Tuesday, August 7, 2018


David Farrar over at Kiwiblog has a very well argued post blasting the Vice-Chancellor of Massey University for her attack on free speech in banning Don Brash from speaking at the university.

Not much more to be said except that Don Brash, love him or hate him, is a respected New Zealander who has been there and done that.    It is to his credit that he makes no secret of his beliefs and while some may consider him wrong that is not the point.   Further, that for Ms Thomas to argue that Dr Brash's stand against Maori Wards in local government comes close to hate-speech is just plain idiotic especially given the fact the the majority of burghers in her home patch voted against them.     Are those voters to be condemned as closet racists for exercising their democratic right and winning?

Ms Thomas ain't a New Zealander and by her action she has forfeited my respect.   She follows in the tradition of her countrymen who still defend the underarm bowling incident.   She should consider her position. 


Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Aaaaaaaah Vet. I didn't know that. Dr Brash will have to be careful she doesn't get anywhere near his balls with sand paper.

Psycho Milt said...

I wouldn't have made the same decision as the VC myself, but Farrar's post isn't well-argued. He makes assumptions and leaps from those to frankly appalling and malicious suggestions like an employer boycott of Massey graduates and pressuring its donors to withdraw their support. It's on the same level as the "anti-fascist" posts about Southern and Molyneux over at The Standard, ie a very fucking low level.

Psycho Milt said...

Sorry, should have added a disclaimer: Massey University is my employer.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt Eeeeeer not it's not. Actually it's on the same level as your friends in the BDS movement.

I do expect that the dear lady will find, unexpectedly, enrollments at Massey will decline.

Further, I'm intrigued to wonder if the person who would prevent a past leader of the National Party from speaking on campus would ban a particularly bilious former leader of the Labour Party whose hatred of Maori and accountants was manifest for all to see.

The Veteran said...

PM .... actions beget consequences and DPF was reflecting on possible reactions to the VC's attack on free speech. I would personally be in favour of seeking a judicial review of the decision which the PM herself has labelled as 'over the top'.

Clearly the VC lives in an ivory tower earning a salary approximately twice that of the PM and where she thinks her word is law ... great to have that tested in Court.

Anonymous said...

Oh dear, those broadbrush words again "free speech." A multitude of sins lay within those words but let's not get confused between this and the Canadian Missionaries.

The VC has an individual opinion that is not a group or a funded opinion plus the power to institute a sanction.....personally I disagree with it.

DB has an opinion that he is willing to expound to any willing listeners.....an opinion that I agree with. Why the hell should anyone suddenly be labelled lefty or righty on a single opinion. Disagree with the abolition of Maori wards and suddenly you are screaming socialist. Agree and and you are within one step of joining the Waffen SS.

Lord Egbut

Psycho Milt said...

...DPF was reflecting on possible reactions to the VC's attack on free speech.

"Reflecting" my arse. He was suggesting and encouraging an employer boycott of people who've done nothing to him.

I would personally be in favour of seeking a judicial review of the decision which the PM herself has labelled as 'over the top'.

A judicial review of whether the VC of a university has authority over operational matters of the university would find that yes they do have that authority, so if anyone comes round asking for donations to fund that judicial review, my advice would be not to waste your money - they'd only be back cadging again when they got costs awarded against them.

pdm said...

Having just read Don Brash's speech notes at the Herald site I think said VC is going to have egg all over her face tomorrow. One hopes the Massey Board will call her before them and point out her poor judgment to her.

David said...

What a load of fucking tripe.

A University is a place of education and research. What did Don Brash have to offer in that regard? He is not a professor or a recognised educator.

Free speech on a University campus applies to the teaching and interchange of ideas between students and educators, it does not imply that any old, sad sack, white male with an axe to grind is entitled to speak.

Anonymous said...

David...you are the most well balanced person I have heard in a long time.....a chip on each shoulder.

Lighten up......... https://www.oxford-union.org/about_us/past_speakers

Lord Egbut


Be careful what you wish for.
Lefties seek to ban the Canadian missionaries.
Then Don Brash.
Imagine a Nat government gets in.
The precedent is set.
Helen Clark silenced.
And Jacinderella.
Though come to think of it, the Gnat case benefits from many Labour people opening their mouths.

David said...

So where is your support for Alex Jones? He has been removed from Facebook, YouTube and itunes Store. Come on, surely you can dig up some support for this POS.

Or how about Blair Cottrell? Interviewed on Fox Aus, but interview deleted from online and producer demoted for having him appear. I guess a racist, arsonist, woman beater was too much even for them. Come up, light up the pitchforks and lay in to Fox!

David said...

Egbut, Oxford Union is not averse to being selective with its speakers.

etractions of speaker invitations

Despite its associations with free speech, in a few notable cases the Union has withdrawn invitations to controversial speakers, as the result of public pressure and concerns about safety.
John Tyndall

A debate that was to have involved the far-right leader John Tyndall was met with a campaign of resistance in 1998. This opposition, coupled with police advice following a series of racially motivated nail-bombings in London, resulted in the cancellation of the debate.[13]
David Irving

An invitation to the writer and Holocaust denier David Irving to speak in a debate on censorship in 2001 was met by a coordinated campaign by left-wing, Jewish, and anti-fascist groups, together with the elected leadership of the Oxford University Student Union, to have the invitation withdrawn. Following a meeting of Union members, and a subsequent meeting of the Union's governing body, the Standing Committee, the President decided the debate would have to be cancelled.[14] However, Irving was allowed to speak at a Union debate in 2007.[15]
Philip Nitschke

In March 2009, the Union withdrew an invitation to euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke after Nitschke had already accepted the invitation. Nitschke received a second e-mail cancelling the invitation "in the interests of there being a 'fair debate'", and was told other speakers were unwilling to speak alongside him.[16] The debate topic was the legalisation of assisted suicide, a field in which Nitschke is prominent. The reason given by Oxford Union president Corey Dixon was that two other speakers "disagree with his particular take on [assisted suicide]".[17] According to Dixon, the speakers who successfully pressured the Union to withdraw Nitschke's invitation were a member of the public, whose brother had undergone assisted death, and British euthanasia campaigner Michael Irwin.[17][18] However, Irwin later denied that he had applied pressure to exclude Nitschke.[19]

The Oxford Union then released a statement explaining the decision: "An administrative decision was made to ensure we had three speakers on each side of the debate, which was proving difficult due to Nitschke's attendance. It is always in the interests of the Oxford Union to ensure a balanced debate with as wide-ranging views as possible represented. There may have been miscommunication between the Oxford Union and Nitschke. We certainly hope that no offence has been caused. The Oxford Union is a politically-neutral institution and holds no opinion on Nitschke's views."[16]

Nitschke commented, "This famous society has a long tradition of championing free speech. To suggest that my views on end-of-life issues are inappropriate simply because I believe that all rational elderly adults should have access to the best end-of-life information beggars belief."[17] He also called the act "an almost unprecedented act of censorship".[20] Nitschke gave a series of lectures across the UK at the time the debate was held.[21]

The Veteran said...

David ... so, in your (flat) world the interchange of ideas in universities is to be limited to educators and students. Boy, you are certainly leading with your chin on that one.

I disagree with just about everything you stand for yet should you be invited to speak at Flinders University I would defend your right to do so.

Seems freedom of speech in your lexicon is to be applied selectively ... figures.

The Veteran said...

Sheesh ... I have just read Brash's speech notes. He had been invited to speak on his time as National Party leader 2003-2006. Nothing in the speech notes about Hobson's Pledge, nothing about Maori Wards ... in fact very little to excite unless you are a political junkie.

The VC has gotten it all wrong on so many fronts. Her credibility is zip, zero.

David said...

This is shutting down free speech.

And so is this.

I have not seen you post a word about these. Must be something about old, white, racist men sticking together.

David said...

More shutting down of free speech.

And again.

And one more, just for fun.

Where is your condemnation?

Veteran, you may disagree with the things I stand for, but I stand as a voice for the voiceless, the condemned, and the abused. There are plenty of others who are happy to let the abuse slide, but will enthusiastically support racist trolls.

The Veteran said...

David ... yours is a straw man argument. This ain't Saudi neither is this a case before the Victorian Courts. This is an Oz import gone feral and condemned from all sides of the political spectrum in my country.

That you (as a refugee from NZL) should choose to align yourself with 'her' sez much about you and none of it is very nice.

Anonymous said...

Veteran......Thanks for that insight. It is a well known fact that the geographical location of ones birth indicates the character, or lack off, in a person. Feral OZ eh. I have a list of character defects according to country of birth. The unkind might call it stereotyping but we know better.

David......you bounce from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Walter....seems like your record of being 100% wrong is still intact re. your 6/8/18 post.
First Muslim in Congress and Trump blew out his 11% lead in Ohio to 1% with 5000 votes to count. The blacks and Latinos' must have stayed at home :-))))

Lord Egbut