Man charged with “inciting racial disharmony”
The farmers’ protest was the big event of last week, but something else occurred on Thursday that needs light shone on it. A man arrested a few weeks ago for posting a YouTube video that offended Maori activists appeared in court and faced an additional charge of “inciting racial disharmony”.
The 44 year old Tauranga man posted a video to Youtube some weeks ago that offended a group of so called “Maori” activists, who complained to the police. The content of the video remains unknown. The video was taken down, and the man was arrested. His identity is suppressed. This site reported that event here.
The initial complaints about the video were not acted on by police, and the video remained up. Apparently this hesitancy was because the police were unsure if there was any legal case against the content.
Chief Censor David Shanks became involved and his Dept quickly issued a classification for the video categorising it as an “offensive publication” under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act of 1993.
This legislation was initially aimed at protecting children and young people from objectionable film content in theatres and on TV. However last year the Ardern govt added clauses under subsection 3 of the act that radically changed its intent. The definition of the word “objectionable” was added to as follows-
“promotes or encourages criminal acts or acts of terrorism”
So the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act of 1993 suddenly became a weapon in the war against terrorism and and the man was charged under this act. It is not known if he was offered a chance to take the video down, or change its content. The Act can attract a penalty of 14 years imprisonment.
On Thursday last the man appeared in the Tauranga court and a second offence of “Inciting racial disharmony” was added. The maximum penalty for conviction is a three-month prison term and/or a $7000 fine offence under the Human Rights Act 1993.
From what is known so far, this would seem to be an especially subjective and politically partisan prosecution. Especially in regard to the second additional offence.
There is an elephant in the room here, and it is that New Zealand today is awash with events that “incite racial disharmony”. The most persistent and shameless offender is the Ardern govt and its numerous race based qangos such as ironically the Human Rights Commission itself.
There is a widespread and raging war on white Europeans that is actively promoted by govt MPs and partisan govt supporters such as radical university academics and a mainstream media that has actually signed an agreement to take money from the govt to conduct this war!
Leaving aside the absolute venom and hatred and incendiary lies delivered through parliamentary speeches and media releases by the two unrepresentative MPs who call themselves the “Maori” party. A venom endorsed and expanded upon by the govt’s own “Maori” caucus and also enthusiastically added to by the Green Party.
The stark reality is that there is a widespread govt supported campaign, a drumbeat of hate inciting racial disharmony right across elitist society and government, and it is focused on the vilification of white European New Zealanders as racists, land thieves, and genocidists. The term “colonisers” is constantly used as a damaging race based pejorative.
Govt paid and/or financed media employees and academics constantly drive this beat not only in broadcasts and publications, but also personally on social media, where they produce a sea of anti-white hate.
Yet all of this institutionalized incitement to racial disharmony is ignored while the police see fit to charge some nameless non-entity who put a video on some obscure Youtube channel that was only up for a few hours anyway?
The prosecution of this person stinks of politicization of the law and the police, and the great irony is that such unfair and subjective application of law will actually do more for racial division in New Zealand than what the offender’s hitherto obscure video would ever have done.
Note: Neither the owner of this site or anyone connected to it has any association with the individual charged or of any such groups as he may himself be associated with. This article is presented in the interests of the fair application of the law and the application of natural justice that every individual should be entitled to in a civilised and orderly society.