Anti-“Hate Speech” campaigner Butt elected to Palmerston North Council.

Zulfiqar Haider Butt has been elected to the Palmerston North City Council under the Labour Party ticket. Butt, vice-president of FIANZ, has been campaigning for a national “hate speech” database to help Muslims feel safer after the Christchurch mosque attack which brought to the worlds attention the long track record the Al-Noor mosque had of radicalising Kiwis. The March 15 attack also revealed the tight-knit Islamic community included both radical hate-preachers and overseas terrorism sponsors. New Zealand Muslims are truly ‘one’ with the global Islamic community/umma/state. FIANZ is funded by the Halal certification system which sees all Kiwi’s paying to promote Islam in NZ.

The NZ Government sponsored tax-payer funded database is intended to help criminalise and silence those who speak out against the agenda of those promoting a global Islamic State. Kiwi PM Jacinda Ardern has already followed closely with the wishes of NZ’s Islamic State leader, whose former sponsor FIANZ represents the 100k Islamics currently  in NZ.

Butt, one time president of the Pakistani friendship committee, also promotes Labour’s 96000 flavour gender equality which is surprising for an Islamic, but perhaps due to Pakistan’s hidden shame. Remember back to when NZ’s prostitution law passed because the Islamic in our parliament surprisingly refused to vote against it? With temporary and child marriages, the morality of Islam is not always aligned with what the West assumes. That Pakistan itself was founded on the concept of Jihad has been widely documented.

Perhaps the ‘hate’ database should also include those who follow the instructions of the Quran. This from the Religion of Peace:

The Quran Dehumanizes Non-Muslims and Says that They are Vile Animals

The Ayatollah Khomeini, who dedicated his entire life to studying Islam, said that non-Muslims  rank somewhere between “feces” and the “sweat of a camel that has consumed impure food.”  Small wonder.  The Quran dehumanizes non-Muslims, describing them as “animals” and beasts:

Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. (8:55)

Verse 7:176 compares unbelievers to “panting dogs” with regard to their idiocy and worthlessness.

Verse 7:179 says they are like “cattle” only worse.

Verse 9:28 says the unbelievers are unclean.

Verse 6:111 says they are ignorant.

Verse 4:76 says they are helpers of the devil.

Verse 5:60 even says that Allah transformed Jews of the past into apes and pigs.  This is echoed by verses 7:166 and 2:65.

A hadith (Bukhari 54:524) says that Muhammad believed rats to be “mutated Jews” (also confirmed by Sahih Muslim 7135 and 7136).

Verses 46:29-35 even say that unbelieving men are worse than the demons who believe in Muhammad.

According to Islamic law, non-Muslims may be owned as property by Muslims, but – in keeping with Islam’s supremacist message – a fellow Muslim should never be (unless they convert to Islam after they are enslaved).


  1. There is also this:

    5:66 If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and what was revealed to them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from above and from below. There are some among them who are on the right course; but there are many among them who do nothing but evil.

    Khan, Maulana Wahiduddin. Quran: A Simple English Translation (Goodword ! Koran) . Goodword Books. Kindle Edition.

    You have to consider the message in its entirety, while keeping in mind the age in which it was set down. Delve into any ancient scripture, and you will soon find passages that are, on a superficial reading, repugnant to the modern mind. That’s why we have something called exegesis: the critical explanation or interpretation of a text, ideally conducted under the supervision of a competent scholar. Such a person will advise against polemic argument, i.e. self-righteous finger-pointing at the “other”, as this does nothing to improve the human condition.

    At this critical juncture in history, we need to pull together and identify the real enemy – globalism. This is the deconstruction of the nation state, and thus any notion of national culture or sovereignty, through policies of open borders and mass migration. (The latter is actually people trafficking on a monstrous scale.) The aim seems to be the creation of a one-world government run by a shadowy, supranational elite, which will rule through intimidation and surveillance.

  2. Further to the above, I am totally opposed to “a national ‘hate speech’ database to help Muslims feel safer after the Christchurch mosque attack”. And I am shocked that some people apparently want us to follow the lead of Britain, where a woman recently lost her job for saying that only women could have babies. (Oh, how hateful that was!) Western society is already madder than it has been at any time since the witch-hunting hysteria of the 17th century. Do we really want it to become worse?

    David Seymour’s comment – “how would feminism have happened if we didn’t have freedom of expression?” – is apposite in view of Massey University’s recent cancellation of a feminist conference because it would have made some “vulnerable” members of the LGBTIQ “community” feel unsafe. Welcome to the intellectual straitjacket, which will never be tight enough to satisfy everyone.

Comments are closed.