Recognising Hate Speech When You See It.


PHIL QUIN’s devastating attack on Golriz Ghahraman, published this morning (15/4/19) on Stuff, is a serious warning to the Greens’ leadership. A warning they would be foolish to ignore.

It is difficult to imagine a more forceful example of the need to distinguish between speech that merely irritates or offends, and speech which directly incites people to kill and injure, than the Rwandan Genocide of 1994. Difficult though it is to rehearse those terrible events, they serve to demonstrate, with brutal clarity, what speech it is always necessary to suppress, and which speech we can safely tolerate.

The barb in Quin’s argument is that if anyone should understand this distinction, it is Golriz Ghahraman. The Green MP was, after all, a participant in the international effort to bring one of the worst inciters of violence against Rwanda’s Tutsi minority, Simon Bikindi, to justice. Ghahraman has more reason to understand what is, and is not, “hate speech” than anyone in the New Zealand Parliament.

In an alternative universe, only slightly different to this one, Ghahraman would be leading the charge against kneejerk demands for blanket curbs on hate speech. She would be reminding New Zealanders of what it actually involves: radio stations broadcasting instructions to “kill the cockroaches” (i.e. the Tutsis). She would explain how these incitements to genocide were preceded by many months of unrestrained racial vilification across all media.

TDB Recommends

In that universe, Ghahraman would be calming down her more zealous followers: warning them that unreasoning zealotry is always the problem – never the solution. She would also be reassuring them that New Zealand’s statute books already contain plenty of legal remedies against dangerously hateful expression.

The reason why the Green Party leadership should pay heed to Quin’s biting criticism of Ghahraman’s failure to supply much-needed guidance on this issue, is because he is very far from the only person expressing misgivings about the Greens’ justice spokesperson.

There is an air of moral superiority to Ghahraman; a blank refusal to engage with her critics; that grates (to put it mildly) with all but the most unquestioning of her followers. Hers is “the sneer of cold command” more usually associated with the unflinching rectitude of monarchs – and commissars – than with the constitutional humility required of the champions of liberal democracy. Less declaiming and more listening would do not only Ms Ghahraman, but the entire Green Party, a world of good.

So, too, would just a little evidence that the Green Party – and its justice spokesperson – comprehends the vital importance of freedom of expression to the survival of our democratic institutions. Some indication that the Greens do understand that, in the end, there is a big difference between a citizen expressing her misgivings about aspects of the Islamic faith, and an ethno-nationalist terrorist exhorting his comrades to go burn down the nearest mosque.

Misgivings a democracy can live with – incitement to murder it cannot.



  1. …” There is an air of moral superiority to Ghahraman ”…

    Maybe quite true but it seems the disease doesnt just stop there at elected officials, – it riddles those lesser minions on the political rungs… such as Te Reo Putake :


    The Standard – Assange Arrested
    April 11th, 2019
    “I think it’s kinda ironic that Assange was rudely awakened yesterday to find he was fucked without protection.”


    He banned another guy til 1 March for challenging him on his double standards..

    I replied in the guys defense,

    WK -‘So your telling me that the bar of soap gag on John Key was different’

    TRP- Correct.

    WK- So you’re saying that the Swedes who have dragged their feet and are struggling to get two complainants to testify against Assange and with all the evidence presented regarding the real reason of extraditing Assange to the USA , that doesnt ring any bells with you?


    UPDATE: Julian Assange arrest.

    Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates’ Court later today (Thursday, 11 April).

    UPDATE: Arrest of Julian Assange – Metropolitan Police


    I think you have willfully and deliberately misrepresented this case in order to be controversial. There is no difference between the the ‘bar of soap gag’ prison humor and your humor. It is called ‘ male on male’ rape and is a punishable offence under NZ law.

    Naughty Te Reo Putake.

    I can only hope that none of us fall foul of the UK’s skipping bail laws, seems kind of Stazi doesn’t it?


    15 April 2019 at 3:18 pm
    [Banned till May 1 for author abuse. TRP]

    So , now that I’ve got that off my chest and exposed that Woke Left creep for who he really is , on with the topic at hand… the reason why I went around the block regarding your topic, Chris, – is that this sort of selectivity exists at all echelons in the political arena… from the fanboys like TRP to Ghahraman:


    … ”It is an irony of some magnitude that the leading proponent of new hate speech laws in the New Zealand Parliament, Golriz Ghahraman, worked as an intern at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), defending Simon Bikindi who was convicted for inciting genocide.

    It is doubly so when you take into account that the defence arguments almost entirely rested on his right to freedom of speech”…



    You know what ? I am sick and tired of these hypocrites populating our political landscape. Ghahraman is one of them. Just another opportunist who conveniently forgets her past and raises herself into something she certainly is not.

    The other question , – that the Greens would have almost certainly known about her past double standards. To me it is as bad as the National party harboring an ex Chinese spy trainer, working out of a military university on the Chinese mainland , – and now an MP of the National party.

    I party voted for the Greens last elections , supported Metiria Turei taking her stand, even accepted Marama Davidson’s colourful use of the English language to prove a point,… but all this ‘tolerance’ that made me feel uneasy has come to an end.

    And its not just hypocrites like Te Reo Putake that has been the turning factor. Its all of them. Who would want to live under their dictatorship if their type ever rose to power.

    I notice that over at the TS , there is a small army of like minded individuals of the Woke Left that are the most anal retentive , vicious, intolerant and pettily self righteous vitriolic bastards one could ever meet.

    They are the Woke Left.

    They are hypocrites.

    Why do they even pretend they are ‘Left’.

    All they ever do is push identity politics within a narrow framework of politically correct and accepted issues. They do virtually NOTHING about poverty in this country though their policy’s may seem to say they do, even the Greens have moved away from their traditional environmental base.

    And yet these Woke’s will challenge and viciously abuse ANYONE who disagrees with their ( often petty , one eyed and jaundiced ) points of view.

    And so many of them have disdain for what the Labour party once stood for primarily , – maintaining working conditions and wages , fair pricing and affordable homes, food, clothing to bring up their family’s.

    They are the Far Right Wing’s best friends and useful stooges. These are the ones who have populated both National , Labour and the Greens. They are part of the reason this country cannot shake of 35 years of neo liberalism. They are part of the reason why nothing will ever change in this country for the low income earners and the homeless, the sick and the aged and the unemployed.

    They are the neo liberals incognito.

    But they will never admit to that, … to do so would be to expose their carefully honed hypocrisy.

    • Well I would say that deplatforming and so on is the ideological tool of the woke so let’s try something a little different. I mean if you want to get good at debating quickly with out having to read a library then go on social media and disrespect every one you can, not just being disrespectful though, you kind of have to prove them wrong and then just not care about there feelings with edgy comments. Pretty soon they’ll start yelling at you and blocking you and you have to respond and win the argument / debate or you end up looking like a tool. It’s a dangerous way of getting good at debate but if you believe in your own research then it’s a quick way of getting good at it.

    • The Standard is a nest of woke hypocrites.
      I quit it when one mod was supporting a fascist poster who was posting literal hate speech about Muslims and “getting what they deserved”, all fine with the mod involved because he was Chinese and hence a minority’s voice. ( there are only 1.2 billion of them after all)
      Oh the irony now if them defending that persons hate speech now.
      The stupid reverse logic of the woke.

      Said poster trolls here occasionally but hasn’t gone full fascist on this blog.

      The moralizing hypocrisy that Mr Trotter alludes to is a major feature of the greens and to a slightly lesser extent labour. Small wonder it taints their flagship blog site.
      It’s a major impediment to moving forward or coming together over a bunch of issues and a major turn off to voters.

    • There is a coterie of warmongering neocons who tolerate no dissent. Now one of them has become an author and moderator, many of us dissenters have been banned from the site for challenging the left’s support of wars and the lefts support of neoliberal economics.

    • Another +1 to WILD KATIPO in particular to

      “They are the Far Right Wing’s best friends and useful stooges. These are the ones who have populated both National , Labour and the Greens. They are part of the reason this country cannot shake of 35 years of neo liberalism. ”

      Also I would add that some of the politicians don’t even realise they are doing it or allow other officials to do it in their name, and probably can’t understand why their views fail to resonate with the public and the increasing view that ‘all the parties are the same’ aka so many hypercritical stances from politicians who seem to be the most agreement to support or turn a blind eye to targeting for more regulation the most powerful (in particular multinationals) or criminals under neoliberalism on everything!

      Instead all their laws seem to be aimed at the middle class….. and make them more and more hollowed out and with targets on their heads!

      Is it ideology or just plain laziness, and doing the easiest thing for themselves, who knows!

      Yes it is so MUCH easier to get more taxes out of the current tax payers than actually targeting those who seem to earn millions but pay nothing through corporations or drive about in BMW’s and live in flash houses but are on welfare or seemingly have no income so can access benefits, education and health care!

      What’s happening to the middle class…

      “Welcome to the “1099 economy”: The only things being shared are the scraps our corporations leave behind
      Companies can hire and fire perma-lancers at will. Is it any wonder the middle class is vanishing before our eyes?”

      Trump won, against the democrats because he focused on domestic and the middle class (plus US political voting system is screwy)… yep his promises may not have not been true, and he may be hated overseas and may be a crook, but he was definitely more on track with understanding that the middle class want to keep a well paid job and wages up in the US and ordinary working/middle class/upper middle class folks not end up on the scrap heap at age 50 or even worse age 20!

      So the government are playing a dangerous game, they maybe popular but when the tide changes and their legacy tallied up, is it going to be a checkered one like Lange, aka more taxes that effect the middle class the most, more poverty and more ideology in his name, amongst the international popularity of one great thing he did?

  2. Beautiful Katipo…I too for the first time ever anywhere had a comment deleted today by TRP….I really should have gone for a ban too. My crime was to point out that to call Assange the most unf***able white man on Earth was racist…the white bit was surplus to requirement. The same female later compounded the crime going on about white men…which as the most powerless patriarch in eternity gave me the heebies.

    I’ve had my fun revving them up, it’s a bit unclean over there, so for a few more years I’m out of there.

  3. I’m afraid that a young lady who possesses so much intelligence also lacks wisdom.

    At her age I learnt a valuable lesson of extraordinary subtelty. I called a friend’s father a fascist. He very calmly looked me in the eyes and replied, “Get it right. I’m a Right wing fascist reactionary pig”.

    Of course he wasn’t. Lesson learnt. I fear Golriz ego may require a term or two knocking on doors for the Greens before she has the very real privilege of sitting in Parliament again. thanks

  4. I was just commenting on the creepy obsession middle aged white men seem to have with attractive young women of power and, lo, Chris Trotter pops up with the QED

    Give it a rest Trots, out of touch and waving your fist at the clouds.

    • I really am in no mood to tolerate any more apologists for hypocrites.

      READ THIS.

      Rwandan genocide – Wikipedia


      Rwandan Genocide – The slaughter of 800,000 people – YouTube

      Take your own advice and ‘Give it a rest’.

      Lest the hole you’re digging not only accommodates you , – but the very people you are trying to defend.

      Enough of the bullshit.

      • So anyone accused of a war crime doesnt deserve legal representation Katipo? Is thzt what yiure suggesting? How do you reconcile that with the police planning to present secret evidence in Bradbury’s upcoming HRRT hearung?? Is that ok with yiu? If not, what is the principle of justuce youre invoking??

        Justice denied for 1 is justuce denied for all


        (Lets see if this one is published)

        • The woke seem more interested in war criminals rights and rights for criminals in general but not keen for it to apply for everyone, (such as freedom of speech) or to put crimes in perspective.

          As soon as someone who does not represent some minority interest does something trivial (normally saying the wrong thing) that they don’t agree with it, is seems to be an over reaction of hang, draw and slaughter them and any talk of justice or innocence until proven guilty, or perspective, goes right out the window!

          If another does the same thing as a minority interest then everything is ok.

          It’s not ok to have a multi tiered system of justice, or injustice for many, quite frankly.

        • First off, Bradbury isn’t a war criminal and second off he isn’t charged with crimes against humanity by inciting genocide. And apparently the Police didn’t go through correct procedures. To put it mildly.

          The fact they want to present evidence in the hearing behind closed doors to the exclusion of Bradbury and any possible representatives he may have , – shows he is being given LESS rights than Simon Bikindi , – not MORE, you buffoon !!!

          The thing that is rankling people is that Ghahraman has set herself up as the ‘leading proponent of new hate speech laws in the New Zealand Parliament’ , – where not so long ago she was defending a man who wrote songs inciting genocide and stood on the back of a ute with a loud P.A system encouraging Hutu’s to kill more Tutsi’s , – and that the Council for defense in that trial based their case on FREEDOM OF SPEECH !!!

          In other words, – he was inciting genocide by his OWN WORDS both oral written ,and in song !!!

          Exactly what some people are being charged with now in NZ after the ChCh massacre.

          Doesn’t that just seem a tad hypocritical to you mate?

    • Freedom of speech has emboldened your ego but very little else. Why is you and the rest woke seed ground to the right. They have freedom of speech thanks to the Southern and Molyneux wars, the US Presedincy thanks to the great meme wars, Bill English almost one it for National if it wasn’t for Andrew Little. Why is it the right get all the cool shit and we get the little wana be Loki gods.

    • Oh , – and that Laura Lane in the video?

      Shes a REAL GUTSY HERO.

      Unlike the the subject matter of Chris Trotters article who DEFENDED the shitheads who incited the 800,000 to 1000,000 strong massacre of Tutsi and moderate Hutu’s.

    • So also the French Canadian military man Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire, the man from the Red Cross, Philippe Gaillard, Gromo Alex veteran U.N aid worker, Captain Mbjang , – the guy with the winning smile who successfully spirited out hundreds against U.N orders, and a devout Muslim, Carl Wilkins the aid worker,… all hero’s.

      ”America has no friends, – only interests,- and our interests are not in Rwanda , – we are not prepared to send young American Marines to come home in coffins”…

      Unmoved. Clinton and his policy of ‘ non intervention’.

      Nothing changes.

      Hilary Clinton years on, – caught out by John Pilger and Julian Assange with the Clinton Foundation funneling arms to ISIS. The Clinton’s and their ‘Democrats’. And their globalism.

      The U.N on the whole were garbage. Gutless.

      Hamstringing all these hero’s.

      There’s your Fake Woke Left for you. Never gave a damn. Just like having Ghahraman defend Simon Bikindi , – a man accused and convicted of inciting GENOCIDE.

      Simon Bikindi – Wikipedia

      How does THAT sit the Greens social policy’s, huh? , – kill all the people to let the grass grow?

      And all you can do is blather on about the latest flavor of the month cliche put down of the Fake Woke Left – ‘middle aged white men’.

      Wow,… just Wow .

      800,000 to 1000,000 deaths, SANCTUARY, – 800,000 to 1000,000!!!

      • Pretty much.
        The woke jump on identifications of societal factors re the shooter as justifying racism, but Ghahraman actually legally defended actual genocide.

        What the fuck is wrong with these people that they don’t see their own rank hypocrisy.

    • Have you also noticed the creepy obsession some young people have of targetting white men past a ‘certain age’ and unleashing with a despising that would earn them time on the naughty step if any other human variety was so scorned by them?

      Have you noticed that? And called it out? Along with all the hate snark about ‘baby boomers’?

      Or are you on the wrong side of the bandwagon and missed that blot on the landscape – mindless and useless picking at people who can do zilch about their age or colour?

      And have you ever asked – what do they hope to achieve by the ‘outrage’ and other symptoms of virtue signalling? Who do they want to fit in with?

      And then what? All the ‘old white blokes’ stop sleazing on pretty young things, see the hideous error of their ways, repudiate good ol’ kiwi bloke culture – and then what? Any answers? Or do we all live happily ever after for a couple of seconds before the next screech of outrage?

  5. I concur with your warning Chris, The Greens ought to listen and act accordingly. But they won’t..

    With Ghahraman and Davidson having significant influence, the party has steadily drifted into the woke culture wars of the faux neoliberal left. The Greens are now moving towards the politics of division and they’ll alienate their base grounded in rationalism.

    I have personally party voted Green every election since 2002 – they’ve lost me.

  6. What is it with Trotter, Quin, and their resentment of “uppity brown women?Jealousy that people like Golriz are actually walking the talk, while they are reduced to being impotent old has been. Perhaps.

    • With the old heads in politics, they’ve been around the block too many times to know to not consider all possibilities

    • It’s always funny how none of these men have any valid points, it’s just the heteronormative patriarchy talking. When the Greens slip under 5% because of their woke alienating identity politics, it won’t be because they were pure temple ideologues – oh no, it will be the heteronormative patriarchy.

    • Get over yourself mate.

      Maybe its because Golriz Ghahraman DIDN’T ‘walk the talk’.

      And like a lot of these political opportunists , – found a nice cozy niche ,- and in this case , – with the Green party. And hoping that the public will never really bother to investigate her past track record.

      You should be thanking Quin and Trotter for bringing this to the light, – not acting as a tribal political follower.

      Would she have gone into bat for Idi Amin , Pol Pot or Hermann Goering and their stooges in a different era as well ?


      You think defending an inciter like Simon Bikindi is OK?, – when he stood on the back of a ute with a P.A system and encouraged Hutu’s to kill more Tutsi’s?

      Nah , she acted as a typical young conscienceless lawyer. All in for the status and the cash and the glamour.

  7. Basically they are trying to GG what they did to Metiria Turei – hound her out of parliament on the premise that she shouldn’t have acted as part of the legal defence for a war criminal. It didn’t work the first time, so they are having another shot. My advice to the Green leadership is to stay strong – if you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything

    • Metiria Turei didn’t defend crimes against humanity. She just did what she could at the time to feed her young child and get a better more stable future for herself and her child under a shitty neo liberal welfare system.

      And she never placed herself in the position to be a voice of what is and isn’t hate speech afterwards.

      I’d have Met any-day over Ghahraman.

      Any day.

      • So, i repeat, Katipo, do you believe that some people do not deserve fair legal representation?

        Who is on your list who does not deserve legal defence counsel when charged with a crime?

        What do you think would happen if someone here in NZ was denied legal represensation? Is that fair

        Her client may have been a murderous thug but denying him legal representation is not justuce. Its a kangaroo court

        • That’s not what this topic is about about is it, and you are deliberately trying to derail it.

          You seem to be oh so interested in morals and virtues ,- DO YOU think its OK to set yourself up as a leading proponent of Free Speech in any country after being council for defense and defending a person who incited his nation to encourage ethnic cleansing and genocide using his influence, – music recordings, radios station and his own hate SPEECH ???

          Using for defense of her client his FREE SPEECH ?!!?

          800,000 to 1000,000 deaths in 100 days. Five times faster than the Nazi Holocaust.

          Did Ghahraman have to do it?

          Was she compelled to do it?

          No. She could have walked away. But she didn’t. It was her own choice.

          • Have you read what Martyn wrote, ffs?? Golriz isnt setting herself up as a “proponent of free speech”. Thats thd whole point of what he is attzcking her

            And yes, Katipo, EVEFYONE DESERVES A FAIR TRIAL. EVERYONE. Otherwise you get kangsroo courts or impridonmdnt without trial. Is that that you are advocating??


            Irony upon ironies, Martyn is already facing secret evidence in a closed court case. Not even his lawyer is allowed tk see the evidence

            Thzt is the world you where fair trials are no more Katipo

    • Actually nah, I think E Pineapples has a valid point

      A cursory look at social and msm media shows an unusual focus on the young Green mp. The media and righties are ganging up on her

      To our shame there doesn not appear to be juch pushback from the left to give support to one of our own

      • Maybe if she hadn’t been seen to be a hypocrite , then there wouldn’t seem to any ‘ganging up’ in the first place. You don’t get let off the book just because you happen to be a Green party MP , BTW…

        • Wyy is she a hypocritd Katipo?

          Because she acted as a defence attorney in a war crimes tribunal?? If thats your case you are conflatjng 2 unrelated events. A poor poor to be attacking soedones and using somethjng utterly unrelated just because of your own prejudice

          If yiu have a reason why Golriz is a hypocrite cough it ip. Otherwise youre doing a Whaleoil on her

  8. Totally agree with this post from Chris Trotter and the points made in Phil Quin.

    Freedom of speech is for everyone not just those who are powerful and those who are criminals! Yes we are all supposed to be equal but it seems that the middle class and ordinary people are less equal than others under the eyes of the woke!

    You should be able to believe in religion and like Falou and that should be ok under freedom of speech to publicly say your beliefs, and ONLY when it calls for illegal action (aka killing/hurting others etc) then it should be hate speech or crime! Otherwise we will be living in Communist China, or a dictatorship and going back to the bad old days and persecuting people on the grounds of religion!!!

    Freedom of speech is messy! But to control it and make the act of speaking your beliefs an illegal or punishable action makes freedom of speech a joke and the people proposing it reinterpreting the law incorrectly. The woke and those who want to punish for ‘having the wrong view’ are authoritarians not liberals.

    Like immigration where NZ laws have become so skewed that the criminals get everything handed to them on a plate by the justice systems, against natural justice, while those migrants who are genuine and do everything the legal way are discriminated against because the norm has now become dysfunctional and fraudulent, with our laws pushed into supporting those who are on the fringes of the law and who have money to buy their paperwork and endless time to fight, not the actual people the laws were designed to administer to and get residency here.

    • +100 (to that last paragraph at least)
      We’re losing the very people we need (and not JUST as economic units), whilst encouraging the fraudulent.
      But – it’s what you get when politicians have a blind faith in their “officials” (especially when some of them come across as ‘nice blokes’ – but who usually/eventually get found out to be complete fucking idiots), and the easy option is to preserve the status quo.
      BTW @SaveNZ – have you heard anymore from the delightful James Casson? They’ve all gone very quiet.

      One day, they might wake up and realise that public service reform (radical in nature) could earn them some pretty awesome ‘brownee points’ (going forward, on the back of – and pivoting off public dissatisfaction.)

  9. What happened to my comment I wrote yesterday??

    Anything critical of Trotter doesnt see the light of day huh?? I didnt even use the F word once

    So much for free speech warriors on the Daily Blog

  10. Free speech is a thorny issue for (mainly) two reasons: the tribalism that has resulted from years of neoliberalism, and the use of PR and advertising methods in propagating opinions. In the ’70’s, when identity politics came to the fore, universal rights and protections were taken for granted, and the idea was to expand the concepts to include those who had been excluded, or granted only limited inclusion. With the rise of neoliberalism, identity politics have been deployed to help undermine universalism, and this shows in the language used: when you call someone some sort of pejorative x-phobic, or y-ist, you are no longer calling for some group to be included, you are calling for whoever doesn’t wholly accept that group on its own terms to be excluded.

    The values allowed to be freely expressed indicate which tribe gets to call the shots, and every tribe, naturally enough, wants that position. So you get ridiculous situations where people can acquiesce in Hillary Clinton giggling at the brutal murder of a man and the defilement of his body, and turn immediately to denounce someone or other for ‘fat-shaming.’ Meanwhile, on the other side, a prominent elderly US Christian, in the middle of lent, argues for Christian values, but still insists that Maduro should be killed with a drone strike. So much for tribalism.

    The other bit is PR. Through the use of PR “contest of ideas” becomes a contest of influence machines. Tribes set out to “de-platform” those with opposing ideas, because they do not want them to get the chance to gain the necessary sponsors etc, to build an effective influence machine. So someone like Jordan Peterson, who seems to be basically a Millsian liberal, is regarded by many as a dire threat.

    Due to tribalism and PR, we have a long way to go before we are even capable of a sensible exchange on the subject of free speech.

    • @OLWYN.
      Agree completely. And somewhere fuelling all the loathing of alternative opinion, critique or analysis is ageism. I have no children for which I thank the gods, but I hear what others my age have to say about their grandchildren and sometimes children. Anyone who lived through the forties, fifties, sixties or seventies knows nothing and if they did learn anything it is all valueless in today’s digital world. Parents are there to be used as free babysitters and need to be shoved into the old folks gulag by the age of seventy.
      I have come to the conclusion that it was a supreme waste of time and effort for our grandparents and great grandparents to have come here in the first place. It would have been better all round if the Chinese or Belgians or Ottomans had carried out all that colonisation nonsense.

    • +100% OLWYN – great thoughts in particular.

      “With the rise of neoliberalism, identity politics have been deployed to help undermine universalism, and this shows in the language used: when you call someone some sort of pejorative x-phobic, or y-ist, you are no longer calling for some group to be included, you are calling for whoever doesn’t wholly accept that group on its own terms to be excluded.”


      “So you get ridiculous situations where people can acquiesce in Hillary Clinton giggling at the brutal murder of a man and the defilement of his body, and turn immediately to denounce someone or other for ‘fat-shaming.’ Meanwhile, on the other side, a prominent elderly US Christian, in the middle of lent, argues for Christian values, but still insists that Maduro should be killed with a drone strike. ”

      everyday there seems to be more and more hypocrisy. It has become unusual for someone from MSM to call it out… aka PHIL QUIN on the representation of tolerance for a war criminal while seemingly have extreme intolerance for free speech from the average Joe, that the establishment does not approve of…

      Ridiculous (and hypocritical) is a great description of everyday decision making and justification from our world leaders!

  11. I saw Golriz and Stephen Franks debating free speech definitions the other day and it just seemed fuzzy, ambiguous and open to interpretation/subjectivity. If two lawyers can’t agree on the state of New Zealand’s freedoms, maybe a techie, linguist or statistician can write an algorithm which states what words can be placed where in a sentence before offense is caused (the crux is what constitutes harm for whom)? The offensive and trigger word permutations are enormous but the Googles can do it. Automated hate speech filters. The lawyers could argue intent with any correspondence on the fringes that get posted.

  12. Reading the comments to this article it’s pretty clear that plenty of the audience at TDB suffer from the same problem of intolerance to different opinions. I have to admit that I suffer from it too. Maybe we should all be having a good look in the mirror – cos right now we seem to be pointing the finger at people who are pointing the finger at other people

    • Sounds like you are pointing the finger at other people pointing the finger at other people.
      Glad we cleared that up.

  13. The Serbian song that the shooter was playing in his car was written during the war in Yugoslavia in the 90s and pays tribute to Karadzic directly. Unfortunate.

  14. I’m not liking the pile-on I’m seeing on Gharahman. It seems to be coming from both left and right and isnt directed at anyone else. Heaven firbid its because she is

    A. Brown

    B. Female

    C. An immigrant

    What is that racist like smell? Oh yeah its racism

    • Why assume any of that Mjolnir?
      Why not the fact she is just another woke hypocrite? Your racism is showing – by assuming it’s all about skin colour-see how that works? (You haven’t changed your white power symbolic name yet I see- see how that works too?)
      I had great hopes for the greens this term with the intelligent balanced team they had. Unfortunately balanced on paper doesn’t equate to socially functional or self aware.
      And here we are.

      • You guys just keep protecting that white middle class privileged sacred cow

        Jesus, only 50 people were shot dead in cold blood to pay for the privilege

        Gharhraman is the only one with the intestinal fortitude to sall tge bleeding obvious, that hate speech dehumanises and paves the way for the Tarrants and Breviks of this world

        But thats ok, white folks. We’re not the ones targeted by the far right

        Proud of yourselves?

        • Please explain how 50 people shot dead is paying for white middle class privilege. That’s a shocking thing to say and absolute bullshit.
          I can’t wait for the hate speech laws, you wokelings are going to be hoist on your own petard.

    • While identity politics have always been a thing, I’d argue that from the 90s to 2010 or so they seemed to be in decline. Then they came roaring back recently.

      I want to see Martin Luther King’s vision come to pass. I see woke SJW stuff as being a step away from it, so I oppose it. Just as I oppose racism in all it’s forms.

  15. There seems to be a lots of disinformation around about the scope of the changes being advocated for. The discussion about hate speech laws is looking at a very specific gap not covered by current legislation. The current human rights legislation only groups defined by race are protected – it is illegal to incite “racial disharmony”. “We will need to set the bar very high, because we want to protect free speech … and… and it can’t be about, you know, whether you’ve offended someone, it needs to be about actual harm., which it is in other jurisdictions” This last is a quote from Golriz Ghahraman.

Comments are closed.