Perhaps one shouldn’t, but…..

A man who claimed responsibility for the shootings left a 74-page anti-immigrant manifesto in which he explained who he was and his reasoning for his actions. He said he considered it a terrorist attack.

There’s no news of his being Maori and they were the arrivals into terra nullius….

59 comments on “Perhaps one shouldn’t, but…..

  1. New Zealand is a curious choice of venue for something like this (assuming it is what it seems)

  2. I should be horrified. I’m not.

    I should be angry. I’m not.

    I should be shocked. I am, but only because this time, Muslims are the targets and not the perpetrators.

  3. @Mr Lud,

    Haven’t the kiwis had more than their fair share of armed nutters going postal? There’ve been quite a few attacks there, if generally less targeted.

  4. JuliaM

    To add to that, I should be surprised. I’m not in the least bit surprised. This has been coming.

    The MSM will jump on this to ensure that the RoP adherents’ victim status is further enhanced.

  5. A man who claimed responsibility for the shootings left a 74-page anti-immigrant manifesto in which he explained who he was and his reasoning for his actions. He said he considered it a terrorist attack.

    Well, I am shocked and disgusted.

    Who leaves a TL;DR manifesto in 2019? He should’ve done a YouTube video or livetweeted it in meme format.

  6. He’s Australian. He’d fit right in in this site’s comment section too. If you read his manifesto it’s basically what many of you keep saying.

  7. If you read his manifesto it’s basically what many of you keep saying.

    Tim’s regulars are commenters of peace, bigot.

  8. If you read his manifesto it’s basically what many of you keep saying.

    Didn’t take long, did it? Failure to genuflect to the RoP makes us complicit in mass murder.

  9. Actually NZ doesn’t get a lot of mass or random shootings. Last major case was decades ago, and famously before that in the 1930’s. Last two were definite nutters, this one has a quasi-political apparent motive which is distinctly unusual.

  10. Matthew L, I could take your comment completely out of context and assume that if you were living under Sharia law you would be the type of person pointing out homosexuals to religious police patrols.

  11. In the league table of evil berkdom do you get extra points for murdering adults, unlike the recent US habit of murdering schoolchildren?

    It’s unclear how many points the Las Vegas shooter should get because so much about that outrage is clouded in mystery. Was it a cry of pain against Country and Western music? If so I can sympathise with the motive but not with the action.

    The Boston bombing is also somewhat mystifying. You might almost think the FBI is bent or useless. I mean, not every police service goes so far as to murder a witness to the lives of the accused.

  12. We must pray Matthew Hell for peace and re-conciliation, light a candle and try to forget it all as rapidly as possible.

    Also Farcebook/Twatter and the like must restore all none left non RoP terror-approving pages in the same way that they still provide platforms for Antifa and ISIS.

  13. I expect politicians to come out and say they stand with white supremacists and warn against a backlash towards the white supremacist community.

  14. “There’s no news of his being Maori and they were the arrivals into terra nullius….”

    Whilst I get your point, I’ve often thought that the tragedies of the Maoris, the Aborigines, the various American Indian tribes, even the Britons if you go back far enough, were actually some of the best arguments against immigration. Because it really can end in ethnic cleansing of the natives.

    From memory, and I may be wrong, didn’t the Maoris initially do a lot of the killing of each other once they were given guns?

  15. Yes, by that 1770 or whatever it was NZ was at carrying capacity given Maori technology. Violent place therefore. I think it was all called “The Musket Wars” when the new armament turned up.

  16. Henry Crun: “The MSM will jump on this to ensure that the RoP adherents’ victim status is further enhanced.”

    And right on cue:

    “UK police are stepping up patrols around mosques following the attack, PA reports.

    Officers will be deployed to provide reassurance. as Muslims attend Friday prayers around the country.”

    So it’s a good day to go shoplifting or burgling. Our police farce is committed elsewhere.

  17. Any day is a good day for trivialities like real crime Julia –the monkey-suited scum have better and safer “work” to do.

  18. There’s a Group A (anti-Muslim bigots) that you want to suppress, but the public don’t agree. So you find a Group B (gun-toting mass-murderers) who the public rightly revile, that overlaps with Group A. Then you highlight the members of this intersection, emphasising their Group A membership and their Group B crimes (i.e. anti-immigrants are murdering terrorists). This stirs up public outrage, which motivates and justifies oppressive actions (Facebook bans, etc.) to be taken against Group A.

    Sounds familiar?

  19. From what I’ve seen so far around the web, while this bloke was a racist, his main theme was ecobollocks.

    As far as he’s concerned, there are too many people on the planet but the brown and black ones are breeding quickest so they should go first.

    Also he’s anti capitalist and doesn’t like bankers but apart from all that, he’s very like the commenters on this blog /s

  20. “From what I’ve seen so far around the web, while this bloke was a racist, his main theme was ecobollocks.”

    “Quick! Quick! Point out another ‘Group A’!”

    No, the trick doesn’t work like that. We’re not talking about rational argument, here. For people who hate ‘Group A’, the logic of the ‘Group A Group B Trick’ is perfect, a confirmation of the obvious, and anyone who points out that the perpetrators could be fitted into an infinite number of alternative ‘Group A’s is guilty of defending mass-murdering terrorists. You know that.

  21. Was I putting him in another group, NIV. Or was I pointing out the group he put himself in according to his manifesto?

  22. It’s irrelevant what ‘Group A’ you or I use. The effect of the media articles on public opinion depend on what group *they* choose.

    It’s a propaganda trick, not rational, logical reasoning. The truth doesn’t come into it.

  23. Kevin B, excellent. So not a right wing nut job but a left wing one. Let’s see the MSM and TPTB try and untie this particular Gordian knot.

  24. Even if he claimed he was a white supremacist, this has nothing to do with white supremacy. White supremacists are a peaceful people, Racists of Peace – RoP if you will.

    Can’t wait for a politician to say something like this…
    *crickets*

    Still waiting for someone to explain how someone can identify as Muslim and kill loads of people, but isn’t a Muslim, despite identifying as one. But a man with a dick identifying as a woman is a woman, because that’s what he identifies as.

  25. I think it is fair to assume that anyone prepared to go and off 49 people with automatic weapons is of extremely limited means on the rational and logical fronts, regardless of their claimed motive.

    Of course, ideologies that preach violent death to all non-adherents are going to motivate a higher proportion of their nut job adherents to off non-adherents than ideologies that do not incite said violence.

  26. “Let’s see the MSM and TPTB try and untie this particular Gordian knot.”

    They don’t need to. He does apparently mention environmentalism in passing (as well as workers rights), but it’s not something he emphasises and not the reason he himself ascribes to explain his actions.

    “It’s the birthrates. It’s the birthrates. It’s the birthrates. If there is one thing I want you to remember from these writings, its that the birthrates must change,” he writes. “Even if we were to deport all Non-Europeans from our lands tomorrow, the European people would still be spiraling into decay and eventual death.”

    The manifesto also rants about “mass immigration” in juxtaposition to European birthrates. He calls it a “crisis of mass immigration and sub-replacement fertility” and calls that “an assault on the European people.”

    His primary issue in the manifesto (called ‘The Great Replacement’) is that white European birthrates are falling, Muslim birthrates are not, which is going to result in them replacing Europeans racially and culturally. He’s a ‘cultural conservative’. That’s his big issue – the explanation that he himself gave for his actions.

    But like I said, it’s irrelevant for the operation of the ‘Group A Group B Trick’ what he says, or you or I say. You can’t deflect people from their own prejudgements. The trick can be applied against *any* Group A, including *yours*. In this case it was applied against anti-Muslim anti-immigrants. And everyone who hates and fears anti-Muslim anti-immigrants is going to see it as proof of what they were saying all along, and any attempt to deflect attention away onto any other group a “defence of extremist right-wing terrorism”.

    You lot never have any problem ‘untying the Gordion knot’ of logical inconsistency. Neither will they.

  27. Why did you carry out the attack?

    To most of all show the invaders that our lands will never be their lands, our homelands are our own and that, as long as a white man still lives, they will NEVER conquer our lands and they will never replace our people.

    To take revenge on the invaders for the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by foreign invaders in European lands throughout history.

    To take revenge for the enslavement of millions of Europeans taken from their lands by the Islamic slavers.

    To take revenge for the thousands of European lives lost to terror attacks throughout European lands

    To take revenge for Ebba Akerlund.

    So, you’re going to try to sell that view to Guardian readers of all people as being left wing?!

    Do you think they’ll believe you?

  28. I was going to say that the Moriori were the first peoples to arrive in New Zealand and were then wiped out by the Maori; but it was the Chatham Islands where the Moriori were wiped out by the Maori. 😉

  29. I think it is fair to assume that anyone prepared to go and off 49 people with automatic weapons is of extremely limited means on the rational and logical fronts, regardless of their claimed motive.

    I wonder if modern life is making people crazier. I’m not joking when I say this would explain a lot of things, including the rise of feminism and transsexualism.

    Specifically:

    Diversity – lowering social cohesion and triggering threat signals in the caveman hindbrain (“my tribe is under attack!”)

    The internet – a river of autism and edgelordery that substitutes for/disintegrates real social connections and empathy.

    The modern economy – insecure, short-term employment with the constant threat of being outsourced.

    Family formation – delayed or destroyed for millions of young Westerners as they’re swimming in contraceptives, casual hookups (for the ones who aren’t incels), and pointless degree courses.

    Christianity – used to be the opiate of the masses (and who doesn’t need something to numb the existential pain of being alive?), now largely dead or unconvincingly going through the motions in Western countries

    So this lunatic in New Zealand – I’d bet money that, like his Norwegian predecessor, he was unemployed or in some marginal job, had no children of his own, wasn’t a member of a Church and had very shallow relationships with people IRL. He was likely extremely online as an ersatz social life, and his neighbours probably barely noticed his existence.

  30. “Diversity+Proximity=War”

    I’m sure rhetoric like that has nothing to do with encouraging violence.

  31. NiV: “Do you think they’ll believe you?”

    What, ‘Guardian’ readers? Well, they have no problems swallowing socialism & all that bollocks, so…

  32. “Diversity+Proximity=War”

    ‘Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.’

  33. Just an anthro note, I’m pretty sure the Maoris met natives when they arrived. And promptly eliminated them.

  34. Wait, what? Whitey isn’t being replaced, raped, maimed and immiserated en masse? That’s what I call ‘winning’.

    I’m just bemused by his choice of New Zealand. Never been there but judging by the comments of people I know who have, it’s the closest thing that what we quaintly continue to call the ‘Western World’ has to having being preserved in the 1950s.

    Given what seem to be his self-avowed priorities and, as with the Mohammedans who do the same thing I am inclined to take him at his word, surely Malmo or Bradford would’ve been better targets?

  35. ““Diversity+Proximity=War”
    I’m sure rhetoric like that has nothing to do with encouraging violence.”

    Observing that foxes + chickens = dead chickens isn’t encouraging dead chickens, it’s saying ‘Fucking hell, if we don’t watch out here we’re going to end up with a lot of dead chickens.’

  36. “I’m pretty sure the Maoris met natives when they arrived. And promptly eliminated them.” There’s no evidence for that.

    “it was the Chatham Islands where the Moriori were wiped out by the Maori”: the Moriori were Maori who’d settled the Chatham Islands and then been forgotten about. The Maori heard about them from whites, got hold of a ship, and sailed off to genocide them.

    “NZ was at carrying capacity given Maori technology”: NZ has a temperate climate, the Maori brought with them a subtropical agriculture. Apart from the sweet potato it failed over almost the whole archipelago. So they turned to hunter-gathering: they exterminated most of the land-living birds, and overfished the seas. In the search for fat and protein they ate each other; it was very violent, very Malthusian.

    Caveat: it’s a while since I read up on this stuff. There might be new evidence. There is one internet loonie who claims the Arabs were there first but I suspect he’s confusing them with the Celts.

  37. Matthew Hell–Tell the RoP your thesis –you might have time before your bungyless base jump begins.

  38. “Observing that foxes + chickens = dead chickens isn’t encouraging dead chickens, it’s saying ‘Fucking hell, if we don’t watch out here we’re going to end up with a lot of dead chickens.’”

    Sure. But which are the foxes and which are the chickens?

  39. “…surely Malmo or Bradford would’ve been better targets?”

    Because an antipodean internet saddo can’t just rock up in either of those places and kit himself out with a semi-automatic arsenal legally and cheaply. Or even via criminal means, assuming he had the money and contacts to do it, and happy to attract the attentions of the sort of person who trades that kind of kit.

  40. Which are the foxes, etc.?

    Well I’ve been stabbed by a RoPER. So I’m guessing I’m a chicken and he’s the fox.

    Difficult to be sure, tho. I mean, the guy got deported. So maybe he’s the victim.

  41. ” I’m sure rhetoric like that has nothing to do with encouraging violence.”

    The Balkans, Rwanda, Burma, Bantu expansion, Aztec Empire.

    An observation of the reality of human history is not giving encouragement to violence,

  42. Compare:

    Post Christchurch – The killer was inspired by right wing voices on the net so we should ban and suppress them.

    Post Manchester – the killer was inspired by Radical Islam so we should ignore the role of the theology, the Koran and Radical preachers in mosques etc, and sing “don’t look back in anger”

    Have I got that right?

  43. I am in New Zealand. Don’t be fooled by the earthly paradise image .There is a constant run of violent crime such that all Police Officers are armed .It is particularly bad in Northland where Biker Gangs are constantly fighting over drugs. Having said that, it is still a wonderful place to be.

  44. “Diversity+Proximity=War”

    I’m sure rhetoric like that has nothing to do with encouraging violence.

    Yeah, I’m sure the Muslims who’ve slaughtered dozens of Europeans in the past decade are always saying it.

  45. MC: in the third world from which the MSM ignores most news, the RoP are motivated to slaughter indigenous Christians by the tens of thousands plus the odd Buddhist(Egypt, Nigeria, Phillipines, Bangladesh, Thailand etc). White supremacy is obviously a potent force even at a distance!

  46. What’s interesting to me about this tragedy is the indifference it’s provoked in people I’ve spoken to about it. The media and politicians will do their performative grief dance, but fewer people seem to care than you might expect.

    After London, Bataclan, Manchester, Nice, Brussels, etc. etc. etc. empathy is in short supply.

    I’m not judging. We should care about innocent lives. But emotional callouses are both unhealthy and inevitable in modern Clownworld.

    Maybe the London mayor was (inadvertently) right about this stuff being “part and parcel” of modern, multicultural life. Maybe we’re starting to react like people in the Middle East or Troubles-era Northern Ireland or the Balkans did to the violent deaths of people they don’t personally know. We’ve imported tribal divisions, we were bound to import the cycle of violence that always creates. The only thing that separates the Christchurch massacre from what happened in Paris is that this time it was a white guy attacking helpless Muslims.

    Are we living in a land
    Where sex and horror are the new gods?

    Ultimately the murders will achieve nothing except to haunt the survivors.

    The authorities will do what they were always going to do anyway – clamp down on speech, censor the internet, double down on signalling their virtue. Nobody’s minds will be changed. Nobody will stop migrating to the West because of this. Nobody will find the magic formula to making multiculturalism sustainable.

    The only way forward, if we’re interested in solutions, is to somehow heal Western societies. That’s a daunting and probably multi-generational project with few easy options. We as individuals have little power to change things at a mass scale. But we have some power in our own lives. We’re still allowed a vote. We can still do our bit to manifest sanity and goodness in the world.

  47. What’s interesting to me about this tragedy is the indifference it’s provoked in people I’ve spoken to about it.

    Yup. Even the hand wringers I know mumbled something about the far right and changed the subject. I can’t think of anyone who’s expressed much about the poor folk who were gunned down.

    Full disclosure: I include myself amongst the indifferent. I don’t like that, but there it is.

  48. Group C is conspicuously absent from your analysis.

    You divert attention away from the Muslim invasion, the real issue.

    One wonders what anti-Muslim bigots are. Resistance to people who have vowed to kill you is bigotry?

  49. “Resistance to people who have vowed to kill you is bigotry?”

    No. “People who have vowed to kill you” is a legitimate Group B. I’ve got no problem with doing something about “people who have vowed to kill you”. The problem is that most Muslims haven’t vowed to kill you, in just the same way that most right-wing anti-Muslim, anti-immigration people haven’t vowed to kill Muslims. (Killed any yourself, have you?)

    If you can attack *all* Muslims because *some* Muslims have vowed to kill you, then society can attack *all* right-wing, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrationists because *some* right-wing, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrationists have vowed to kill Muslims. It’s the same thing.

    You keep on pulling the same trick, as if you thought I wouldn’t notice you doing it. “Then you highlight the members of this intersection, emphasising their Group A membership and their Group B crimes.” Anyone who objects to your tactic against Group A is accused of defending Group B. You just did it again.

    As far as I’m concerned you’re very welcome to object to “people who have vowed to kill you” – the issue is with doing the same to people who have *not* vowed to kill you but who share a characteristic with some people who have.

    Likewise, many right-wingers would probably accept limits on the freedom of those few right-wingers who have vowed to actually kill Muslims, but don’t want that extended to *every* right-winger expressing their views just in case their rampant right-wingery should inspire more people to go out and kill Muslims.

    Any tool of social control that you can use against Muslims, the SJWs can pick up and use against *you*. And they are no more required to be fair, even-handed, or logically consistent about it than you are.

    “Presumably aimed at NiV?”

    Of course! Everyone loves debating with me so much they just can’t stop themselves. 🙂

  50. After London, Bataclan, Manchester, Nice, Brussels, etc. etc. etc. empathy is in short supply.

    This. Attitudes are hardening. First, we see indifference. Then, after a few RoP retaliations we’ll see mild tolerance – the “well they probably deserved it” kind of thing.
    It will gradually increase until someone comes along and we’re firing up the ovens again.

    The norm for humanity is violence and war. Our history as a species is incredibly violent. The past 80 years have lulled the west into a false sense of security, that this peace is the norm. It isn’t. Sh*t’s going to get violent again – it’s inevitable. And when it comes it will be worse because of the importation of multiple cultures all fighting.

    Obviously it’d be nice if everything was rainbows and unicorns, but thinking so is naive optimism.

  51. ‘Now your time has come a storm of iron in the sky
    War and murder come again, lucky if you die.
    No way to rescue destiny, scream and curse in vain
    You will never be remembered, no one knows your name.

    When the music changes then all is broken down
    Mighty cities laid to ruin, burning to the ground.
    Murder is become the law; you cannot make a stand
    Chaos rules the world now mortal, brotherhood of man.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.