Gutless Goff enforces the hecklers’ veto

Too right!

A regular column by John Black

Auckland Mayor and enforcer of the Hecklers Veto, Phil ‘Gutless’ Goff

By now most will know that the planned talk by free thinkers Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux has been binned due to our chinless wonder of a mayor, Phil ?Gutless? Goff. He has caved to an (un)holy alliance of the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations and Auckland Peace Action, the latter distinguishing themselves by being a peace group that threatens violence. Quote:

?We will confront them on the streets. If they come, we will blockade entry to their speaking venue. End quote.

Isn?t that like a group of vegetarians holding a sausage sizzle?

Well, it seems to have worked, with the Bruce Mason Centre cancelling due to ?health and safety concerns?, which is a nice euphemism for the possibility of a mob of lefties descending on their patrons. Since then Gutless Goff has banned promoters from using any alternative council venue.

The Gutless one is concerned that a twenty-three-year-old blonde and a bald guy speaking to 1,000 people (if sold out) will inflame the streets of Auckland with racial and religious strife, claiming they will “stir up ethnic or religious tensions.” This betrays, at once, an astoundingly low opinion of the Auckland citizenry and a high opinion of the persuasive powers of Southern and Molyneux. Their actual views, available to all on YouTube, are far from the nightmare of fringe hate speech Goff imagines. Look them up for yourself. Of course, they are both harshly critical of the Islamic belief system.

And that?s what?s done them in.

Goff has come under pressure from the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations headed by a Mr Hazim Arafeh. Mr Arafeh, an immigrant, seems not to understand a fundamental value of his adopted home. As he told RNZ: Quote.

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

No, it isn?t, Mr Arafeh, no it isn?t. In fact, it?s nearer to the definition of free speech.

The right to say what others don?t want to hear.

In giving in to the arrogance of Mr Arafeh, Gutless Goff has chosen to privilege Islamic beliefs over the belief in free speech deeply embedded in New Zealand culture ? a birthright of our British colonial past.

It?s the freedom that underpins all others. It?s the hallmark of our adversarial legal and political systems, our free press and even our irreverent sense of humour. Many New Zealanders feel as attached to this heritage as Mr Arafeh does to his religion.

Unfortunately, Gutless Goff is not alone.

All over the west, pusillanimous panjandrums are sacrificing our glorious heritage of freedom on the altar of ?tolerance? and ?inclusivity?. They are the true exemplars of the multiculturalist conceit ? that all values being equally valid makes none worth protecting.

I hope you?ll join me in saying a hearty ?Mohammed?s balls? to all of that.

In the face of protests from the Islamic community and veiled threats from violent peaceniks here?s what a leader worth the name would have said: Quote.

?I understand that Mr Molyneux and Miss Southern hold controversial views offensive to some. But what is more offensive is the idea of banning someone for speaking their mind. If you interfere with their doing so, they will be protected by the full force of the law.? End of quote.

And what should such a leader have done with Mr Arafeh, if he continued his demands for special treatment?

Given him directions to the airport.