Far right Canadian activist wants to come to New Zealand to insult local communities

Written By: - Date published: 12:08 pm, July 6th, 2018 - 292 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, clickbait, Deep stuff, gender, Globalisation, human rights, immigration, International, Politics, scoundrels, sexism - Tags:

Lauren Southern wants to come to New Zealand to give a speech on August 3 which will no doubt insult various communities.

Should we let her in?

She appears to have a certain way of conducting her business as a self confessed journalist and vlogger.  She goes places, says really controversial stuff, hopes to pick a fight, claims to be a victim and then leaves.

Her views are pretty extreme.  She once said that Adolf Hitler “was just an SJW [social justice warrior] who happened to get freaky amounts of power”.

For instance here she is picking a fight at an anti facist protest in London.  It was all filmed in detail.

The overwhelming impression that I received after watching it was that she was only after clicks.

And here she is insulting a group of women protesting against rape culture. Her lack of understanding and sensitivity is mind boggling.

Attempts by some of the participants to educate her were wasted.

She was recently banned from entering the United Kingdom. From the Independent:

Canadian far-right activist Lauren Southern has been detained in Calais and banned from entering the UK.

Ms Southern, who worked for far right Canadian site The Rebel Media, was held by Border Force in Coquelles on Monday.

A Home Office spokesperson told The Independent: “Border Force has the power to refuse entry to an individual if it is considered that his or her presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good.”

Ms Southern, who supported a seaborne mission seeking to hamper the rescue of refugees, claimed British authorities had told her she was “officially banned from UK for racism” after being detained.

“They just locked me out and said ‘au revoir’… Officially banned from UK for ‘racism’.. Doing fine though, all the cool people are being banned anyway,” the ultra-conservative provocateur said on Twitter.

It appears the authorities were heeding warnings given by the anti racism movement. Again from the Independent:

Dr Joe Mulhall, a senior researcher for anti-racism campaign Hope not Hate, raised concerns about Ms Southern’s activism.

“We’ve been watching Lauren Southern for some time, and she has gradually become more and more extreme in her outbursts and associations,” he told The Independent in a statement.

“The decision to refuse her entry came after she distributed racist material in Luton on a recent visit to the UK.

“In our State of Hate 2018 report released earlier this month, we warned that one of the major threats we would witness this year was the linking-up between Stephen Lennon (Tommy Robinson) with North American far-right alternative media personalities such as Southern and the far-right Generation Identity (GI) movement in Europe. This has seen an unholy alliance start to come together particularly over social media but also in the offline space.

The local Muslim community oppose her being granted permission to visit. From Radio New Zealand:

Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux are best known for their far-right alternative views on everything from feminism, gender and immigration to Islam.

Earlier this year, Ms Southern was banned by from entering the UK on the grounds of her involvement “in the distribution of racist material in Luton”, according to the BBC.

The Islamic community voiced their opposition to the visit last month.

New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations president Hazim Arafeh said it had written letters to the Immigration Minister, Minister for Ethnic Communities and the Human Rights Commission asking for Lauren Southern to be denied entry.

“[She] abuses her right of freedom of speech. She’s just going to give a talk in which she’s just going to insult all of us,” Mr Arafeh said.

“I don’t think insulting Muslims comes under free speech, that’s an abuse of freedom of speech.

“I’m talking on behalf of 50,000 to 60,000 Muslims in New Zealand who are going to face a very hard time by all the comments she is going to make.”

The proposed venue for her speech is the Bruce Mason Centre in Auckland, an Auckland Council owned venue.

My personal view?  Freedom of speech does not require us to let her in to insult local communities.  And Auckland Council should cancel her booking.

If you want to do something there is a petition you can sign.

Update: Auckland Council and Phil Goff pulled the booking and the speech has been cancelled.

292 comments on “Far right Canadian activist wants to come to New Zealand to insult local communities”

  1. Ovid 1

    Having been excluded from the UK, Southern fails the good character requirements for entry to NZ. She would need positive approval from the Minister of Immigration to get a visa. So really what the Minister is being asked is to do nothing.

    • mickysavage 1.1

      Thanks Ovid. Hopefully this will be an easy decision.

      There is the other speaker Stefan Molyneux who may not be caught by this. I have not had a chance to look at his background although judging by his twitter feed he is similar to Southern.

    • Baba Yaga 1.2

      The only threat Lauren poses to NZ is from the far left nutbars who will resort to violence to try to disrupt her appearances.

      • Sabine 1.2.1

        how dare people be intolerant of her intolerance. Oh my.

      • Tricledrown 1.2.2

        Baby Gaga hopefully you get detained on your next overseas trip.

        • Sanctuary 1.2.2.1

          And waterboarded. It isn’t torture you know, just enhanced interrogation.

          • NZJester 1.2.2.1.1

            It depends on who you and who you do it too. The US helped in the prosecution of foreign nationals who used it against their people listing it as torture in the charges. But when they used it themselves it was suddenly reclassified as enhanced interrogation.

            If they let that legal argument fly the next, you will have rapists claiming what they where doing was just enhanced hugging and not rape.

            But both are actually also a form of psychological and not just physical torture inflicted on people.

        • Baba Yaga 1.2.2.2

          You wont have long to wait. Off to Vanuatu for a week tomorrow. Watch the papers.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3

      She seems to fail on 2 of those conditions:

      – have ever been removed, excluded or deported from any country.
      – are likely to be a threat to public order

      And possibly on:

      – are likely to be a risk to the public interest.

      Which means that she should be stopped at the gate and told to leave.

      • Gosman 1.3.1

        Why is she likely to be a threat to public order?

        • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.1

          By increasing hate and divisiveness in society by what she says and does.

          BTW, failing on the first means that she can’t come here any way.

          • Gosman 1.3.1.1.1

            I personally find your views hateful and divisive. It doesn’t mean you should be banned from spreading your views around though.

            • humma 1.3.1.1.1.1

              Yeah I find Draco’s views hateful as well. But i bet Draco does not care about that at all.
              That said, I will protect Draco’s right to spread his hateful views and think the more people speak the better. Hiding speech, as abhorrent as it may be to some, is a recipe for disaster.

              • Draco T Bastard

                Care to describe what makes my views hateful?

                • R.P Mcmurphy

                  thats trumpspeak from the goebbels playbook.

                • Gosman

                  You denigrate a section of society and label them essentially parasites. You call for them to be eliminated. That is hateful in my view.

                  • Draco T Bastard

                    You denigrate a section of society and label them essentially parasites.

                    Capitalists are parasites and calling them what they are isn’t hateful.

                    You call for them to be eliminated.

                    Legislated out of existence. The people would still live.

                    That is hateful in my view.

                    And your view is meaningless. It has neither logic nor facts to back it up.

                    • David Mac

                      Parasites provide no benefit to their hosts. Without capitalists I’d have no shelter, shoes, food, transport or internet.

                      I’m quite grateful for Jennian Homes, Hannahs, Watties, Toyota and Slingshot.

                      How do you fill those needs in your life Draco? Buy their internet and then use it to slag them off. Pay their rent and then once they’re out of earshot name them: “Bludger”. You’re as deep into this capitalist thing as we all are and I guess you aren’t going somewhere else soon.

                      Parasites and bludgers come in all stripes, dirt poor and filthy rich. The discerning factor is the value of the contribution we make to the society that supports us.

                      The bone of contention is the subjective nature of value. One man’s asset is another man’s liability.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      Without capitalists I’d have no shelter, shoes, food, transport or internet.

                      We had shelter and food long before we had capitalism.

                      The discerning factor is the value of the contribution we make to the society that supports us.

                      Capitalists add none at all. They just bludge off of the work of the rest of us.

                      You’re as deep into this capitalist thing as we all are and I guess you aren’t going somewhere else soon.

                      It’s impossible to live outside of society. All I can do is try to change it by highlighting how capitalists bludge upon the rest of us and produce poverty.

                    • Andy []

                      I am a self employed IT contractor. I am therefore a capitalist and a parasite according to you

                    • marty mars

                      Draco has spelled it out clearly from his perspective. If you are a capitalist then you are a parasite – not sure why you want to ask rhetorical questions except as a prelude to outrage.

                      I suppose you may change his mind – lol yeah nah not a hope in hell thank the Gods.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      I am a self employed IT contractor. I am therefore a capitalist and a parasite according to you

                      Actually, what you are is an ignoramus.

                      You’re incorrectly equating capitalist with entrepreneur. As a self-employed person you’re the latter and not necessarily the former.

                      Now, it’s very easy for an entrepreneur to become a capitalist and thus a parasite. All that they’d need to do is to employ someone else in their business and profit from that person’s work.

                      Shareholding, the epitome of capitalism, is pure bludging.

              • Rob

                Pity we don’t have time travel as these trolls could catch abus to the 1930’s Germany and live their dreams

            • Paul Campbell 1.3.1.1.1.2

              I think there’s a simple difference NZ residents are guaranteed free speech by the BORA, foreign nazis are not – we don’t have to let them in.

              Our own nazis on other hand have every right to make their viewpoints known in public, as do we to show up and tell people what we think of them

            • WILD KATIPO 1.3.1.1.1.3

              You don’t give a shit about any of that , Gosman.

              That woman got her arse kicked in England. You don’t mess with the English , mate – Hitler tried and look what happened to him. And the English are ALL races . Just like the woman who got under her skin.

              English pride.

              Cockney Rejects- Oi! Oi! Oi! – YouTube
              Video for oi oi oi music you tube▶ 3:19

        • cleangreen 1.3.1.2

          Gosman;
          “is she likely to be a threat to public order?”

          It doesnt’ really matter now so I hear the organisers are about to cal off the visit to NZ now.

          I beieve in the freedom of speech and that incuded those who often offend me and others.

          But they have a human right to speak of their concerns,

          I would be happy if she caome to give her views as she is entitled to do and I if offended can speak my mind then also.

          Fredom of speech is a human right and was what our fallen solders died to preserve our right to do so.

          The people who want to stop her will use “Incitement to imminent lawless action”

          But when many folks in Ackland and other places arond NZ marched against TPPA and caused lawlessness by blocking roads interestingly the national Government used the poice to force an end to their freedom of speech and assembly, as they did when many ralliied against Banks in that famouus movement “take back wall street”.

          So if she incited public lawless action again cant the government then use the police as they are using it all the time now?

          • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.2.1

            But when many folks in Ackland and other places arond NZ marched against TPPA and caused lawlessness…

            Protesting isn’t lawlessness.

            Rioting, on the other hand, is.

            From what I’ve seen she’d be attempting to induce rioting.

      • alwyn 1.3.2

        “have ever been removed, excluded or deported from any country.”.
        Do other countries have such draconian conditions as this?
        If they commonly do I guess that Marama Davidson isn’t going to be doing very much travelling in the future.
        Wasn’t she removed from Israel after her trip on the good ship Band of Fools?

        • Draco T Bastard 1.3.2.1

          Do other countries have such draconian conditions as this?

          Yes, as a matter of fact – they do. Here’s a reasonably full list of exclusions.

          Wasn’t she removed from Israel after her trip on the good ship Band of Fools?

          I believe she didn’t even try to enter Israel but Palestine.

          • Muttonbird 1.3.2.1.1

            It’s convenient for Israel apologists to call it Israel when it suits them and Palestine when it suits them.

        • Tricledrown 1.3.2.2

          Alwynger Marama she’s got guts than you will ever have.
          Hitler practiced ethnic cleansing like Netenyahu does.
          He began his war on Jews initially by extraordinary diting Jews to Israel even though his mother was part Jewish.
          The reason why I believe was to bring the Arabs back to his side after the British had promised Palestine to both after ww1.
          Now we have the ghetto like conditions in gaza strip just like Warsaw days.

      • Andy 1.3.3

        But it completely fine for the Canterbury Museum to feature an “art” exhibition displaying a T shirt stating “Jesus is a c@@t”?

        How exactly is that advancing society ?

        I’m pretty sure it is quite reasonable to question Sharia Law, FGM and “Asian grooming gangs”, but not according to the government and the left

        • Draco T Bastard 1.3.3.1

          But it completely fine for the Canterbury Museum to feature an “art” exhibition displaying a T shirt stating “Jesus is a c@@t”?

          Wouldn’t that depend upon context of the art?

          I’m pretty sure it is quite reasonable to question Sharia Law, FGM and “Asian grooming gangs”, but not according to the government and the left

          It would be the majority of parties in the present government that actually question those things. National, on the other hand, appeared to try to bribe one of those countries that’s hard on Sharia Law to sign an FTA and ignoring all those questions in their pursuit of profit.

    • Andy 1.4

      She was held under UK terrorism laws in Calais for running a stall in Luton handing out leaflets claiming “Allah is Gay”

      Obviously a serious threat to national security

      • Stuart Munro 1.4.1

        Fomenting religious violence is indeed a threat.

        • Andy 1.4.1.1

          Yes, insulting “The Religion of Peace” could be seen as a threat, as it adherents are likely to kill you

        • Richard Christie 1.4.1.2

          Fomenting religious violence is indeed a threat.

          It’s just what religions do, it’s part of their DNA. For some reason we seem to tolerate the practice.

  2. Tuppence Shrewsbury 2

    Fighting stupidity and racism with controversy, air time and banning of ideas. Feels like the war on drugs all over again

  3. marty mars 3

    No we don’t need that hater here – got enough of our own.

  4. Gosman 4

    Why is insulting Muslims not included in free speech?

    • mickysavage 4.1

      Free speech is not the absolute right to say anything. Besides she is asking for the privilege to come here and I don’t think we should extend that privilege to her.

      • Gosman 4.1.1

        Agreed, incitement to violence isn’t included. However insulting people is generally regarded as free speech otherwise politics would be impossible.

      • Gosman 4.1.2

        I am really interested in exploring this topic MS.

        This blog for example contains many insults against people who do not share a particular World view that many here hold. These insults can get quite nasty but we are all adults and this is the internet after all. But if Muslims can’t be insulted then why should anyone be allowed to insult anyone?

        • McFlock 4.1.2.1

          I think “insult” was an extremely polite description.

          Either way, the insults here are usually directed at specific individuals or groups that have a choice about their political beliefs, off the top of my head.

          • Gosman 4.1.2.1.1

            Are you stating Muslims don’t have a choice about their particular belief or do you think religious beliefs deserve special protection above political beliefs?

            • McFlock 4.1.2.1.1.1

              I pretty much get why a lot of people have political beliefs, as I have some of my own. They are generally a matter of choice.

              I have no idea why someone would choose one magic book over another. To me, a religious person appears to have as much choice about it as they do their sexuality. If I were afflicted by irrational faith, I fear I might become religious, too. But I don’t think I’ll ever be a tory.

              • Gosman

                By stating that you are insulting (some) religious people.

                • McFlock

                  Do you mean “insult” as in “cause offence”, or “insult” as in “promote a fear of genocide against whites”? Because I might have done the former, but apparently Southern does the latter.

                  • Gosman

                    You can define insult however you like. The fact is if we don’t think people should be insulted for their religious beliefs you’ve failed to do that.

                    • McFlock

                      So, to be clear, your argument in favour of hate speech is an absolute, all-encompassing definition of “insult” so you can argue equivalence between risking lives by blocking rescue ships and calling scripture “magic books”.

                      Do you have a choice about your religious beliefs?

                    • Gosman []

                      Yes you have a choice

                    • McFlock

                      I’m not so sure about that.

                      I’m really not sure one can avoid having a firm, inexplicable conviction that a particular flavour of religion exists, even if it’s merely a social construct from birth.

                      It’s certainly make life easier for a lot of people. Might have stopped someone I know from killing themselves, too.

                    • Gosman []

                      Unless you think people are born in to a religion (i.e. believe from birth) then it’s a choice.

                    • Baba Yaga

                      “…your argument in favour of hate speech is an absolute, ”

                      And there it is folks. The shift from discussing an ‘insult’ to introducing this nebulous concept of ‘hate speech’. Beautiful sleight of hand.

                    • McFlock

                      BY, thanks for demonstrating my point.

                      As I said at the start, “insult” is a very polite term for some of this person’s shenanigans. But because you pricks pretend that regurgitating fears of ethnic “replacement” is the same as calling someone a poo-head, any criticism or sanction might seem remarkably disproportionate.

                    • Gosman []

                      The problem for you McFlock is defining hate speech is fine when it is controlled by your side but it inevitably falls in to the hands of the other side

                    • McFlock

                      Perils of democracy. You got a better system?

                    • Gosman []

                      Yes. Ensuring individual rights are codified in constitutional law so they aren’t subject to the vagracies of democratic politics.

                    • McFlock

                      That just means humans write them once, rather than tweaking them when 18th century punctuation puts assault rifles in the street.

              • Andy

                Muslims don’t get much of a choice as they might be killed if they leave Islam, but that is OK with the left, apparently

            • Jenny 4.1.2.1.1.2

              Gosman
              6 July 2018 at 1:14 pm
              Are you stating Muslims don’t have a choice about their particular belief or do you think religious beliefs deserve special protection above political beliefs?

              Gosman, you obviously don’t believe in freedom of religion, or freedom from harrassment for practicing the religion of your choice. Therefore you don’t believe in free speech. On those grounds, I would ban you from entering New Zealand.

              • Gosman

                Ummm… freedom of religion does not equate with freedom from criticism for belonging to that particular religion.

                Do you think freedom of political association means people should be free from criticism for their particular political association?

                • Tricledrown

                  Gosman the world isn’t as simple as your simple mind.
                  Perhaps you could work for Trump and become his ambassador to the middle East.

                  • cleangreen

                    Trckledrown 100% beautiful hit there.

                    Some of Gossie is right though as we need to draw the lines in public behaviour as now wesee that the Seurity review just released contests that the Chinese ‘have strong influenence in our regions’ now because of their mass imigration and financial investments so so need now to draft rules so these new mass imagagants have a guide to work with.

                    Sam would apply if we get a large muslim imigration and if the political power shifts to more muslim persuassion we may then find our whole system becomes vastly diffent where women are banned and men are losing hands or fingers for their infidelity to islam.

                    Scary times for sure here if borders are thrown open.

              • JohnSelway

                Freedom of religion doesn’t include the freedom not to be insulted or made fun of. My rights don’t end where your beliefs begin.

                If people didn’t want their beliefs made fun of they shouldn’t have such silly beliefs.

                Anyway – if there is no reason to deny her entry then let her in and we can mock and protest her silly beliefs

        • Andy 4.1.2.2

          It’s worth noting here that the Canterbury Museum ran an “art” exhibition that featured a Tee Shirt stating “Jesus is a C-Word” and a picture of a Nun pleasuring herself on the other side

          Te Papa had an exhibit featuring a Virgin Mary figurine draped in a condom

          Most Christians shrug this off, but when someone tries a mild and meek “social experiment” in Luton, a Muslim stronghold, she gets banned from the UK on terrorism charges.

          • McFlock 4.1.2.2.1

            She wasn’t banned on terrorism charges.
            She claimed to have been questioned, at least in part, under the UK Terrorism Act of 2000.

            Probably asking her whether she was going to shill for the EDL or NF while she was there.

            • Andy 4.1.2.2.1.1

              She has no connections with the EDL and I’m not even sure if the National Front still exists

              She was questioned at Calais under the auspices of the terrorism act

              • McFlock

                Gosh, glad you could clear that up for the border guards. They wouldn’t be doing their jobs if they didn’t ask the question.

                And given the nature of some far right extremists, the terrorism act questions might well have been reasonable.

                But as it was, she was not “banned from the UK on terrorism charges”. That’s you lot hyping up the importance of someone who was simply barred because they’re a horrible person, not because they’re a suspected terrorist.

      • One Two 4.1.3

        You don’t understand what free speech is then, MS…

        It is the absolute right to say anything….

        Geez…come on…

        Consequences are another conversation…

        • Draco T Bastard 4.1.3.1

          It is the absolute right to say anything…

          Nobody has that right:

          The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. […] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.

          Consequences are another conversation…

          And not just the consequences to her but to our society because of the increased divisiveness that she will cause in it.

          • One Two 4.1.3.1.1

            Every human being has ‘that right’…

            Figure it out Draco…seriously…it’s not difficult…

            • Draco T Bastard 4.1.3.1.1.1

              It’s not difficult.

              You’re obviously having difficulty with it though.

              There’s a very good reason why we have laws against hate speech. A reason that you fail to understand.

              • One Two

                Laws do not take away the ability of any human being to communicate any message they so choose, using whichever natural or man made mechanism they have access to…

                Figure it out Draco…

                • Draco T Bastard

                  Just because they can doesn’t give the right and the law (and basic logic) tells us that there must be limits to what people can say.

                  • Gosman

                    Only in extreme circumstances Draco. I personally find your views dangerous and a threat to my view of public order. Do you want people like me to restrict your rights to spreed you particular viewpoint?

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      I personally find your views dangerous and a threat to my view of public order.

                      Your view of public order is inconsequential.

                      Nothing I say here or anywhere else will cause anyone else to riot. Hopefully they’ll get round to changing the political system away from the failed capitalist paradigm.

                  • One Two

                    You’ve figured it out…well done…

                    But you’re still confused about what ‘rights’ actually are…

                    Unless in your mind relieving another human being of communication is ‘acceptable’…then you appear to be clueless…

                    The laws that you seem to believe, are ‘rights’…are nothing of the sort…

                    Basic logic you say…

                    Nope…

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      But you’re still confused about what ‘rights’ actually are…

                      Nope. That would be you.

                      You still have NFI as to why rights need to be limited.

                    • One Two []

                      Rights…limitations…need to have limits…laws…for public safety you say…

                      That is a completely different discussion…which still does not stop people saying anything they want, using any method they can communicate with…

                      You can’t forecably stop people talking and communicating by removing their voice box, arms/legs etc, Draco…locked up in a cell miles from another human being…still talking…still speaking freely…free speech can’t be taken from human beings…not by other human beings…impossible without mutilation or death…

                      It’s your fantasty world where digital currency is not run by private enterprise and ‘law’ can turn a human being into a mute…

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      You can’t forecably stop people talking and communicating by removing their voice box, arms/legs etc,

                      And where did I say anything like that?

                      Oh, that’s right, I didn’t.

                      You’re just making shit up to suit yourself which makes you a troll.

                    • One Two []

                      Not you specifically, Draco…the wider context…

                      Keep believing written words on paper, enforced by actors in costumes can stop human beings communicating any message they so choose…no matter how vile the content…

                      And every human being you believe can be shut down by ‘laws’ will continue … exactly as they are…

                    • JohnSelway

                      Draco’s authoritarian streak slips out again.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      Keep believing written words on paper, enforced by actors in costumes can stop human beings communicating any message they so choose…no matter how vile the content…

                      And this is you making shit up. I’ve never said that laws stop people doing shit. In fact, I’ve the exact opposite even on this site (about 10 years ago).

                      The laws define the rights that people have. That’s all. And broadcasting hate speech isn’t one of them. You go round broadcasting hate speech and you will end up with criminal charges.

                      Having the ability to broadcast doesn’t give you the right. Same as having a car that can do 320km/h doesn’t give a driver the right to do 320km/h.

              • Gosman

                Hate speech should only be banned if there is a specific call to act in a violent or illegal way.

          • Baba Yaga 4.1.3.1.2

            Dietrich Bonhoeffer caused increased divisiveness when he opposed the Nazi’s. They dealt with him, didn’t they.

    • R.P Mcmurphy 4.2

      if you don tknow that then you are a complete ignoramus.

  5. cricklewood 5

    I say let her in. She can be damned by her own words. Banning her is counter productive and will further entrench bigotry.

    • Wensleydale 5.1

      Best plan would be to let her in (free speech, no matter how repugnant), and then send Jeremy Wells, Matt Heath and Mikey Havoc to troll her. No one’s accused of trying to gag professional shit-stirrers, and everyone gets a good laugh out of it. The best weapon against this sort of thing is merciless, concentrated ridicule.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.1.1

        “The best weapon against this sort of thing is merciless, concentrated ridicule.”

        100% agree – and making it even funnier – those types of people usually have zero humour about themselves or their own god-awful views.

      • Andy 5.1.2

        Light weights from NZ media would have no chance against Southern

        At least she gets off her butt and goes to dangerous places unlike our Twitter following media

    • Anne 5.2

      I hope she’s banned. It’s a point of victory for these creeps to be able to roam the world spreading hatred and disorder and unfortunately there are too many gullible people around who will follow them. Don’t give them the opportunity in the first place.

      Out of curiosity were they invited to come here by anyone and if so by whom?

      • Gosman 5.2.1

        Why do you want to know? Do you want to ban them as well?

      • Andy 5.2.2

        Recently, a Muslim Iman in the UK was discussing whether gays should be thrown off buildings, burned alive, or have a wall dropped on them, or a combination of all three

        I don’t recall any action being taken against this gentleman, but if you criticise him, you are guilty of “hate speech”, as we see with Lauren Southern, Tommy Robinson etc

        • Paul Campbell 5.2.2.1

          Sure, I’ll call him on it that’s hate speech … but then so is burning catholics in effigy every November

      • Andy 5.2.3

        The vast majority of YouTube channels of a political bent are conservative or libertarian
        If those on the left want to engage in society they could use the same platform of free speech and open discussion rather than banning people that they disagree with. If their ideas are so repulsive then I’m sure the public would see this

    • Ad 5.3

      With you on that one.

      We rarely have exposure to the anti-immigration debates occurring worldwide, and it’s time we did.

      We should model free speech and strong debate as the alternative to violent conflict, and let the quality of her ideas stand or fall on their merits.

  6. Carolyn_Nth 6

    From the reports it sounds like Southern is just out to get headlines by creating public disorder. I would ban her from entering NZ as she’s likely to cause public disorder.

    • Andy 6.1

      Because a bunch of leftist thugs would rock up, that is true

    • MikeS 6.2

      “…likely to cause public disorder.”

      Rubbish. She’s not even far right like so many have described her she’s just conservative.

      I challenge anyone on this site to offer up a concrete example of Lauren Southern saying anything racist or trying to stir up hatred or cause public disorder, etc…

      I’m very much left wing economically and some of my thoughts on tax and inequality, etc would probably be considered by some as rabid far left! . But on these sorts of cultural or social issues, the ‘so-called left’ (because I don’t believe it is a majority of the left) shoot themselves in the foot and even drive people to sympathize with opposing views.

      Banning someone from speaking simply because you disagree with their views or choose to be offended by what they say is the absolute worst way to go about things. Not only does it make more people seek out the opinions you ban because they want to know what is so bad that it gets banned, but it often creates a backlash when people discover just how tame the banned ideas and opinions actually are.

      The ‘left’ likes to talk full throttle about diversity, but not when it comes to diversity of ideas or opinions. Banning people or shutting people down from speaking is pathetically weak and only makes the other side stronger. The best and only way to defeat ideas and opinions you disagree with is to stand up and offer better ones, not to bury your head in the sand and pretend differing ideas don’t exist.

      Why anyone would ever be afraid of letting someone with opposing views speak bewilders me. Banning speakers (especially those who aren’t really that offensive, if at all,) is simply pandering to vocal minorities. Of course we’ve (you’ve) been happy to let real hate speech peddlers such as Bilal Phillips and Sheikh Khalid Yasin into the country to pedal their real hate.

      Banning speakers because you don’t like their opinions is tyrannical and authoritarian. The Left used to fight heart and soul against tyranny, what is happening to us???

  7. Baba Yaga 7

    “I don’t think insulting Muslims comes under free speech, that’s an abuse of freedom of speech.”

    Of course insulting muslims is free speech. Insulting any group is free speech. No-one has a right not to be insulted. No one. Calling for someone to be physically harmed is an abuse of free speech. Calling for an entire people group to be annihilated, now that’s an abuse of free speech (https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/07/california-imam-calls-on-muslims-to-kill-and-annihilate-jews).

    • Gosman 7.1

      Agreed Baba Yaga. Muslims seem to get preferential treatment by some members of the left for some reason. I’m not sure why.

      • Stuart Munro 7.1.2

        It’s an old principle, the freedom of religion.

        Because corporations are not religious, religious rights are among those RWNJ routinely seek to overthrow. The Left supports their victims.

        • Gosman 7.1.2.1

          It actually isn’t an old principle. In fact until quite recently the majority of the World did not have it. In some places (i.e. most of the Muslim majority World) they still don’t.

          • Stuart Munro 7.1.2.1.1

            It is old – throughout reformation Europe it was acknowledged as a desirable thing long before it was guaranteed by any constitution.

            But like most RWNJ you have no idea of the importance of the institutions that you so ignorantly set out to destroy.

      • cleangreen 7.1.3

        True also here.
        “Muslims seem to get preferential treatment by some members of the left for some reason.”

      • Andy 7.1.4

        The prophet Mohammed personally beheaded 600 Jews in one day according to Hadith. Seems an exaggeration but def a role model for young Muslims

  8. Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux are quite nauseating and provocative in their ideas ..but so what. Why can’t someone be able to express their views in a public setting . They both seem disturbingly obsessed with the concept of ‘white people’ who ever they are. And personally find their science illiterate ideas offensive to the extreme, but would rather see them put in position of having to explain them, than have them silenced this way.
    The people we should be most concerned about are those trying to silence views of others that appose their own and have folk banned. That is a very disturbing development in society. It’s as though we have a new form of Sturmabteilung …C21 brown shirts that openly wish to suppress free speech for their own political reasons, and do it with impunity.

    • mickysavage 8.1

      She is clearly free to say what she wants. And thanks to the world wide web we have instantaneous access to her thoughts. But we don’t have to let her in to say these things.

      • Gosman 8.1.1

        Who is ‘We’? Are you deciding who I can and can’t listen to in person?

        • mickysavage 8.1.1.1

          New Zealand Inc. There is no absolute right for people to be allowed to come here.

          • Gosman 8.1.1.1.1

            There is no such thing as NZ Inc. You just made the term up. Again do you think YOU have the right to decide who I can listen to in person?

            • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1.1.1.1

              You can listen to whomever you like.

              Our law, as written, doesn’t let you listen to people live in NZ if they’re not of Good Character.

            • mickysavage 8.1.1.1.1.2

              No but I was hoping that my elected Minister of Immigration who has the right to decide who comes into the country would decide that she should not.

              And I was hoping Auckland Council would withdraw the booking and they have.

            • R.P Mcmurphy 8.1.1.1.1.3

              No John Keys made it up. thank god he sloped off before the lynch mob got him!

          • Andy 8.1.1.1.2

            Ms Southern is a master troll

            Banning her from NZ will get her much more publicity. Streisand effect.

            • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1.1.2.1

              Good – she needs all the exposure she can get.

              Perhaps then she’ll understand just how horrible she is.

          • Andy 8.1.1.1.3

            Nigel Farage is coming to NZ this year. Are we going to ban him too?

            • Incognito 8.1.1.1.3.1

              Has he been denied entry into the UK?

              • Andy

                He is a UK citizen so no, obviously

                • Incognito

                  Well then, you’ve answered your own question, haven’t you?

                  • Andy

                    We also banned Ayaan Hirsi Ali

                    I’m pretty sure we can ban Nigel Farage on some vague “hate speech” justification

                    • Incognito

                      Aren’t Nigel and Winston good mates? Surely, that’s enough reason to ban him from entry 😉

                  • Carolyn_Nth

                    I should think there’s no reason to refuse entry to Farage to NZ. And if he wants to speak to the public, he can do so without using publicly owned or supported venues.

                    Anyway, Nigel seems to win battles and cause chaos. He seems to have vacated UK right wing organisations now Brexit is causing so many problems for May’s government. So he must being doing world tours to find support elsewhere. He’s a bit of a Trump supporter now.

                    • Incognito

                      Surely, we can find something on him so that he’d fail the ‘good character test’? Does he ‘shop’ at Harrods by any chance? Now, that would qualify him as an unsavoury character 😉

                    • Carolyn_Nth

                      Ah. Farage seems unsavoury to me, but he’s careful to stay within certain kinds of boundaries that won’t scare the horses – he supports Trump and has made some nasty comments about gays and Jewish peoplE, which makes him unsavoury to me – these views do not help towards a humane society.

                      However, apart from that, he has past his use-by date. Brexit mostly won because of the likes of Boris getting behind it. Now Farage seems to be travelling the world looking for a constituency. I don’t think any Trump cheerleader will get a very big following in NZ.

                    • Incognito

                      I think Farage like many men and women past their use-by date is vying for attention rather than a constituency. I think he’s quite smart and outspoken. He’d make a good columnist for Granny Herald and there may even be a spot for him on DWTS. That said, some of these people from yesterday can still pack a punch …

            • Gabby 8.1.1.1.3.2

              Who’s ‘gay’ and/or ‘trans’ according to Nige?

      • “But we don’t have to let her in to say these things.” ‘we’? Can I remind that in a democracy you don’t speak for me or anyone else but yourself. Perhaps you should consider what happened in 1939 when a group self righteous ‘brown shirts’ said essentially the same thing about socialists, artists and more …with whom they disagreed politically.

        • Draco T Bastard 8.1.2.1

          Can I remind that in a democracy you don’t speak for me or anyone else but yourself.

          And our ‘democratic’ system has put in place rules that will deny her access.

          Remember, in a democracy the rules are what the majority agree to.

          Don’t agree with those rules? Fine – petition to get them changed. That is also democratic.

          • PaulMartinson 8.1.2.1.1

            To Draco T Bastard,
            I’m not aware the majority of NZers agree with banning free speech. You do obviously…..but that only indicates an intolerance for dissenting voices . Banning criticism and mockery of any religion is plain wrong. These rights are the essence of out democracy. If it weren’t for them there would have been no protestant reformation in the C17 for example.

            • Draco T Bastard 8.1.2.1.1.1

              I’m not aware the majority of NZers agree with banning free speech.

              We haven’t. In fact, it’s guaranteed in the BoRA. We’ve put in place rules that only allow those with Good Character to enter NZ.

              You do obviously…..but that only indicates an intolerance for dissenting voices .

              And that’s just BS.

              Banning criticism and mockery of any religion is plain wrong.

              I criticise religions all the bloody time. They’re really stupid idea. I just don’t do it using hate speech.

              These rights are the essence of out democracy.

              There’s all sorts of rights and laws that make up the essence of our society including limits to those rights.

              If it weren’t for them there would have been no protestant reformation in the C17 for example.

              You really need to check your history:

              Today, people in the United Kingdom live in a democracy, with laws made by a Parliament that they have elected. This has not always been the case:

              At the start of the Middle Ages, England was ruled by a king. The institution which came to be called Parliament was just beginning.

              In the 17th century, war broke out between king and Parliament, ending in the Glorious Revolution of 1688. This established a constitutional monarchy, which is a ‘king-controlled-by-parliament’.

              The 19th century saw a reform of Parliament in 1832, and a number of acts of Parliament giving the vote to a greater number of people.

              However, Britain did not become a democracy until the Representation of the People Acts of 1918 and 1928 gave the vote to all men and women over the age of 21.

              Yeah, England and the UK weren’t even pretending to be a democracy in the 17th century. They did have a major revolution that probably set the stage for them to become one a few centuries later.

        • mickysavage 8.1.2.2

          “But we don’t have to let her in to say these things.” ‘we’? Can I remind that in a democracy you don’t speak for me or anyone else but yourself. Perhaps you should consider what happened in 1939 when a group self righteous ‘brown shirts’ said essentially the same thing about socialists, artists and more …with whom they disagreed politically.

          Godwinned …

          Think of it this way. It is not a case of someone being deprived of freedom of speech. It is a case of the interruption of someone’s business opportunity.

      • Andy 8.1.3

        “She” is legally a man in her home country of Canada.

        Please try not to misgender Lauren Southern (sarc)

        Actually LS was banned from the UK on terrorism charges. She had set up a stall in Luton giving away LBGT leaflets claiming Allah is Gay

        This was in response to a Vice article stating Jesus is Gay, which of course is completely fine

        The UK is now locking up political prisoners based on very flimsy charges. I don’t really want to NZ go down that path

        • Nic the NZer 8.1.3.1

          Do try to make some sense Andy. Distributing leaflets claiming Allah is Gay in no way meets the UK’s definition of terrorism.

          Also a travel ban is quite a different thing to locking somebody up.

          • Andy 8.1.3.1.1

            southern was banned from the UK under the unspoken adherence to Sharia, namely that one shouldn’t criticise the Religion of Peace

            Presumably that is also true for NZ now . Fine to have art exhibitions featuring “Jesus is a C” though

            • marty mars 8.1.3.1.1.1

              Rubbish. That isn’t true – youve made that up to fit your bigotry imo.

        • mickysavage 8.1.3.2

          She went over there to pick a fight and film it. Excuse me if I have no sympathy for her or if I object in this being described as a freedom of speech issue.

    • esoteric pineapples 8.2

      I’m with you Paul. Shutting people up poses far more dangers than letting them speak.

      • cleangreen 8.2.1

        I join you on this EP.
        “Shutting people up poses far more dangers than letting them speak”

        Yes they become ‘martyrs’ as history has often shown us..

  9. Rozgonz 9

    Hilarious, I knew her visit would get under you lefties skin. Why don’t you just ignore her, don’t give her any airtime. She’s just trying to wind you up and you have taken the bait, hook line and sinker

    • JessNZ 9.1

      I’d say the same thing about every single one of Gosman’s posts!

      But I’d decline the application for the visit based on our duly-agreed laws and avoid the media (and possibly real-world) shitstorm that benefits nobody in NZ, even the people who may agree with her opinions.

      • Andy 9.1.1

        Southern has been to many dangerous places that most journalists would shy away from. So yes, the media here wouldn’t want “her type” here

    • mickysavage 9.2

      Because we don’t have to let her into the country?

    • Gabby 9.3

      Then she’ll be as happy as you clearly are rozzers.

  10. David Mac 10

    Those wasting an evening and their money to listen to someone share solutions that are fueled by hatred will get what they deserve.

    Provided she doesn’t break our laws I say let her harp on. I’m interested in what those juxtaposed to my own view have to say, just reinforces my feelings.

    The audience she will attract already harbour views aligned with hers, whether she fills the Bruce Mason Centre or not will have little bearing on where their heads are at.

  11. tsmithfield 11

    What I say below isn’t an indication that I agree with her specific point of view. But rather her right to have it and promote it.

    Firstly, I don’t see how this was racist as religion is not a race. It is an ideology.

    Secondly, Here is what she got kicked out of Britain for:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxjH5hZYTbQ

    All she was doing was demonstrating the contradiction between how Christianity is treated. (Where it is common for academics etc to make provocative statements that Christians would find offensive without extreme reactions from Christians) compared to how Muslims behave when confronted with similar information (Allah is a gay god).

    People in the LGBT community should be offended at the response that Muslims had in this in video about the proposal that Allah is a gay god btw. But this perspective seems to be glossed over and accepted by the left so far as Islam is concerned when it wouldn’t be in other contexts.

    This incident was entirely about confronting people with concepts that challenged their world view, nothing about causing personal offence.

    So, entirely a free speech issue IMO.

    • mickysavage 11.1

      But it is a question of entry to our country not free speech.

      The video you link to confirms that her modus operandii is to go around the world and hope to make a public spectacle of herself.

      She is clearly doing this for the clicks, which I am regrettably adding to.

      And I would have to disagree with you about her motivation. You can see from her action in the other two videos that she was happy to start skirmishes with the left and with feminists. She just wanted to pick a fight.

      • tsmithfield 11.1.1

        See my comment below that I don’t agree with what she specifically did.

        However, what she did wasn’t that different to a stunt that Greenpeace might pull. I likely wouldn’t agree with that either but support the broad right of people to protest and make a point.

        In Southern’s case she is protesting against an ideology that is very restrictive on the rights of women and gays etc. In most other contexts we would support the stand she takes. But Islam seems to get a pass on this for some reason.

        • mickysavage 11.1.1.1

          “what she did wasn’t that different to a stunt that Greenpeace might pull. ”

          But it was completely different. She goes for the edge of the political spectrum as part of her business model. She clearly does this for the clicks.

          By comparison Greenpeace is motivated by the best of intentions …

      • Gosman 11.1.2

        Why would she being denied entry to the country MS? The only reason would be that she has unpleasant views which she might share with NZers.

        • McFlock 11.1.2.1

          Visiting here is a privilege, not a right. What good is she to the country?

          • Gosman 11.1.2.1.1

            Some citizens of the country think she is useful. The question you are not answering is why YOU get to decide they are wrong and YOU (and people like you) are right.

            • left_forward 11.1.2.1.1.1

              Hey man stop shouting, it’s piercing.

            • McFlock 11.1.2.1.1.2

              I don’t get to decide anything. Draco’s already clearly and repeatedly told you who makes the decision and on what basis.

              If you’re still asking the question, you must be an idiot or a liar.

  12. Bill 12

    A kind of ‘B’ Grade Katie Hopkins then?

    I suspect people like her have simply found a very unpleasant but effective way to ego trip.

    Let her turn up.

    If halls or auditoriums are empty, she’ll pack up and shut up. But…well, I suspect there are enough people would give her oxygen by trying to shut her down.

    What’s with the money grubbing fucks who run or rent out the Bruce Mason Centre though? You think they’d promote an evening by solid left wing/socialist/ anarchist speakers who were sharing their thoughts for free?

    No. Of course they wouldn’t.

    • esoteric pineapples 12.1

      “I suspect people like her have simply found a very unpleasant but effective way to ego trip.”

      I came across her videos by chance a while ago – the ones dealing with what is happening to white South Africans – and I didn’t get that feeling at all. I felt she was quite sincere in her motivation. I felt that she tends to attract shallow racist personalities, but didn’t feel that she fitted that description herself.

  13. indiana 13

    Oddly we never see the same group of people rushing to set up a petition to block a person such as the one in this article:
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/86784089/auckland-imam-permanently-stood-down-after-antisemitic-speeches

    I’m not sure if that person is a NZ citizen, if he is then would we also demand that Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux would be blocked from applying for NZ citizenship? Because, once you are a citizen, then you can freely go about insulting anyone.

    • tsmithfield 13.1

      Exactly. There at least needs to be consistency in the way people are treated.

    • McFlock 13.2

      Well, yes, once you’re allowed into the country then there are no immigration blocks to your speech. You just get stood down when the HRC hears what you’re saying.

      Or should we deport citizens, now?

      • Draco T Bastard 13.2.1

        Not everyone in the country and spouting hate speech is a citizen. Those people should be deported as they don’t fit the Good Character test for Permanent Residence or even getting a visa.

        • McFlock 13.2.1.1

          Visa revocation ok, but I reckon if they go bizarro-evil after permanent residency, we’ve already made the call and they might have cut ties on that basis.

  14. tsmithfield 14

    Yes. Personally, I don’t agree with what she did because the reaction was quite predictable. I don’t think she needed to do that to know there would be a reaction.

    However, the broad concept of challenging religious ideas, and making people feel uncomfortable about their behaviour is legitimate freedom of speech. Not racism.

  15. Alfie 15

    Mickey… you may want to modify your link to the petition. The current link goes to a “You have successfully signed the petition” page.

    [Will do thanks – MS]

  16. Jenny 16

    I call on the New Zealand authorities and the acting Prime Minister to deprive this hate monger of her right to come here.

    To give fascists and racists a platform to openly state their views, on the grounds of free speech is a false equivalence.

    If you illegally deprive someone of their liberty by kidnapping them, society retains the right to deprive you of your liberty by imprisonment.

    In my opinion the principle is the same, if you practice hate speech you give up the right to free speech.

    Racism and hate speech is not free speech, it is an abuse of free speech, because its purpose is to incite violence and deprive others of their freedom.

    Freedom of speech, freedom of choice, freedom of religion, political views, racial equality are all the target of hate speech., The purpose is to deprive others of these rights, To advocate the removal of these rights from others, means you do not deserve them your self.

    Do we defend the right for neo-nazis and racists to parade in Chartlottsville or do we oppose them?

    Do we oppose the right of the blackshirt fascists to bolster their movement by marching down Cable Street as they did in England?

    Or do we allow the Brown Shirts to march unopposed and grow as they did in Germany?

    The children stand at the gate by Lene’s yard. Suddenly they hear: tromp, tromp — tromp tromp — Hey hey hey! Hitler Youth! Heil, heil heil!

    Hurray, Hitler Youth! Let’s follow them! They are marching past: tromp, tromp, right, left

    http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/textbook05.htm

    • Gosman 16.1

      Who gets to decide if it is hate speech or not?

      • You_Fool 16.1.1

        Me? Can I? Please?

        Also am I allowed to follow you around and verbally abuse you at all times, call you names and insult your parentage? You can’t complain about that cause it is my free speech right? No matter what I say, or what leaflets I hand out… right?

        • Gosman 16.1.1.1

          If you like. Unless you damage my reputation by speaking or writing untruths. Then I get to sue you. Do you see how this works now?

          • You_Fool 16.1.1.1.1

            Can I record my time and cut it to not show where I do slander you and abuse you and then claim that is the truth because I have a video of the incident…

            You realise that is what these people are doing right?

        • Andy 16.1.1.2

          Being anti rape and anti FGM is now considered “hateful” by the left

    • Jenny 16.2

      Germany is everywhere where we march in brown shirts and sing our songs, that is Germany.

      Heini and Lene

      “Is Germany everywhere?” Heini asks. — Father says: “Germany is everywhere where real German people are together…..

      …..Germany is everywhere that happens, no matter how far away from here. And where German boys and girls obey their parents and work hard in school, that is also Germany. Where the Hitler Youth play and sing and do their duty, and where girls dressed in brown use their hands to show their love for their Führer and help their people, that is also Germany. Where German soldiers conduct exercises, where we march in brown shirts and sing our songs, that is Germany.

      http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/textbook05.htm

      No pasarán

    • Andy 16.3

      I support a lot of work that Lauren southern does particularly the Farmland documentary

      I am a UK immigrant with NZ citizenship

      Would you like to deport me? I’d be happy to share my contact details with you and you can doxx me and intimidate my family

      It would be my pleasure

  17. I think the term “Don’t Feed The Trolls” applies to this person… She is just a click-bait troll…

    • Draco T Bastard 17.1

      And so are all the RWNJs in this thread.

      • You_Fool 17.1.1

        Well, yeah… they mostly seem to be in it for the l0lz and not to actually debate ideas…

        • tsmithfield 17.1.1.1

          Let me ask Draco and you if you would speak against ideologies that have been shown to be highly repressive to the rights of women and gays?

          • You_Fool 17.1.1.1.1

            I am against anything the represses the rights of anyone….

            Note this troll isn’t really protesting anything, any more than me yelling at random people is protesting anything…

            • tsmithfield 17.1.1.1.1.1

              To the degree that Lauren Southern is also against a specific ideology that holds those views, would it be fair to say that you agree with her so far as that goes?

              • McFlock

                Well, no she’s not.

                She’s basically saying we should fear all Christians because on denomination covered up child abuse by its members (well, multiple denominations, but probably not all). When you’d probably find that most members of even that denomination were appalled by the behaviour.

                • tsmithfield

                  In the particular stunt she pulled, only those with intolerent views would have reacted to her.

                  Similar to how someone speaking against child abuse in the Catholic church would receive support and agreement from those in the church not involved in the behaviour and only cause upset with those who were in agreement with that behaviour.

                  • McFlock

                    she’s only ever pulled one stunt? lol

                    But in a broader sense, too, you’re full of shit. Blocking a ship that’s going to search for and rescue people in the sea, or blaming Syrian refugees for a shooting, or ranting that your ethnicity and culture is being “replaced”, these aren’t merely criticising a narrow aspect of a particular faith, it’s tarring everyone in that faith with the same brush.

                    • tsmithfield

                      Blocking a ship that’s going to search for and rescue people in the sea”

                      That actually sounds quite similar to the way Australia treats refugees, so perhaps we should be boycotting Australia.

                      All the rest is merely her expressing her views.

                      The best way to counter that speech is to provide counter examples, arguments, and stats to refute her position.

                      The more she states her views, the more opportunity there is for them to be countered and for her to be discredited. Suppressing her views only feeds her cause.

                    • McFlock

                      What ships do the aussies block?

                      What you’re avoiding is the fact that racism isn’t rational. One can’t counter that with examples, argument or stats. Any more than one can counter AGW deniers. They want to bog people down in muddy waters of example vs counter vs statistic. If the waters are clear, there’s only one rational position. If they’re muddy, nobody knows where to go. And look at all the people they’re debating with and pwning in their heavily edited videos…

                      But more importantly, sometimes the worst thing one can do is validate an abhorrent position with respect.

                    • tsmithfield

                      What Australia does isn’t exactly the same, but it is of the same ilk. Such as this where fairly extreme measures were taken to stop refugees reaching Australia:

                      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-09/abf-denies-sinking-indonesian-asylum-seeker-boat/7232010

                      So far as the rest goes, don’t you think it might be a tactic for Southern to provoke bans etc to increase her profile, and enlist support on the basis of perceived injustice on infringement of her right to freedom of speech.

                      So far as racism goes, I think it is conflating issues. I don’t think it would bother her particularly what colour skin the people were.

                      If there were hordes of white people arriving as refugees in similar numbers I suspect she would think pretty much the same about those as she does about the current refugees.

                    • McFlock

                      rescuing people and then scuttling their craft isn’t the same as stopping other people rescue them.

                      Of course she wants a reaction. The question is whether respecting her views (and I’m not going to get into a semantic debate about which exact flavour of fuckwittedness she has) would do more harm than just not actively supporting her by giving her a visa in the first place.

                    • tsmithfield

                      I would think the long term detention of refugees in squalor conditions without any hope for the future is worse. It is killing them slowly and torturing them at the same time.

                      So, I don’t think Australia is any more virtuous than Southern, yet we keep up relations with them.

                    • McFlock

                      Yup. We’re not perfect.

                      So we should give her a platform because we’re imperfect in other areas? How does that work? In for a penny of bigotry, in for a pound?

        • Gosman 17.1.1.2

          What ideas do you want to debate here?

  18. SPC 18

    No right turn, as usual determines on principle and favours free speech.

  19. AsleepWhileWalking 19

    I watched her piece on getting into the Whitehouse press gallery. Seemed interesting and made some good points.

    Other than that don’t know her work and don’t have time to watch. Won’t be going in any case.

  20. Carolyn_Nth 20

    The venue managers have now cancelled the event.

    Newshub 3 hours ago.

    An ‘alt right’ speaking event planned to be held in Auckland has been cancelled by the venue operators.

    That comes as Mayor Phil Goff sent a clear message that the pair are not welcome at Auckland Council venues.

    “I just think we’ve got no obligation at all – in a city that’s multicultural, inclusive, embraces people of all faiths and ethnicities – to provide a venue for hate speech by people that want to abuse and insult others, either their faith or their ethnicity,” Mr Goff told Newshub.

    Auckland Live, which runs the Bruce Mason Centre where the event was scheduled to take place, said the event was cancelled due to “security concerns” around the “health and safety” of the presenters, staff and patrons of the event.

    Canadian Lauren Southern was banned from entering the United Kingdom after displaying flyers reading “Allah is a Gay God” and “Allah is trans”. She claims the flyers were part of a stunt proving Islam is homophobic.

    In a trailer for the speaking event, Ms Southern asks whether Australia will continue to be a “victim of multiculturalism”.

    “Do you want to retain your culture? Do you want to retain your borders? Family? Identity? Or will the boats keep coming?” she asks.

    Stefan Molyneux also shares his views in lengthy internet videos, including arguing race is tied to IQ and reportedly saying women are to blame for violent men because adults are informed by “dysfunctional early childhood experiences, which are all run by women”.

    There would be precedent for not allowing the pair entry. Musicians Odd Future was denied entry to New Zealand in 2014, after the group was deemed “a potential threat to public order”.

    As Ms Southern has already been denied entry to the United Kingdom, she is not eligible for a New Zealand visa unless she is granted permission specifically.

    Immigation Minister Iain Lees-Galloway said Immigration NZ [INZ] is looking into the matter.

    “I am advised that INZ is aware of the two Canadian nationals referred to and is assessing whether any action needs to be taken under the Immigration Act and Immigration Instructions.”

    • Bill 20.1

      I’d like to think that the simple act of hitting, or threatening to hit the bastards where it hurts (in the pocket) is what lies behind the Bruce Mason Centre cancellation.

      But given the nonsense from Goff (wouldn’t butter melt in his mouth?) and the noises from Galloway, I suspect it’s all down to far messier stuff.

    • Andy 20.2

      Actually Molyneux’s arguments about race and IQ are based on peer-reviewed science. Jordan Peterson holds similar views.

      At least NZ will be a quiet place with none of these “far right” extremists coming in. However, when a large number of Kiwis hold similar libertarian views. you might want to be careful

      They might be everywhere… even commenting here……. Wooooo scary

  21. tsmithfield 21

    But what she did (with respect to illegal migrants) is not really that different to what our “civilised” neighbour Australia has done with respect to migrants.

    So, while I strongly disagree with the action, it wasn’t that much different to the behaviour of a sovereign nation we happily engage with. So, if we are going to stop her from coming to NZ should we also be boycotting Australia?

    So far as speech goes, it is merely her speaking her view and challenging the status-quo.

    I am sure there are viewpoints you support where you would applaud similar behaviour from an activist. So, freedom of speech cuts both ways.

  22. Hum 22

    I don’t support this woman’s ridiculous views but I support her right to express them. We need to be very careful as a society if we are to start suppressing points of view that we disagree with.

  23. millsy 23

    We will have a Handmaid’s Tale style dystopia imposed in the west if the likes of Petersen and Southern are allowed to flourish. They want to strip women, blacks and gays of their hard work rights, and they need to be stopped.

    • Carolyn_Nth 23.1

      I do think there is a major struggle going on right now between social and economic conservatives, and progressives.

      There’s a backlash coming from conservatives against the gains made by social progressives. They have taken some confidence from Trump winning the presidency.

      There’s an article by Jamelle Bouie on Slate, saying Trump is “leading the Republican charge to preserve a shrinking white majority”.

      Getting bogged down in a debate about free speech is a red herring.

      This struggle is about the current challenges to the wealthy elites and those with social and cultural status and privileges, and attempts by them and their supporters to maintain their power and privilege. Like Trump their “free speech” can play fast and loose with the truth. They aim to influence rather than spread evidence-based information and arguments.

    • chris73 23.2

      Got any links to support your views?

      https://www.youtube.com/user/JordanPetersonVideos/featured

      He’s got thousands of hours on his youtube channel so it shouldn’t be too difficult to find or did you just hear something from someone and decided to believe it?

    • MikeS 23.3

      What absolute rubbish. You clearly have no idea what any of the people mentioned even have opinions on.

      A “Handmaids Tale style dystopia ” already exists, it’s called ISIL, or Saudi Arabia, or one of many similar cultures / countries that believe women to be sub human and that gays should be killed.

  24. Andy 24

    All this “far right” BS is getting very tiresome.

    It’s just a label used to discredit anyone who doesn’t go along with the globalist corporate agenda

    • McFlock 24.1

      Not at all. Some of them are far left, as well.

    • Carolyn_Nth 24.2

      Exactly how are Southern and Molyneux opposing “the globalist corporate agenda”?

      Southern is a right wing libertarian and they tend to support international free trade. They do seem to be “globalist” in the way they are travelling the world to spread their views.

      And Southern has spent most of her time attacking NGOs, not corporates. She has opposed feminists and LGBTI+ people – these are not groups supporting international corporates.

      • Andy 24.2.1

        She is part of the so-called Identitarian movement which is in favour of closed borders, or at least anti-open borders, and maintaining the cultural traditions of European countries.

        In other words, pretty much like most Kiwis

        • millsy 24.2.1.1

          No, she wants homosexuals strung up with piano wire, casual sex made illegal, and schools to stop teaching evolution.

          • Andy 24.2.1.1.1

            I’m not sure if you are actually serious

            I’ll just assume that you are mentally ill Millsy,

            • millsy 24.2.1.1.1.1

              I am serious. Ironically the Islamic nation’s she hates so much caters for her reactionary social conservatism with laws against pre maritial sex, homosexuality, restrictions on women’s rights, etc.

              • Andy

                Millsy, I have watched many videos from Lauren Southern and nowhere have I seen her have “reactionary” views that you suggest.
                She has interviewed Trans people on her Youtube channel, and her trolling in Luton with the “Allah is Gay” thing was done with Caolan Robertson, who is a gay man

                So I don’t really know here you get your information from

                OK I get it that she is a “troll” in the sense that she is trying to provoke discussion and reaction’
                This is a problem, apparently

          • chris73 24.2.1.1.2

            Again Millsy got any proof of what you say? Here’s her youtube channel:

            https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCla6APLHX6W3FeNLc8PYuvg

            see if you can find anything or, ideally, STFU

            • joe90 24.2.1.1.2.1

              Here she is saying young women delaying marriage and engaging in pre-marital sex leads to unhappiness and that they squander the advantages they have in securing their future because it, pre-marital sex, undermines the ability of women to successfully pair bond.

              https://youtu.be/oxHIftZVfrQ

        • Carolyn_Nth 24.2.1.2

          there are some on the left that do want more border restrictions. But Southern and Molyneux go further than that and have a very racial slant to that.

    • Gabby 24.3

      A bit like the ‘farleft’ bullshit andies.

  25. esoteric pineapples 25

    I’ve watched some of her videos on what is happening to white South Africans – particularly the poor ones and farmers – and felt she presented a pretty strong case for the injustice that is taking place against them where no-one else seems to be speaking up for them.

  26. Sabine 26

    The wannabe Nazi Richard Spencer was denied further travel within Europe on a stop over in Poland.

    “He has to return to the United States”

    hahahahahahaha

    https://thinkprogress.org/richard-spencer-is-effectively-barred-from-europe-30b18131d272/

    Poor things, so white and no one wants them.

  27. AsleepWhileWalking 27

    Goff just banned them.

    Pity. I like Stefan even if I disagree. Always thought provoking.

  28. Sanctuary 28

    Deftly torpedoed by Phil Goff.

    • JessNZ 28.1

      If you want to feel disturbed, go check out the comments on Phil Goff’s FB page post where he starts ‘Auckland Council venues shouldn’t be used to stir up ethnic or religious tensions.’

      One, to me, says
      ‘Too little, too late.

      The awakening continues, and you hysterical leftist mental patients best beware, we WILL absolutely retake the reins of power, and WILL absolutely treat you and your degenerate, depraved ilk, in the exact same manner as you treat us.

      The pendulum swings, NOTHING can stop it.

      Enjoy while you can.

      Tick tock.’

  29. patricia bremner 29

    Just another RW troll we don’t need here.

    • Andy 29.1

      There are actually two of them . I notice how the left always pick on the women though

  30. RedBaronCV 30

    Is she self funding or is someone else footing the bill. And if so who?
    It’s not cheap to come here and hire the Bruce Mason centre and then the required security etc etc. And from my brief glimpse above it looks like a change of operating style. in the past she seems to have gone to a demo and mouthed off – and got a reaction she filmed.
    Standing a a stage making the same sort of remarks is a very different scenario – particularly if the audience is small and friendly. On the other hand if she did give a speech we could well wind up with social media photos of all who support her views publicly available.

    • Carolyn_Nth 30.1

      The promoter who was organising the Auckland event is David Pellowe. Curiously, he’s not interested in rtying for a non-council venue in Auckland. Probably feeds off the cancellation of the event to make political mileage out of it.

      He’s an Aussie, and is described in this article anarchobase about Pellowe bringing Southern and Molyneux to Australia.

      As noted, the tour is being organised by ‘Axiomatic Events’, a new project behind which sits Queensland businessman and Media Guy (‘Hunni Promotional Media’) Dave Pellowe. A concerned Christian citizen, Pellowe, both via his now-deleted blog ‘The Philtheist’ and still-extant Twitter accounts (Dave Pellowe and VozMayoria/Voice of the Majority), expresses fairly conventional ‘AltLite’ views: he’s pro-Christian and anti-Muslim; pro-Trump and anti-abortion; a climate change denialist and a friend of the corporate sector. He’s also a former candidate for the Family First Party, running for the seat of Logan in the Queensland state election in 2015 (when he scored 1,098 votes or 4.1%)

      Pellowe has a website and a youtube channel

      He’s anti-marriage equality, and anti Palestinian. “The truth about Gaza” is about how awful Hamas and Palestinians are.

    • Incognito 30.2

      On the other hand if she did give a speech we could well wind up with social media photos of all who support her views publicly available.

      I see, guilty by association, as ruled by an armchair-based Facebook & Twitter lynch mob viewing photos online and drawing their verdicts. FFS!

  31. weston 31

    I thought we championed free speech here in nz ?IM astounded that the mere idea of two individuals speaking from a stage in auckland could cause so much fear and righteous indignation .Surely ideas surreptitiously entered into our psyches by huge corporations or media giants or villainous pr companies or equally villainous intelligence agencies …..are infinitely more dangerous ??

    • Alan 31.1

      second that

    • mickysavage 31.2

      Their ideas are free to make they way through the WWW. Why should we allow them into the country. Besides it is not expression of free speech, it is a lost business opportunity.

      • Nick J 31.2.1

        So Mickeysavage, you are happy to decide who should be allowed in to say what. That’s a mighty fine and dandy position for anyone to hold. Now imagine Gosman for example holding that power. Would that be acceptable?Are you by dint of your political persuasions a better candidate for decision on who comes, speaks etc than Gos?

    • Gabby 31.3

      What gave you that idea westy? The jihadists on every street corner preaching death to the infidels?

  32. corodale 32

    Divide and conqueur in action, bring it on!
    More exciting than work and mortgage.
    Expect we have enough adults in our community to help supervise these kids peacefully, that they may express their past trauma is a healthy fashion.
    Gentle conflict to potentially release the tention, in a theraputic sense.

  33. Macro 33

    Well we banned Randy Mandy.
    Rice-Davies also toured Spain, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore but was banned from entering New Zealand as a result of a complaint from the Girl Guides.
    http://spartacus-educational.com/SPYdavies.htm

  34. Sabine 34

    I think the chick is just confused.

    she wants to be racist but does not want to be a ‘feminist’ even tho she would like to have some of the rights ‘feminists’ have fought for, such as the right to not marry in order to have a meal ticket, such as sex without marriage, and sex without child bearing. But other then that she just wants to be racist, cause being white is so special, and being a youtube alt-right racists beats working any day. .

    https://www.salon.com/2017/12/04/alt-right-women-are-upset-that-alt-right-men-are-treating-them-terribly/

    Quote :”I am not trying to sell the idea that myself, as a 22-year-old, needs to be married right now for the sake of traditionalism and not being a degenerate,” Southern said in a YouTube video. “What is also just completely shocking to me is the utter lack of understanding of nuance.”
    Southern said that women should be able to choose their own life path and not be attacked for it, which sounds like what women have been shouting for a few decades now.” Quote end.

    https://mic.com/articles/186675/the-women-of-the-alt-right-are-speaking-out-against-misogyny-theyd-prefer-absolute-patriarchy#.z2SugSrrX

    Quote: “I’m not going to get married at 22 years old just so that I won’t be called a degenerate on the internet,” nationalist figurehead Lauren Southern said in a recent video addressing her harassers.”Quote end.

    Sadly the blokes don’t think so? 🙂

    Quote: “They’re tricking a lot of men into thinking they’re the ideal, traditional woman when they’re no different than the skank I can find in any nightclub here,” Roosh V, a famous rape apologist blogger, said in a YouTube video posted Dec. 4. “In fact, in some cases, they are worse.”Quote end.

    Sorry my dear, you are dabbling in white patriarchy and sadly these guys that adhere to this outdated form of society really do like their women uneducated, bare feet and pregnant in the kitchen fixing sandwiches. 🙂 Cause you – women – need to out breed the ‘undesirables’ – you know the ones not white.

    I suggest she acquaint herself with the quiverfull movement and realize that this is her future if they get their say 🙂

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gothard

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19_Kids_and_Counting

  35. Blazer 36

    Those that had never heard of her like me,now have.
    A win for her ‘brand awareness’.

  36. Robert Guyton 37

    Goff – “I just think we’ve got no obligation at all…”
    Correct. He does just think that. And he gets to decide. It’s a mayoral thing, deciding. ‘parently.

  37. justpassingthru 38

    Of course Goff has the right to ban her from a council-owned building. She’ll just find somewhere else. It just proves how much of a far-Left organisation Auckland Council is.

    • Gabby 38.1

      The giveaway for me was how much money the council is taking from millionaire property developers and spending on street beggars justpassingwind, now that’s far-Left I thought to myself.

  38. Nick J 39

    Let her come and express herself, judgement of her opinions is over to the listener. Buggered if I want anyone telling me who or what I can listen to, that’s the thin end of the authoritarian wedge.

    On that note it seems ever more clear to me that the Left in particular have adopted a closed mindset that does not tolerate anything other than their views to be expressed, socially, politically or publically. It’s Orwellian, I don’t need Phil Goff to protect me or make me safe from malign opinions. Time to grow up, harden up and start thinking.

    • MikeS 39.1

      Exactly right. As stated in an earlier post, the so called left shout from the rooftops about how great and important diversity is. But when it comes to diversity of ideas or opinions, not so much.

  39. Jenny 40

    Breaking News:

    A white person has not been let into the country.

  40. Blazer 41

    My understanding is she cancelled her trip.
    Has not been barred from entering NZ.

  41. cleangreen 42

    Yes it looks like we are in a PC PC PC PC PC PC out of control world now and we really should be worried about the other global issiues that now confrant us all like….

    WORLD
    -Global heat wave
    -Climate change will be catastrophic
    -Global financial meltdown
    -Trump trade war with China
    -America invading Venezuela

    • Jenny 42.1

      Everything is related.

      The rise of the Far Right is in part a reaction to the issues you mention. Just as rise of fascism was a reaction to the Great Depression.

      The purpose of these ‘reactionaries’ is to delay or prevent any progressive action to confront any of these sorts of problems.

      To your list I will add another but related list…

      -Climate change, denial
      -Scapegoating of minorities
      -Austerity
      -Sexism
      -Racism
      -Nationalism
      -Militarism
      -War

      The second list is a list of all the things that the Far Right champion.

      You may agree, or not maybe, that it complements the first list

      • Andy 42.1.1

        I am anti rape . Does that make me Far Right?

        • marty mars 42.1.1.1

          Lol are you for real? What a knob.

          • Andy 42.1.1.1.1

            1500 girls were raped in Rotherham England by “Asian grooming gangs” yet the police and media were silent . People who spoke up were labelled “far right”

            My question stands. Is it better to let your daughters be raped because it is politically correct to do so, or is it better to speak up and risk being labelled Far Right?

  42. DS 43

    It’s a bit moot now, but I’m a tad uncomfortable with denying these nutters entry. Yes, they are nutters, and truly vile people, but letting them in and then protesting them strikes me as a much better solution. We aren’t fascists, even if they are. As it is, they’re going to thrive on martyrdom.

    Also note that the dangers of “incitement” is the justification for New Zealand’s archaic blasphemy law (you know, the one the Government wants to repeal – surely we on the Left want to consign that sort of thing to history?).

  43. Jenny 44

    Everything is related

  44. joe90 45

    Hates immigrants but thinks he should be able to go wherever TF he likes.

    White nationalist leader Richard Spencer was reportedly stopped by authorities in Europe this week while attempting to travel to address young white nationalists.

    Spencer seemingly confirmed the incident Thursday on Twitter, sharing a Swedish-language tweet from another “alt-right” supporter saying that Spencer had been banned in Europe because of his views.

    […]

    The Associated Press reported last year that Spencer had been banned from entering 26 European countries. Those countries, which include Poland and Sweden, are part of Europe’s visa-free Schengen area.

    Spencer said at the time that he would try to challenge the ban, which is in place for five years, according to the AP.

    “I’m being treated like a criminal by the Polish government. It’s just insane,” Spencer said at the time. “I haven’t done anything. What are they accusing me of?”

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/395745-richard-spencer-confirms-ban-on-traveling-to-european-countries

  45. Adam Skinner 46

    I’m glad there are other Kiwi’s like me who are appalled that we have politicians, protest groups and the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations telling others who they can listen to. I’m a Lauren Southern fan and I wouldn’t be if she were racist or bigot that the media label her. I’ve watched many of her YouTube videos and have not seen a single example of her being racist or bigoted. I’ve have heard her say that Western style democracies are superior to others when it comes to human rights, religious tolerance, Justice and equality, and I’ve yet to hear a credible argument proving her wrong. She describes herself as a conservative but still she is described as far-right in the media without them ever saying what the far-right actually stand for or what makes Ms Southern part of it. If being a nationalist is the only criteria I have to say I always support NZ in sport and are proud when a Kiwi does something good internationally but I voted Labour in the last election, not really a far-right party whatever that is. I noticed they used to accuse Dr Jordan Peterson of being far-right but this has changed somewhat since he became internationally well known and has given so many interviews and talks that the far-right accusation is seen as the rubbish it is. I suggest that those wishing to know the truth about Ms Southern watch her videos and podcasts for themselves rather than listen to the bias views put forward by people who disagree with what she says and argue she is a bad person rather than disputing her facts and arguments or debating her on the issues.
    I am very sad that NZ is following Britain and Canada in stopping people from speaking and accusing folks of hate speech because they don’t like the facts being presented. It has lead to real injustice and loss of freedoms elsewhere and we should fight against it here in NZ.

    • Incognito 46.1

      I’m glad there are other Kiwi’s like me who are appalled that we have politicians, protest groups and the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations telling others who they can listen to.

      I’d be appalled too if it were not for the fact that nobody has told others whom they can listen to. You appear to be twisting the facts and your last paragraph is only slightly more accurate.

    • Andy 46.2

      Hear hear.

      Jordan Peterson is a self described classical liberal Yet has been described as Alt Right and Far Right

      Ridiculous. The left have long since lost the plot

  46. greywarshark 47

    There’s no such thing as ‘free’ speech. There are all sorts of controls on what is reasonable to say to people. People who think that limiting free speech would be bad, talk in theories and open the way to bullies dogging people they have decided they disagree with. Those people might be wanting an abortion which should be a private affair, wanting to use euthanasia or find out about it, which should be a private affair, or just interfering and trying to change others actions. How far should one go in this behaviour?

    In turn the free speech promoters need to take serious thought about their own attempt to oppress others by their actions, while they attempt to deny those others the right to behave and express their thoughts in a reasonable way.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/361324/self-styled-nz-baptist-pastor-facing-deportation-from-australia
    What is the Pillar Baptist Church?
    The Pillar Baptist Church opened at Goodna, west of Brisbane, within the past 12 months.
    It is not affiliated with the mainstream Baptist denomination, including the Queensland Baptists or Australian Baptist Ministries.

    The church has declared it is anti-abortion, anti-gay and anti-Islam.
    Mr Robertson posts sermons on social media and has also released a “documentary” critical of the Mormon faith.
    On the church’s website, Mr Robertson describes his church as a New Testament Independent Fundamental Baptist Church.

    “Our church is a friendly group of believers who have a strong desire for truthful biblical preaching, that isn’t watered down or compromised,” the website says.

    Mr Robertson had already sparked controversy in New Zealand by saying people in gay marriages should be shot, and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern should “get in the kitchen where women belong”.
    He was rebuked by Baptist Churches of New Zealand in 2014, who said he had never been affiliated with their denomination.
    “The NZ Baptist churches have been demeaned by his vitriol, leaving many of our Baptist church members and pastors wrongly implicated by Robertson’s actions,” the church said.

    New Zealand police reportedly launched an investigation into Mr Robertson but dropped the case on the basis there was no evidence to suggest he had committed any crimes.

    Who is this man? Why does he think he has the right to harrass and frighten Muslims? Why is he more important to the world than others, and his judgments reign supreme? Why should bears be drained of their bile when there are people like this roaming free in our society? Why go to Australia and bring our country into disrepute, and enable them to bridle sensitively about it, when they have their Manus Island disgrace ongoing? What has taken him to Queensland to do this? And why can’t Baptists sue him for using their name, bringing their ‘brand’ and reputation into disrepute? Surely churches know that one of Jesus’ forecasts that people will worship false gods and wrongly preach in his name, and use religion to make money, is increasing in our materialistic society.

  47. cleangreen 48

    Yes greywarshark,

    The truth is that the politicians expect us to believe ‘we have free speech, but in reality we do not.

    We saw many cases when our people protested with our voices the government of the day would shut our people down when the poiotical climate got to sticky didn’t they.

    We need a free speech tv network as best as the TVNZ 7 was; – remenmber when we had this ‘free speech’ channel until National closed it down?.

    Labour need to construct their own commercial free balanced channel as they in the last Labour Government did, and have another ‘mark two’ TVNZ 7.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TVNZ_7

    TVNZ 7 was a commercial-free New Zealand 24-hour news and information channel on Freeview digital television platform It was produced by Television New Zealand, which received Government funding to launch two additional channels.

    The channel went to air just after 10 am on 25 March 2008 with a looped preview reel. The channel was officially launched at noon on 30 March 2008 with a special “kingmaker” political debate held within the Parliament building and featuring most of the elected minor party leaders.
    It featured TVNZ News Now updates every hour from 6 am to 11 pm, with a specialised rolling 10-minute bulletin ‘zone’ between 8 am and 9 am, throughout which six bulletins were aired. TVNZ 7 also featured an hour-long bulletin, TVNZ News at 8, at 8 pm each night. It was hosted on weeknights by Greg Boyed and on weekends by Miriama Kamo.

    While it was originally reported to be a ‘rolling news channel’, similar to Sky News and CNN Headline News, Eric Kearley, head of TVNZ’s Digital Launch team, stated about 70% of the schedule would be “factual variety” programming – a mix of local and overseas documentaries, and programmes that discuss current events and sport, with the remaining 30% being the news updates. A full schedule was released on 28 February 2008.

    The channel was relaunched on 1 March 2011, it was officially announced that TVNZ 7 cease broadcast in June 2012. This was confirmed when Broadcasting Minister Jonathan Coleman stated on behalf of the government that they would not extend further funding for the channel due to low ratings. This was despite viewing figures that suggested half of all households with Freeview at the time were watching TVNZ7 – around 700,000 people – and not the 207,000 claimed by Coleman. In March 2012, Television New Zealand confirmed this decision and announced there would be no eleventh-hour reprieve for TVNZ7.

  48. Name (Required) 49

    “[She] abuses her right of freedom of speech. She’s just going to give a talk in which she’s just going to insult all of us,” Mr Arafeh said.

    Well I guess we will never know now will we.

    “I don’t think insulting Muslims comes under free speech, that’s an abuse of freedom of speech.”

    Mr Arafeh, with respect, one should be free to speak their criticisms as they see fit. If you feel insulted by their words you are free to do so. You are free to rebut their criticisms. I am sure Ms Southern would be happy to meet with you to address your concerns.

    If free speech is going to be truly free then nothing can be beyond critique. To make Islam some how exempt from analysis or mockery is not fair to all the other religions who have learned to live with a little tongue in cheek.

    I’m disappointed that our civic venues have been closed to people with ideas that might hurt some peoples feelings.

  49. Name (Required) 50

    Far right Canadian activist wants to come to New Zealand to insult local communities

    Bullshit journalism. If this is “The Standard”, then may the one true god help us all

  50. Ned 51

    Anybody who bothers finding out about Lauren Southern or Stefan Molyneux would realize they are NOT FAR RIGHT in their political beliefs literally everything they talk about is backed up by the actual truth its a really sad day when New Zealand becomes afraid of the literal truth and this whole incident is extremely embarrassing to our countries reputation internationally…Really folks are laughing at us for being liberal morons right now.

  51. Craig Y 52

    If anyone wants to sign this Change.org petition against Southern’s visit here, go right ahead. It currently has 2885 signatures, more than twice as many as a pro-visit petition on the same website: https://www.change.org/p/immigration-new-zealand-stop-lauren-southern-from-entering-new-zealand

  52. Delia 53

    If she is cancelling her trip, why are we talking about her?

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Government ropes in livestock rustling
    Justice Minister Andrew Little today introduced a supplementary order paper (SOP) on the Crimes Amendment Bill to crack down on livestock rustling. ...
    5 hours ago
  • Small business the focus of Australian talks
    Efforts to progress a seamless trans-Tasman business environment will take another step at a ministerial roundtable meeting in Sydney tomorrow. Small Business Minister Stuart Nash and Australian Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert will co-host a roundtable meeting of senior government and ...
    1 day ago
  • Andrew Little – Speech to Amnesty International event to mark the 70th Anniversary of the Univ...
    ANDREW LITTLE - SPEECH TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL EVENT TO MARK THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ON WORLD HUMAN RIGHTS DAY, PARLIAMENT, WELLINGTON ...
    2 days ago
  • Tax reforms focus on fairness
    New tax legislation has been introduced to Parliament to ensure greater fairness in the way the tax system shapes commerce, investment decisions and social policies. Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has introduced the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2019-20, GST Offshore Supplier ...
    1 week ago
  • Preventing death and injury on our roads
    Police Minister Stuart Nash and Associate Minister of Transport Julie Anne Genter are encouraging road users to be alert to a new safety campaign launched today by Police and the NZ Transport Agency in the lead up to the Christmas. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • New comms centre improves public services
    A new digital services and communications centre opened on the Kapiti Coast will help transform the way Police connect with the public and work to make communities safe. Police Minister Stuart Nash has officially opened the Police Digital Services Centre, ...
    2 weeks ago