Jacinda suggests a good idea- ignore the Royal Commission Report
Its not often that NZ’s IUSY trained PM comes up with a good suggestion. However she did so during a Newshub interview this morning, and that was the question “Should we ignore the Royal Commission Report?”
Of course we should, because the report is a disgustingly draconian attack on NZ’s traditional freedoms and way of life and far more effective of change than even the savagely oppressive Carbon Commission Report.
Its cooler times now. The report should be subject to a review by a panel of free speech and constitutional law experts, with a view to examining how many times its premises and recommendations breach our Bill of Rights. Including how it treads all over our rights not to be spied upon, our rights to communicate and travel freely, and of course our right to free speech. Even a layman could assess that these breaches would number in the hundreds.
In the video below, Jacinda Ardern tries to justify her draconian Stasi style changes to law as being necessary to “protect” religion. In fact NZ has existed for almost two centuries without such laws. What has changed recently? Due to a politically motivated but eternally unexplained obsession with diversity, and an accelerated immigration process, we suddenly have the influence of the Islamic religion and its accompanying socio/political ideas to deal with.
Why are we listening to this group, which manifests itself as the Federation of Islamic Associations of NZ? (FIANZ, see attachments below) Because those calling to attack our traditional freedoms claim it is justified on the basis of the Christchurch massacre, and preventing a similar attack in the future.
They’re wrong. In fact if you study the report, in all its biases and its trite emotion driven recommendations and conclusions, it actually contradicts itself by admitting the Christchurch attack was not heralded by hate speech but came completely out of the blue. Some relevant quotes from the report-
- The individual had no close friends and largely avoided social situations and, in that sense, he was socially isolated.
- The only information that directly referred to the terrorist attack was an email the individual sent to the Parliamentary Service (as well as politicians, media outlets and individual journalists) just eight minutes before the terrorist attack began.
- The fact the individual was not detected was not in itself an intelligence failure. …we find that the concentration of resources on the threat of Islamist extremist terrorism is not why the individual’s planning and preparation for his terrorist attack was not detected.
- Given the operational security that the individual maintained, the legislative authorizing environment in which the counter-terrorism effort operates and the limited capability and capacity of the counter-terrorism agencies, there was no plausible way he could have been detected except by chance.
The whole theme of the report is that diversity is good and all argument against this concept should be silenced and punished. Which again is self defeating. Punishing people for expressing views that counter the govt or a popular narrative does not enhance social cohesion. In fact it achieves the opposite.
The report says “having a society that is cohesive, inclusive and embraces diversity is a good in itself”. That is of course a matter of opinion, but the irony is we had a cohesive society before the political narrative and actuality of “diversity ” was thrust upon us in a manner that gave us no say in the matter.
Finally, the report opines “societies that are polarized around political, social, cultural, environmental, economic, ethnic or religious differences will more likely see radicalizing ideologies develop and flourish”. That of course is true, however it is also obviously truthful that the proposed law changes will not meet these outcomes, but actually create more of the polarization and radicalization that its authors seek to avoid.
The report is a total capitulation to the wishes of FIANZ. Wrong both morally and practically, it is draconian and oppressive and its needs to be reviewed in line with the suggestions above, and then thrown in the garbage bin and never ever be seen again.
We don’t need the report. We don’t need its recommendations. The cowardly disgusting attack that occurred in Christchurch was as the report admits an aberrational act that could only have been stopped by good luck. Therefore the changes the report recommends are totally unnecessary. As said above, it is an exercise in failed logic and it repudiates its own conclusions.
We are free people, and we will remain free people. We already have legislation dealing with incitement to violence, for all contingencies. Jacinda Ardern, the Labour party and FIANZ can take this medieval age tyranny disguised as care and compassion and shove it where the sun don’t shine.