human rights

A benefit payment for ex-Crims is a human right? Or so the argument goes

The wombles are out in force, now demanding benefits for criminals as a “human right”.

A move to allow probation officers to impose cuts to a person’s benefit if they fail to comply with community work has been labelled by some justice advocates as a breach of the Human Rights Act.

The changes are being proposed under a member’s Bill by National MP Mark Mitchell.

Mr Mitchell says during his time as a former police officer he had seen many people breach their community sentences, and imposing sanctions to benefits provided another tool to enforce compliance.

“This Bill is just very specific and it’s saying that anyone that’s convicted of a crime, anyone that’s actually meant to be in the community doing their sentence and they’re not carrying it out, let’s give Corrections another tool to be able to get them compliant,” Mr Mitchell said.

“Corrections will be able to advise or request [the Ministry of Social Development] to start to either withdraw part or the whole benefit payment for that person until they comply with their community sentence.”

Read more »

Inside Britain’s Sharia courts

There are now EIGHTY-FIVE Islamic courts dispensing ‘justice’ across the UK. An investigation into what happens inside them will shock you to the core. This is why you cannot have a parallel system of justice running alongside British law. Muslim women in Britain should have the same rights as every other woman in Britain. It is a betrayal of the British belief in equality to allow them to be presided over by the clerics who run these Sharia courts. By allowing these Sharia courts to exist, the British government is allowing British Muslim women’s rights to be trampled on.

Sitting in one room, a young Muslim woman tells an elderly cleric about the parlous state of her marriage to a 50-year-old man.
?He oppressed me to the maximum,? she declares. ?He is violent, physically, and treats me like a dog.?
The woman ? who looks barely out of her early 20s ? describes her spouse as verbally and physically abusive about ?every little thing? she does.

A distraught wife seeking a divorce at a Sharia Court in London holds her head in her hands as she sits with judge Suhaib Hasan?

A distraught wife seeking a divorce at a Sharia Court in London holds her head in her hands as she sits with judge Suhaib Hasan

When the husband?s around, he forces her to wear a headscarf. When he isn?t, which is often, he likes to travel to Tunisia, where she suspects he has secretly married several other women.

For all she knows, she adds, he might have accumulated as many as ten other wives. Fighting back tears, as she finishes this tale of betrayal, the woman glances to the cleric, who has a long white beard, and sits at a raised desk in front of a bookcase full of Islamic texts. Perhaps she?s hoping for a supportive smile, confirming she?s not at fault. Maybe she?s seeking reassurance that the man will hold her misogynistic, wife-beating husband to account.

Instead, the elderly cleric, whose name is Suhaib Hasan, starts laughing. ?Why did you marry such a person?? he chuckles.

Read more »

If you are a New Zealander you have fewer rights

Australian newspapers have rejected an attempt to kickstart a campaign to get Kiwis equal rights across the ditch.

Michael Horton, former owner of the New Zealand Herald, took out an ad in The Listener last month highlighting 138 countries whose citizens can apply for Australian citizenship — including Myanmar, Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Congo, and one whose citizens can’t — New Zealand.

Mr Horton says the advert didn’t take much effort to come up with.

“One Sunday morning I woke up and that very ad was in my mind, just there in front of me like a vision from heaven,” Mr Horton told Paul Henry on Monday.

He tried to run it in a number of Sydney newspapers, including the?Sydney Morning Herald, but was rejected — and doesn’t know why. Read more »

Baldy McBald (aka Phillip John Smith) claims his human rights are being violated

via Radiolive

via Radiolive

Convicted murderer and sex offender Phillip John Smith says having his prison jobs taken from him is a denial of his human rights.

Today Smith is appearing in the Auckland High Court by audio-visual link, where he is seeking an injunction against prison authorities who have stopped him from working.Smith said he had a 20-year working history in prison that included working in a public cemetery and on a marae, and there was no history of misconduct.

He said the authorities had stopped him having jobs even inside prison.

Read more »

Al-Qaeda terrorist compensated ?80,000 for hurty feelings


Alleged Al-Qaeda militant, former Tunisian football player Nizar Trabelsi. ? Michel Krakowski / AFP

Apparently sending someone to America is a punishment and one that is a human rights violation worth almost??80,000?in damages. Terrorist Nizar Trabelsi is convicted of terrible crimes and is in jail for them, yet the system is so messed up that he is being paid out for his hurty feelings. Someone please stop the world because I want to get off.

An Al-Qaeda terrorist convicted of plotting attacks against US targets in Europe received about ?78,000 in compensation, as he claimed his human rights were violated by his extradition to the US, it has emerged.

Read more »

Family First caught distorting facts

Gay marriage

Pat Brittenden has a long post busting the mis-truths of Family First and Bob McCoskrie they are spreading about gay marriage.

It was too hard to edit so I called Pat and asked if I could re-publish it.

by Pat Brittenden

I read with interest an article on last week about Living Springs, a Christian venue in Christchurch, that has changed its position on allowing LGBTI couples to get married there. From the tenor of the article it seemed that the venue had come to this policy change in a sensible, rationale and logical way. The director, Denis Aldridge, was quoted saying, ?we?ve been on a journey with this one, and we?ve got there? It took a while.?

Part of the journey involves a recent Human Rights Commission complaint?against Living Springs after a lesbian couple were refused their request to hire the venue for their wedding. According to the article, Living Springs did not feel coerced by the Human Rights Commission to change their policy. In fact Elizabeth Wiltshire, one half of the couple who made the Human Rights Commission complaint, rang to speak to Aldridge after the change in policy. Wiltshire indicated that Aldridge seemed to be perfectly happy with the outcome.

?It was good, actually. I felt it was genuine. It wasn?t ?Oh, we?ve had this unlawful policy and now you?re making us change it,? [he was] very thankful,? she said, ?It gave them a mandate to push for?change.?

Fast forward one week and lobby group Family First distributes a press release headed ?Function Centre Pressured to Allow Same-Sex Weddings.? The Press Release uses Living Springs as a reason to push the narrative that ?Faith-based function centres? are being held hostage and forced into holding LGBTI marriages when they don?t feel they should have to. Family First also continues to make allegations?that some in government said this would never happen which is factually incorrect as the opposite was clearly signalled at the time.

?If a church currently hires out their hall for money, they can?t discriminate against any group who chooses to hire out that hall.??Louisa Wall, Q&A.March 2013

I saw Family First?s Press Release on Facebook and it didn?t ring accurate to me after having read the stuff article. The change in Living Springs? policy seemed more pragmatic than pressured. The conversation on the Facebook post ebbed and flowed between Living Springs and general negative comments about marriage equality. However anytime a contributor suggested the headline of the Press Release may be incorrect Family First director Bob McCoskrie pushed back with the idea that Living Springs ?were certainly placed under pressure.?

This really didn?t add up to me, so I phoned Living Springs Director Denis Aldridge myself and requested a formal interview to use for elephantTV. It turns out Aldridge?s story is fascinating.

As a Pastor he was at the forefront of protests in Balclutha in 1986 opposing the Homosexual Law Reform Act. Since then he has been on what he describes as a ?journey of thirty years?, where various people came into his life at different stages and challenged his perspective on what it means to be gay. Today Aldridge is an supporter?for marriage equality. To have shifted from being someone who led the march against homosexual law reform to someone who is now ?pro? marriage equality is simply remarkable.

I wanted to clear up the most important claim by Family First that Living Springs was ?pressured? into changing their policy. Aldridge?s response was simple.

?It?s totally wrong and that didn?t come from us, that was the narrative that the guy that rung me wanted and I refuted it? he said. ?The reality was [Living Springs] didn?t feel strongly that way, we?d actually come as an organisation [to the place where] we were seeing it, we believe, on a higher level and the higher level was ?what would Jesus do???

Aldridge also made it clear that if they were to take what many Christians believe to be a ?biblical interpretation? on marriage and reject marriage equality, then ?we have to take a biblical line on re-marriage and divorced people? as well, given that the bible specifically denounces those forms of marriage.

Family First contacted Aldridge looking for comment on their change in policy prior to writing the press release and Aldridge wanted to make clear that he told Bob McCoskrie that they did not ?feel coerced [into making the decision to change policy].?

?It?s actually that we have decided it?s the right thing to do? Aldridge said.

Aldridge feels as if Family First has purposely ignored their position.

?They obviously have an agenda, there?s a certain narrative that they wanted to hear and they?ve printed that narrative,? he stated.

Aldridge said they ?weren?t pressured into [holding Same Sex marriages]? and they ?don?t see it as capitulation.? The issue of Same Sex couples using the venue was already being spoken about at Living Springs, ?we?d already had this conversation and that was the words I felt Bob [McCoskrie] was trying to put into my mouth that we were bullied into it, we answered that [we were not] but he?s gone ahead with that story anyways.?

Aldridge finished the interview with a challenge to us all, ?I felt really proud of [Living Springs] in the end that we had, I suppose, the humility to say ?well we haven?t always been right in this thing.??

To clear up one issue with this whole thing. The law is clear, and it hasn?t changed since?Same-Sex marriages were legalised. There is no ambiguity. If you hire a venue to the general public then you must abide by the Human Rights Act of 1993. This doesn?t allow discrimination in twelve main areas, one of which is ?sexual orientation?. If you hire your venue to the general public for marriages, now that LGBTI couples can marry, then you cannot withhold the venue from them because of their sexual orientation. Prior to marriage equality, if your venue made itself available to the general public and that same LGBTI couple wanted to use it for a birthday party, or a baby dedication, or any kind of celebration that you?d hire it to any heterosexual person for, you also couldn?t refuse them because of their sexual orientation. There is no difference in the law.

I gave Family First the opportunity to retract or correct their statement about Living Springs?informing them of the interview I had conducted and the information that came from that interview. They have refused to do so. It is now unequivocally clear that Living Springs were not ?pressured? or ?bullied? or ?forced? into making this policy change. They chose to, and were happy to change.

The full unedited interview with Denis Aldridge is below.

A leading legal academic who needs to be slapped hard


Read more »

These are the people that the left wing don’t want us to fight


The?left wing, normally bastions of human rights, tell us that we should leave Daesh alone, that we shouldn’t interfere in Syria, or Iraq.

While the same people hurl abuse at Israel for supposed human rights abuses, they remain silent on atrocities like this.

BEFORE a crowd of men on a street in the Syrian city of Palmyra, the masked Islamic State group judge read out the sentence against the two men convicted of homosexuality: They would be thrown to their deaths from the roof of the nearby Wael Hotel.

He asked one of the men if he was satisfied with the sentence. Death, the judge told him, would help cleanse him of his sin.

?I?d prefer it if you shoot me in the head,? 32-year-old Hawas Mallah replied helplessly. The second man, 21-year-old Mohammed Salameh, pleaded for a chance to repent, promising never to have sex with a man again, according to a witness among the onlookers that sunny July morning who gave The Associated Press a rare first-hand account.

?Take them and throw them off,? the judge ordered. Other masked extremists tied the men?s hands behind their backs and blindfolded them. They led them to the roof of the four-storey hotel, according to the witness, who spoke in the Turkish city of Reyhanli on condition he be identified only by his first name, Omar, for fear of reprisals.

Notorious for their gruesome methods of killing, the Islamic State group reserves one of its most brutal for suspected homosexuals. Videos it has released show masked militants dangling men over the precipices of buildings by their legs to drop them headfirst or tossing them over the edge. At least 36 men in Syria and Iraq have been killed by IS militants on charges of sodomy, according to the New York-based OutRight Action International, though its Middle East and North Africa co-ordinator, Hossein Alizadeh, said it was not possible to confirm the sexual orientation of the victims.

The fear of a horrific death among gay men under Islamic State rule is further compounded by their isolation in a deeply conservative society that largely shuns them.

[…] ? Read more »


Devoy lashes back at Garner: Bad race relations is a White Men problem

Islamic shill Susan Devoy has lashed out at Duncan Garner after he criticised her in his column yesterday.

The ironic thing about people who send me letters about how useless I am and that our race relations are OK, is that most of them are from Pakeha men: as Duncan Garner proved in his latest opinion piece.? I get many letters and emails: some polite, many abusive or threatening.? The personal attacks aren’t new and I’ve got pretty thick skin, for a simple squash player.

But as well as the haters I also get the opposite: messages of thanks and support from people who are grateful I stood up for their right to live in peace and dignity.? They aren’t powerful? or famous people but their voices mean more to me than those who think it’s PC gone mad to actively work at peaceful race relations.

Super Diversity isn’t coming, it’s already here. We are home to more than 200 ethnicities ? more cultures than the UN has member states. More than one million of us were born overseas and these trends will continue. New Zealand is one of the most ethnically diverse nations on the planet, to ignore our differences is a na?ve and hopeless response to an issue the entire world is grappling with.

Race relations in our country are far from OK.? A third of all complaints we receive are about racial discrimination but we know many people never bother complaining. If we aren’t careful the future we leave our children will be vastly different from the peaceful New Zealand we grew up in.

It’s not OK for Muslim Kiwis to be singled out, abused and discriminated against because of violent extremists. Neither is it OK to blame Jewish Kiwis for an unfolding tragedy thousands of miles away.

It’s not OK for Maori New Zealanders to be racially profiled shopping at their supermarket or walking down the street.

It’s not OK to put an advertisement on Trade Me that says No Asians, No Indians or Europeans Only. This year I spent the day with some of the toughest Kiwis I’ve ever met, elderly Jewish women who survived the Holocaust. One remembers how advertisements for jobs and houses increasingly declared: No Jews. They told me hate starts small, in prejudice and intolerance and they were right.

Read more »

Oh my, I feel faint, I agree with Brian Rudman

It isn’t often that I agree with Brian Rudman, perhaps once a year.

Today is one such?day, I’m feeling a little queasy. He has a crack at Muslim apologist Dame Susan Devoy.

It would be great to see Human Rights Commissioner Susan Devoy take on a real problem, instead of wasting time on hoary old sillinesses like dropping the word Christmas from our summer vocabulary.

Dame Susan wants to save me, and the majority of New Zealanders who are not Christian, from feeling excluded at this time of year. Let me assure her that as long as the sun shines, the wine flows and there’s plenty of pork crackling, I don’t care what the season is called. As for what the Christians get up to inside their churches, that’s their business. I don’t feel left out in any way.

As patron of the Auckland Regional Migrants Services (Arms) Dame Susan says she agrees with the agency’s policy of avoiding the word Christmas, by referring to “happy holidays” and “season’s greetings” and other euphemisms instead. Arms is planning a “festive lunch” instead of a Christmas lunch, so non-Christians won’t feel excluded.

As one of the 41.9 per cent of New Zealanders who ticked the “no religion” box in the 2013 census, I’ve never felt excluded or ostracised by the use of Christian-based words like Christmas or Easter. Our Northern Hemisphere ancestors were holding festivals to mark the beginning of spring and winter long before this Johnny-come-lately religion appeared on the scene and hijacked the dates. In recent years, the rest of us have been steadily claiming the holidays back.

Nor do I feel isolated by the emergence, in recent times in Auckland, of public celebrations for non-Christian events like Diwali, Matariki and Halloween.

Arms and Dame Susan are well-intentioned, but surely new migrants don’t need protecting from the cultural idiosyncrasies of their new land. Most of them, I suspect, come from countries with a smorgasbord of festivals that leaves our handful looking very miserly.

Read more »