Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, April 11th, 2025 - 33 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Things are pretty bad under NAct1…but there are always beacons..
I have followed this (and of course many others) these particular creeps bought the land knowing…
Of course they gambled that slime Shane Jones and his fast track would destroy any covenants.
Super Supreme court..to the rescue !
The J Swap creeps maybe gonna try again ? The Fight will go on…
Years ago, I found out what a Stand Up Guy is. Bro in the following link meets that and more…Respect ! Reading the story you can feel the depth of what it means to him and us . If you have any sense of Value that is…
Thanks psych….QE2 covenants should be sacrosanct.
Cheered me up at breakfast.
nice
/
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:2vtbmhmrwzbqcfv4we4uxzzt/post/3lmiadhmpik27?
what's wrong with it?
They want to stop ideas.
illegal ones. I mean it's stupid ad, and particularly concerning in the current US climate. But NZ banned the Chch shooter's manifesto in part because he was trying to influence people's ideas on the mass murder of Muslims.
Really? And which ideas do you think should be banned?
I just gave you an example joe.
I mean, there are some ideas that are a serious threat to society (eg the manifesto). The problem the US has is that it's heading towards authoritarianism and is already using people's ideas against them. The left's problem is that it thinks no ideas should be suppressed, except when it does, and those are the ones it doesn't like. We're all in deep shit here.
His manifesto wasn't an idea, it was propaganda for bad ideas.
His propaganda was banned. A quick squiz at any of the numerous local anti-Islam SM accounts will show his bad ideas to be alive and well in NZ.
they said ideas in the ad. "propaganda for bad ideas" wouldn't fit in the meme. Plus it's not understandable without context.
Are you suggesting they didn't need to ban it?
I'm suggesting that you can't ban ideas and that even if you could, which ideas should be banned?
You can't ban ideas – they are in people's heads. You could ban the transmission of ideas through writing or speech, but everyone acknowledges that this can be a dangerous slippery slope. You can, and probably should, ban explicit or even implicit calls to action which are based in ideas and which would be materially harmful to other people in a way that infringes some standard of human rights (e.g. not feeling insulted might not be deemed to be a human right, but the right to life usually is.)
case in the UK of a woman who tweeted during community riots over immigration after a man stabbed children in a dance class and was mistakenly identified as an immigrant. She tweeted that the rioters should set the apartment block with the immigrants in it on fire. She was sent to prison for that for 2.5 years. Afaik it was a single tweet, but she had 10,000 followers and her husband was a local councillor. The tweet had 300,000 views.
The judge was of the view that it was incitement to violence. But what if she had just rage tweeted in the moment and didn’t really intend for people set immigrants on fire? Is it the intention or the idea that is the problem?
I tend to put it in the fuck around and find out category (people need to take social media use seriously). But the question of where the line is on what ideas to control lies with the state.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-who-tweeted-set-fire-31364618
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo
otoh, people in the UK have been arrested and/or questioned under non-crime hate procedures for tweeting rudely or offensively about transgenderism or trans people. This is almost certainly the result of police capture by lobbyists. It seems to have lessened now, after the previous Tory Justice (?) minister got involved. But I’m willing to bet lots of the liberals objecting to the stupid (and possibly dangerous) ICE ad wouldn’t speak up for the people in the UK who were arrested or interviewed.
Harry Miller took the police to court over non-crime “hate incidents”. His tweets were ruled lawful, and the judge went on to say,
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/transgender-hate-crimes-harry-miller-court/
that doesn't answer my question. I think the manifesto was rightly banned. One of the ways to stop fascism is to prevent the normalising of abhorrent ideas eg kill muslims. So even though there are people in NZ who still believe that and want it acted upon, they are having to talk in private/secrecy rather than in the town square where they can radicalise people.
Completely agree about how to know which ideas to ban. For instance, I think KJK should have been allowed to run a LWS event in Auckland, so that NZ women could speak their ideas. Then the ideas themselves could be understood, analysed, critiqued, and addressed. Instead, the MSM and liberals said it was akin to Nazism and the mob stopped it. I'm not sure how that is an improvement on ICE.
Meanwhile – here is a kiwi author who isn't going to the US because of …
Ideas
https://www.rnz.co.nz/life/books/why-bestselling-korean-nz-author-graci-kim-had-to-cancel-us-tour
Yep. Although I would say she’s not going because it’s not safe under the current descent into authoritarianism. Honestly, I think anyone travelling to the US is taking a risk unless they are very wealthy and/or connected (I don’t think they,administration is ready yet to go after high profile people or those with big wealth for lawyers).
I feel for those librarians and teachers. Incredibly difficult situation to be in. It’s not going to get better if people don’t act
I think there are two possible interpretations regarding ‘ideas’.
The first one is that they want to stop the influx of morally objectionable ‘ideas’, i.e., opinions & views that the High Priests of the Supreme Upper Cult of Trump object to.
The second one is that they want to stop the efflux of useable ‘ideas’, i.e., knowledge that might have strategic value, e.g., commercial (IP), military, et cetera. NB ideas per se cannot be patented!
What they mean exactly by ‘ideas’ and ‘illegally’ is unclear, of course – the aim is to paralyse and instil fear of punishment.
The whole thing is textbook fascism.
third option. It was a brain fart from someone who didn't think it through or was overly stressed (hence the removal). I'm curious to know if ICE pre-2017 inauguration, had the duty to stop 'illegal ideas', or it was the purview of another department. eg the Chch shooter manifesto.
An ignorant fascist is still [a] fascist – rarely do they operate on their own in a vacuum and I think these ‘slips’ are an indication of the culture they operate in.
The shooter’s manifesto is unambiguous because it’s officially banned (censored).
I can’t answer your questions re. the US.
There's no way to know what the intent of that ad was. But we can use it to look at the problems around censoring ideas, and concepts of freedom of expression.
Is the problem with the ad relying on the current state of the US? Or is it a problem in principle (as joe seems to be arguing)?
IMHO, it doesn’t matter; the issue is the likely consequences that could be known/predicted like DUI and the risk it poses to others. And there’s such a thing as the “banality of evil”.
I prefer local examples because anything US-related comes with too much baggage and has become another version (and proof) of Godwin’s Law.
For example, the recent furore about Medical Officers of Health being muzzled.
https://nzmj.org.nz/media/pages/journal/vol-138-no-1613/let-the-muppets-out/8439e1abc2-1744167712/1613-editorial.pdf
Or the Coalition’s increasing over-reach into the autonomy of NZ universities.
https://teu.ac.nz/news/the-governments-free-speech-bill-is-hypocritical/
Quite. Not sure enough people here appreciate our own vulnerability
I would really hope that NZ border control would have, for example, at any time acted on the importation of hard copies of the manifesto (pre or post massacre), without waiting for a court decision.
Yep. Most likely ideas – or more accurately, any form of expression of ideas- that the Trumpists don't like. For example the idea of an Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders. This allows you to deport people on student visas on campuses in pro-Palestinian protests, which they have already done.
It's always the expression of the ideas which is illegal, not the ideas themselves. Because there is no way of knowing what ideas a person has in their head. Though you can use techniques like interrogation, torture and psychometric tests to get people to unwillingly or unwittingly express the ideas you are hoping to persecute them for.
True, but there are (more subtle) ways to fail people based on good or bad (or desirable and less desirable) character, e.g., previous convictions, memberships, ‘friends’ they associate with, patches & flags (and other symbolism), et cetera.
Where exactly one places the slider is a mark of character in its own and this doesn’t necessarily represent the character of the people (if we’re referring to a nation).
Don't think about trying to enter the US these days if you have ever posted anything contrary to MAGA "doctrine".
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/apr/02/neil-young-fears-us-ban-donald-trump-criticism
I thought Seymour was a trifle odd….. but in his speech to the House, "the Treaty is a binary cult'?
Good grief.!!
Where does he get this rubbish? He is unsuitable to be Deputy Prime Minister.!!imo.
Comprehensively not suited for the Deputy PM role as he has already demonstrated.
That's on national who were so desperate to gain power they agreed to an 8% party having such power knowing what a dangerous idiot he is with zero respect for due process or the existing laws.
Reap what you sow hollowmen.
it's a dog whistle to the hate the left mob, esp online. Calling something a cult is shorthand for saying they're deluded and dangerous. It's used a lot online, on the FR, and by the left. Sometimes they're right, but without looking at the speech this sounds like more racist rhetoric from him. All those pro-treaty Pākehā being sucked in by radical Māori or sometime. Of course he could just be massively triggered by losing so badly 😆
There is another theory though. It's that this Bill was simply prep for the 2026 election, the more he can build a racist resentment in NZ, the better ACT will do on election day.
Wonder if Trump, Noem, Bondi and co will defy the court?
CNN —
The Supreme Court on Thursday required President Donald Trump’s administration to “facilitate” the return of a Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador but stopped short of requiring the government to return him to the United States.
The high court said that the administration must try to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who was deported on March 15. It said part of the lower court’s order requiring the government to “effectuate” his return was unclear and needed further review.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/10/politics/supreme-court-abrego-garcia/index.html