'I just heard that NZ has passed legislation that if anyone possesses a copy of the Brenton Harrison Tarrant manifesto, it will bring a 14 year jail term. '

yep and of course the Koran is still freely available.

Last night's Q&A was a crystal clear example of insidious hate speech. That program needs to be shelved !

I think that it is quite clear which statements
may increase racial hatred and division. Most
people have a common sense about where the line
is to be drawn. Pointing fingers of blame or
responsibility on groups is a very unfair way to
approach political discussions. However there
appears a clear position that appeals to race and
religion have become more acceptable and more common
in Australian politics.

'I think that it is quite clear which statements
may increase racial hatred and division'

certainly kill the infidel, wipe Israel off the map, fake race crimes (Justin Mollet),behead Trump jokes by liberals. Yep sensible people reconise hate speach. They also spot virtue signalling pretty well.

Foxy,

Common sense is actually not that common and comes second to self interest and bias.

I really do have concerns about proscribing the shooter's manifesto, especially with such penalties attached. However I do understand why NZ felt this was a necessary part of their drive to combat right-wing extremism. My fear is that is will give the document some legitimacy although once you read it it is obvious how high-school level at best it really is.

Dear Josephus,

You wrote;

“However the shooter was an advocate of socialism, and admirer of Communist China, which places him as a left wing extreme radical.”

Rubbish. The bloke admired Trump and said the former leader of the British Union of Fascists “Sir Oswald Mosley is the person from history closest to my own beliefs.”

He also referred to Blair Cottrell of the United Patriot Front as his 'emperor'.

He said in his own naff little q&a;

“Were/are you a christian? That is complicated.” … “Were/are you “right wing”? Depending on the definition, sure. Were/are you “left wing”? Depending on the definition, sure. Were/are you a socialist? Depending on the definition.” Hardly definitive is it.

His call to Christians was firmly made quoting the words of a former Pope; “Let our lives be stronger than death to fight against the enemies of the Christian people.”

So to the question of hate speech. The NZ government clearly thinks the manifesto constitutes hate speech. Yet there are many sentiments from right wingers like yourself which clearly echo the words and sentiments contained therein. Our job is to determine what parts of this clearly hateful document deserve the charge and then assess the words of others against that measure. If you conclude there is nothing within it that qualifies then we obviously have a problem.

So you have clearly read it, what do you judge as the more hateful parts of it, parts that you would staunchly disown and call hate speech?