. He is a legend in his own mind.

FIGJAM, there is no way you are ever going to make the step up.

You have totally pissed off the VRWC and you have replaced Winston Peters as our main target. Treason is always a far greater crime than corruption.

Only insiders will know that the whole Electoral Reform select committee was a total farce. FIGJAM hung Amy Adams and the other National committee members out to dry, doing a shabby backroom deal with Labour to have a law that will go through without a fight.

He railroaded the whole process, with caucus not having a say on it, and those on the committee having to do as they were told by FIGJAM.

The only way to deal with this is for FIGJAM‘s cabinet colleagues to tell him to sort it out, and for caucus to give him the bash tomorrow morning. Then they need a swift change in the bill to stop the suppression of free speech.

Otherwise I will be looking for a donor to give $300,001 so I can run a third party campaign against Figjam in Rangitikei, and become New Zealand’s first political prisoner for demonstrating my right to free speech.

Meanwhile I understand that there is chaos in Wellington. Captain Panic Pants has his nickers in a serious twist about the thought of the PM seeing my billboards on Molesworth St every day on the way to work. Billboards like this one.

Kim il FIGJAM needs to be taken out, both of Rangitikei and also from the National Party, he is better suited to be a force within Labour, with all his pinko mates he prefers to scheme in back-rooms with.

Kim il FIGJAM

Kim il FIGJAM?