If crypto-fascists can be allowed into the country – a human rights legend like Chelsea Manning should be allowed to as well – this is what free speech looks like!

53
1

I am incredibly excited about going to see Chelsea Manning speak in Auckland next month (please get tickets here).

She is a human rights legend, her actions led to the world seeing the truth of the evil war crimes the United States of America were secretly conducting in their Iraq abortion. On top of this bravery of conscience, she courageously transitioned while in prison.

Chelsea is the kind of human being we should all try to aspire to, she was prepared to whistle blow against real evil and then set out on that most personal of journey’s to find who she truly was.

What. A. Legend.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

So it is terribly disgraceful of the hypocritical National Party to come out and demand she have her visa revoked and refuse her entry here…

National’s Michael Woodhouse calls for whistleblower Chelsea Manning to be banned from New Zealand
National has called for US whistleblower Chelsea Manning to be banned from speaking in New Zealand because of her criminal record.

Manning, a former US Army intelligence analyst, is due to speak at events in Auckland and Wellington on September 9 and 10.

She served seven of a 35-year prison sentence for theft and espionage after releasing hundreds of thousands of classified or sensitive documents to Wikileaks.

National’s immigration spokesman and former minister Michael Woodhouse said Manning was convicted and sentenced to prison for using her position to steal hundreds of thousands of documents and release them.

…I say hypocritical because barely a month ago the National Party were championing free speech when it came to two crypto-facsists visiting NZ, National now claim the difference is that Chelsea has broken the law, well so did Nelson Mandela, would they be demanding he didn’t visit as well?

Chelsea Manning exposed war crimes, Molyneux and Southern peddle petty psudeo-science bigotry, for National to champion one and damn the other is hypocrisy of the worst kind!

There isn’t just hypocrisy from the Right on this, watching those on the woke left demanding free speech now with Chelsea when barely a month ago they were screaming censorship shows the intellectual bankruptcy that has overcome so many in this debate.

This is why I defend free speech, yes we should have the right to protest those who use that speech to cause bitterness and spite, but when we deplatform, we open the door for the right to play the same game.

Manning should speak and I look forward to reviewing her show.

Buy tickets now!

53 COMMENTS

  1. Please note that editors of NZ biggest 2 right wing blogs, have both called for Chelsea to be let in NZ and given the opportunity to speak.

    So there is no hypocrisy from the right, and Woodhouse is an idiot.

      • Well of course they wont commit as much time and energy, that is their right, but I predict they will give her a fair hearing.

        Nor will they demand like you Frank, to have them banned simply because they dont like what she says as you did with Southern and Molyneux

        Nor will they scream and yell and push our wimpy little mayor into a corner and making him ban them from council owned venues because of “security concerns”

        One thing I can bet on though, I bet Farrar and Slater know a lot more about Manning, what she has said and what she stands for than you know about Southern and Molyneaux.

        I have twice on this blog asked you directly to send me a link to any of their speeches which confirms they are fascist or whatever it is you call them. You have not.

        While she still has serious convictions, I am not opposed to her being here, I doubt many on the right are.

        • Can you confirm that many on the right are not opposed to her being here? Two very quickly spring to mind, Woodhouse and Hosking.

          • Thats is two!. FFS! Their objection is she is an undesirable alien because of her convictions I suppose. I cant speak for them.

            In general terms the right are far more protective of free speech than the left, just look who makes up the Free Speech Coalition.

            Didnt see Franks name there.

            • In general terms the right are far more protective of free speech than the left

              What arrant nonsense. Do you know how many people have been imprisoned, murdered, or “Disappeared” under Right-wing regimes?

              How many violent incidences have been carried out by neo-nazis in Europe against their critics?

              Have a look at David Farrar’s comments column under his blogposts. With enough “down votes”, a comment can be ‘hidden’ so it is not easily viewed. There’s your “free speech”, Gary.

              And I’ve heard that comments critical of Cameron Slater do not go past his “moderation” process.

              During the early days of the US invasion of Iraq, I submitted a comment criticising George Bush and his invasion to a right wing forum (“Free Republic”, if I recall correctly). I questioned the existence of WMDs. It was my first post; written politely – and it never saw the light of day.

              Just recently, singer/entertainer Lorde was slandered and attacked in public adverts by a right-wing Zionist rabbi in the US for her decision not to tour Israel.

              Didnt see Franks name there.

              And you won’t, Gary. Southern and Molyneux have a “right” to spew their bigotry. We don’t owe them a platform. This sums up my views fairly well; https://fmacskasy.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/xkcd-free-speech.png

              • Frank, you talk a lot of rubbish. Tell me about your friend Castro who in your terms, “make a few mistakes”.

                Well actually, only tens of thousands mistakes, you know, all those Cuban citizens that he did away with.

                Oh, and lets not forget about your other idols, Lenin and Mao.

                Have you ever listened to what Southern and Molyneux say? No of course you haven’t.

                • Tell me about your friend Castro who in your terms, “make a few mistakes”.

                  Well actually, only tens of thousands mistakes, you know, all those Cuban citizens that he did away with.

                  Oh, and lets not forget about your other idols, Lenin and Mao.

                  So you can only defend your position by using ‘whataboutism’ and pointing to other authoritarian figures (known as “strongmen’ when they are pro-Western – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/29/AR2006122901903_pf.html?noredirect=on), as justification?

                  Ok, so you are – in a roundabout way – agreeing with me.

                  Have you ever listened to what Southern and Molyneux say? No of course you haven’t.

                  Answering your own question to me doesn’t provide much of an answer, Gary.

                  I have referenced a sample of the things Molyneux has said. And I have listened to comments made by Southern.

                  • Nailed it, Frank!!

                    When they can’t justify their own position and instead have to point at others, you just know they don’t have a case. It’s like a burglar saying he’s ok doing burglaries because white collar crims are ripping us off ten times worse. Not much consolation when they nick your antiques, wife’s jewels, and favourite Osmond Family record collection.

      • Frank of course they won’t. The time/energy committed was due to the fascists trying to shut them down and the lefts intolerance for ideas they disagree with.

        • Your comment smacks of intolerance for ideas YOU disagree with. As for me I’m open to all ideas, Southern and Molyneux are welcome to their ideas. You decide which side of the fence you sit but I’m with Frank, having listened to them, I believe their ideas to be vile crap. But please don’t be intolerant to my views.

  2. Politurd elites should butt out of the free speech arguments until further notice. The power imbalance is astounding. Big bullies enjoying super amplification themselves and without even anything useful to bring to the table anyway. To concern themselves about the remarks of minor characters far beneath them on the privilege scale, is oafishly crass. You just stick to your knitting govt it’s our job to analyse, and you’re not competent to do so, because of your position. That is, conceited criminals so stuffed with vanity they think they have unlimited power. Banning people here, cats there, ramming long term visions down people’s throats. Witness the infinite madness that comes with playing god and realize how threatening it is

  3. I don’t think this is necessarily a free speech issue yet – that’s part of it for sure, especially when actually in NZ but it may not be the primary issue right now. So far this seems more like a test of which convictions prevent you from visiting NZ and which ones won’t. From the immigration website:

    “Serious character issues:
    You can’t be granted a visa if you:
    —have ever been convicted of an offence for which you were sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 5 years or more …”

    Although the sentence was commuted, Manning was convicted and sentenced to 35 years.

      • I have no intention of going. However, I am not sure why the NZ left feel it necessary to protest against someone whose primary platform was getting the UK out of the EU.

        • Don’t you think it’s weird that the main proponent of the “LEAVE” campaign gets to avoid the actual hard work of selling to the UK why their economic situation is now going to be shit house….

          • No I don’t think it’s weird. UKIP was set up as a single issue party and they achieved their goal. The UK establishment did their best to exclude Farage from Parliament. Given that he is not an MP or in any role in hte UK government, how should he work in this capacity?

          • “Don’t you think it’s weird that the main proponent of the “LEAVE” campaign gets to avoid the actual hard work of selling to the UK why their economic situation is now going to be shit house….”

            Fair point, Sam. I notice Andy doesn’t have much of an answer.

            Game. Set. Match.

        • I’m of the left and I don’t give a rats about whether Farage comes or goes, I only care about this Government fixing the previous National Governments perceived corrupt practices.

          What I’m interested in is an open and honest government, Clearly Manning found that there was another side to the war atrocities for that, that American troops were responsible for.

        • I am not sure why the NZ left feel it necessary to protest against someone whose primary platform was getting the UK out of the EU

          In which case, why is he coming to New Zealand? Trout fishing?

          • Presumably he is coming to NZ to do a speaking tour in order to make some money

            Our MP Golriz will be there to protest him. Why, I’m not sure.

            • “Our MP Golriz will be there to protest him. Why, I’m not sure.”

              Because its her free right? Y’know, Andy, living in a democracy and all that. You DO know what de-mo-cra-cy is, don’t you?? Just like Green MPs protest the visit of the Chinese leader over their occupation of Tibet.

    • Please send me a link showing that Farrage is a nazi, or like Frank are you just so uptight you call everyone a nazi (or similar) that you dont agree with.

      • Nigel Garbarge is not a nazi, he’s an ignorant, manipulative, liar, a mind virus in an ugly man suit. A man who encourages people to lash out at those who have already suffered the worst effects of corporate globalization (imperial wars and dismantling of industries) – ie refugees and immigrants – instead of directing their legitimate anger at the way that same system has treated them at the 1%ers who benefit from it. To call him a cockroach would be an insult to wonderfully resilient insect, which serves a number of useful ecological functions. The only thing Nigel serves is Nigel.

        I hope he does speak to Aotearoa, because as much as I loath him and his ilk, I would hypocritical to stand up for Chelsea Manning’s freedom to speak (which I do) and not for his. However, I hope a huge, joyful carnival of diversity takes over the streets outside any venue ignorant or greedy enough to let him speak there, and uses their own freed of expression to tell him, with greatest respect for our common humanity, to walk west until his hat floats.

        • I’m no fan of Farage, but as a public face of the anti-EU movement, I’m not quite sure how he is with the globalists and bankers that are running the EU and its ilk

        • So you wish for a crowd of people to make so much noise that he can’t be heard?

          You might as well deplatform him

  4. “Crypto-fascists”
    Oh, please…Anarcho-capitalism, the ideology Molyneux subscribes to, is about as ideologically opposed to fascism as you can get: It is anti-state, anti-identitarian, anti-dictatorial and individualistic. But keep throwing vilifying buzzwords around, Bomber, you “Crypto-commie”

  5. Anyone expecting consistency from National and rightwing fuckwits like Mike Hosking is delusional. I’ve got more but I just can’t be arsed anymore.

    Nigel Farage can come and go. He is irrelevant.

  6. +100 Great Post …Absolutely!….we are not China or the USA !

    ….of course Chelsea Manning should be allowed in to speak!

    (love the ladder in her stocking)

  7. re “Molyneux and Southern peddle petty psudeo-science bigotry”…and are “two crypto-facsists”…actually disagree with this description

    …they make many points which should be raised and discussed rationally

    …you can disagree with them and bring up counter arguments and counter science but they are not stupid nor are they violent and they express themselves well

    ( many of the questions they bring up have been brought up in the past in universities)

  8. “Crypto-fascists”? I swear to GOD, I have no idea what that means.

    Is it something to do with cypherpunks who advocate widespread use of cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change?

    Something to do with crypto-currencies? I’ve seen the term used by TDB before, I’ve tried to google it and I’m still confused ..

    Can someone please explain what “Crypto-fascists” means, thank you, I’ll keep checking back for an answer.

  9. UK far right politician Nigel Farage is bringing his racist, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant views to New Zealand to spread the alt-right politics of hatred and division. Join us for a peaceful public demonstration outside the venue to say, “Nigel Farage is full of shit!”

    https://www.facebook.com/events/414091958995445

    I’m no great fan of Farage as he is a showman and has little substance (like most politicians), yet these statements are off the wall.

    If you want a real anti-Semite then the UK Labour Party is full of them

    • dont drink the anti Corban Kool aid bro, seems his only bitch about the Israeli’s is their treatment of the Palestinians, anyone who criticizes them gets the full treatment of anti-Semitic accusations, his position on this has never changed despite the constant attacks of the Corporate Media press weapon.

      • The Munich terrorists castrated an Israeli athlete and let him bleed to death in front of his mates.

        Anyone who supports this, or lays wreaths in honour of it, is a loathsome piece of vermin.

        This includes Corbyn

        No ifs, no buts, no “what about..”

        Just vermin. Get it?

        • Your assumption that Corbyn supported the Munich terrorists is unsupported by any facts, Andy. Making up stuff to support your bias doesn’t advance your argument one jot.

          • The only upside to Corbyn is that he was once a Eurosceptic ( and probably still is in private) and his brother Piers is the Mad Professor type climate sceptic

    • If you want a real anti-Semite then the UK Labour Party is full of them

      So anyone who dares criticise Israel’s policies is “anti-semite”? So no debating with you then; any/everthing Israel does is 100% ok with you.

  10. It’s not about free speech ‘banning’, Aussie are banning Manning due to being a USA federal criminal (yes you can argue the time has been done and is out of prison, but it wasn’t only 7rs of a 35 yr sentence and only commuted by Obama) the crime was and is still a federal crime he was committed for. Are you saying you all agree for Australia to change it’s laws for just this person?, would you also change the laws for this time in NZ, but take offence if same scenario were from someone ‘different’ in political slant?

    • Manning was a political prisoner for exposing the truth ( the so -called crime was exposing the truth)

      ‘Bradley Manning’s sentence: 35 years for exposing us to the truth’

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/21/bradley-manning-sentence-birgitta-jonsdottir

      ‘Chelsea Manning: Why was the whistleblower who exposed some of America’s most brutal war crimes serving such a harsh sentence?’

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/chelsea-manning-commuted-why-in-prison-brack-obama-clemency-a7532466.html

    • It’s not about free speech ‘banning’, Aussie are banning Manning due to being a USA federal criminal (yes you can argue the time has been done and is out of prison

      And herein lies the problem, Im Right.

      Rightwingers (and some on the Left) support free speech – on their terms. If you don’t agree with a person from the Left, you will find a reason to disqualify that person,

      “Oh, I support free speech one hundred percent. But in the case of XYZ, “it’s not about free speech ‘banning’ it’s about[insert reason here].”

      Remember the Colorado cake-maker who refused to provide a service (ie, a wedding cake) for a gay couple? (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/masterpiece-colorado-gay-marriage-cake-supreme-court/index.html)

      The Right supported the Colorado cake-maker on the grounds of “religious belief”. As if “religious belief” is somehow worthy of greater justification to discriminate, than, say, personal bias, or political ideology.

      That is demonstrated how the Right squealed in anger when a branch of the Auckland Council declined to provide a service for the Polite Fascists, Southern and Molyneux.

      The Colorado cake-maker was supported by the right to deny service because he had a belief in a supernatural entity.

      The Auckland Council was not supported by the Right because their decision was based on political/safety reasons.

      Now if the Auckland Council had been a religious organisation…

      See the double standard?

      • Double standard?

        The Christian Baker has been vilified in the public space for not baking a cake for a same sex wedding.

        Would the progressives also force a Muslim baker to bake a gay cake? Approx 50% of British Muslims think that homosexuality should be criminalised. Imans in the UK have publicly discussed the best ways to kill gays.

        Of course, those who have PhDs in intersectional genderqueer theory in the context of the post-Industrial patriarchy and third wave feminism and climate change may be able to make sense of all of this.

        For the rest of us it just seems like a bunch of leftists doing what they do best, bullying people whose views they disagree with.

Comments are closed.