Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki has been charged with three counts of inciting racial disharmony over June comments calling for Hindu, Sikh and Muslim communities to be removed from New Zealand.
Police served a summons at his home on Thursday, which he livestreamed. He is due in Manukau District Court at 9am on 19 October.
Tamaki denies threatening anyone or advocating violence, saying he challenged religious beliefs and leaders rather than people by race, and called it the “beginning of the end of free speech in NZ”.
This story has been republished with permission from RCR Bites. For news like this direct and free to your Inbox every day, go to biteme.news to sign up for RCR Bites.
If you are a media outlet interested in republishing RCR Bites stories, please contact inbox@rcr.media.
The New Zealand Company Church Parliament is the protagonist in inciting racial disharmony, period.
A bit late to remove them now
The invaders have manifested and entrenched themselves
Along with their fake man made satanic religions
Cultural enrichment
Racial harmony
We are one
This is no better than the snake oil spewed out from Tamaki’s own reprobate Destiny Church though
Destiny Church in New Zealand, led by Bishop Brian Tamaki, identifies Tamaki as a “spiritual Jew” and asserts that Jews are God’s chosen people with a specific destiny to return to Israel
The church teaches that the Jewish people are the House of Israel and that their mass conversion to Christianity is a necessary condition for bringing about the end times and the return of the Messiah
Throw what not’s into the equation and you have a marriage made in hell
Seriously Brian Tamaki doesn’t have a clue or what’s more a spirit meaning he does not have a future
The the ‘Re-migration’ crowd will be next? Then me?
Disgusting police over reach. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Only the worst of people join their ranks for the most part. You only need look at recent cop convictions to see that.
Attack on Christianity!!! Evil
That’s not Christianity or what could ever be envisaged as being Christianity
Nowhere near it
What Tamaki preaches is basically Judaism
Judeo Christianity- infiltrated corrupted and taken over
The Bible has got nothing to do with Brian Tamaki
The Bible is only talking to one group of people – the ELOHEEM- the House of Israel
And out of concern for others – Jacob Israel
Jesus came only for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel
The Holy Spirit is only to be found in the White Adamic race and not all of them
Brian Tamaki does not possess the necessary qualifications
That is a spirit
Clearly NZ Police are targeting Tamaki. They are applying a very wide semantic range to the definition of what is racist by assuming a national identity to being Hindu or Muslim.
Government, church, cuntcil, LEAVE ME ALONE!
Brian is a moron.
and you stand up for your people john p, me thinks you are the MOron
They are NOT us.
No fan of the man but this is just another attack on free speech. Keep in mind too, who is in office at this time. I loathe Labour but this time its not them. Say NO to globalists of all shades this coming election.
The NZ Herald is reporting that:
“Earlier, Detective Senior Sergeant Natalie Nelson said because the charges were laid under the Human Rights Act, consent was required from the Attorney-General for police to prosecute.
However, Attorney-General Chris Bishop told the Herald he was not involved in the decision-making, and that consent to prosecute an offence under the Act was delegated to the Solicitor-General.
“This reflects the fact that it is not appropriate for the Attorney-General to be involved in individual prosecutions, which must be carried out without any appearance of political interference,” Bishop said.
Police amended their statement a couple of hours later to confirm it was the Solicitor-General who has the authority to provide consent to prosecute, not the Attorney-General.”
The Human Rights Act 1993 states:
“No prosecution for an offence against section 131 shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney-General.”
Sec 131 is the criminal section for “Inciting racial disharmony”.
So, if the Attorney-General has specifically declared that he “was not involved in the decision-making”, then how is there any ability to prosecute? The act does not state that the Attorney-General can delegate his authority. Rather it states that “No prosecution .. shall be instituted *without* the consent of the Attorney-General.”
So, either the Attorney-General consents (even if by way of his supposed act of delegation which the Act specifically does not allow for), and the prosecution proceeds, but contrary to the Attorney-General’s protestations there is an appearance of political interference, or the Attorney-General does not consent, and the prosecution is contrary to the Act.
Furthermore, according to the ODT, Tamaki “believed the charges related to his commentary concerning Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.” – how can he be charged with a criminal offense and not be specifically told what that offense actually is? How it is that he does not actually *know* what the alleged offense is? Was this not communicated to him?
The ODT reports that this comment was:
“He [Modi] is currently purging India of all Christians and burning church buildings down … I think we should reciprocate in kind. Let’s purge New Zealand of Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. And, while we’re at it, if they’re burning churches down, why don’t we burn mosques and their temples down? Tit for tat.”
The Human Right Act 1993 Sec 131 states that the alleged incitement to disharmony must be on the”ground of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins”
Hinuism, Sikhism, and Islam are religions, not races, ethnic groups, or nations.
Tamaki has also clarified that “he did not mean” temples and mosques to be burned down.
One can suppose that he is simply using an ironic redictio ad absurdum – with the rhetorical point that such acts would not be acceptable to his opponents, so they should not so act themselves.
If this is all the prosecution rests upon, then it is a shambles. It doesn’t follow the conditions of the act, and has nothing to do with the act, being a comment concerning religions not races/nations, etc.
It has all the hallmarks of an absurd politically motivated use of “lawfare” against Tamaki.
Much as I dislike this bible basher, like Voltaire, I defend his right to say what he feels without fear of favour.