Don't read his manifesto, that's what he wants - arguments, divisions. Just ignore him and let him rot.

I see people in your media say "he's not Australian" and "this isn't what we stand for" yet your society made him and people like Fraser Anning and Pauline Hanson show that he's not a one off. Denying what you've created and sweeping him under the rug will do nothing.

You're saying that the media or the NZ governments reaction is playing into his hands, well you are too. Break the cycle, take a good long hard look at yourself and fix your society, and, most of all, ignore him.

This isn't about left versus right, this is about the hatred and dehuminisation of those who are different. Pure and simple, it's cowardice and anyone who's threatened by another culture is a coward.

Well said. Absolutely agree with ignoring his manifesto. Remember the victims.

I was thinking the perfect response would be to simply increase immigration and for NZ to keep on doing what it is doing.

Straight off the bat I do not subscribe to anything this clown has written down.

I read the manifesto and I think dismissing people like this bloke and saying just ignore him is a dangerous folly.  The arguments he presents are easily seductive for the disenfranchised.  I'm not surprised there are vast swathes of these people inhabiting forum boards and closed groups all over the internet that are supporting what he had to say. 

He's articulate, the manifesto seems to be fairly well structure, it's not riddled with spelling errors or unhinged ramblings and he sticks to his key points and he hammers them home. 

I'm not sure what the best approach is but ignoring these sorts of things will not make them go away.

Thousands, if not potentially 10's of thousands of people, would have read what he has written.  (The video was uploaded 1.5 million times to facebook.  Probably 100's of thousands of manifesto copies are doing the rounds as well.)  To just 'ignore' him and hope that these people will somehow disappear is deluded.

Terrorists want a platform, if we don't give them a platform they won't be as effective. Those who want to read the manifesto will seek it out, there's nothing we can do about that, but encouraging people to read it is frankly sick.

Of course as a society we, and you, need to fix whatever is causing these issues but we should focus on the victims not the terrorist.

Problem is, the internet is his platform. Even if mainstream media went silent on him today, he is still getting exposure. 

And there's no way to stop that.

-PB

Nope. But you can make it hard. The people who go out to find it are likely to be the people who go out and find that documentation anyway and are looking to be radicalised or to reaffirm their beliefs anyway.

Yep.  Just like pill testing.  Not providing it is not going to stop people from taking drugs.

I can see both sides though.

These 2 beetootas made me laugh.  Razor sharp as usual.

https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/local-patriot-who-worships-ned-kelly-and-chopper-disgusted-by-egg-boys-civil-disobedience/

https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/australia-left-in-shock-after-witnessing-sincere-and-competent-politician/

i have not read the manifesto, but I do not see why reading it is problem at all.

In order to "fix society" its neccessary to understand what motivates these sort of people. 

Ignoring people like this and their views is exactly what wider western public and media have done. 

Exactly why they went under the radar.

-PB

No, his manifesto is a calculated attempt to radicalise and sew division. Just look at the people using it to justify keeping firearms because the manifest said that the government would behave this way. Because he predicted some reaction it's inherently wrong? These people who read this document don't realise they're sheep and they're being played.

We know the sort of bull that's going to be in it and reading it isn't going to lead us to any insights on how to deal with him. All it's doing is giving him a platform, encouraging people to read it and sharing it is just building his platform and sharing his hate.

The only way to stop this is to show empathy and to not tolerate any hate speech or racism at all. Your first duty as Australians is to stop the casual racism that's completely pervasive in your society. Your second duty is to show your politicians that you wont stand for this sort of behavior and vote out all the racists in your parliament, there won't be anyone left it seems but you've gotta start somewhere.

The only solution to this is to be nice to each other.

New Zealand has issues but we're trying harder than just about any other place to resolve race problems. I've never heard of any religious or race based hate crime other than petty small things, definitely none from our Muslim residents.

This person came here specifically because we're peaceful. Now the risk is that his actions will radicalise those that he attacked, his end goal is to create a race war.

It's incomprehensible, it's sickening.

Disgusted at what Senator Anning said but really no different from what the Greens, some in the Labor camp, and even folks on 442 have said in the past relating to terrorism.  I remember when the Sept 11 attacks occurred and a very fashionable thing to say at the time was to describe the attack as "the bully getting it's nose bloodied".  This wasn't some radical underground commies saying such things this was mainstream media outlets such as the Guardian.  Can you imagine if some figure on the Right used those same words to describe the Christchurch attack?  "Nothing to see here folks just Muslim extremists getting their nose bloodied"?

Similarly many on the left have sought to do exactly what Anning  did and project blame for the attack onto the victims.  Even the Council of Imams have in the past gotten in on the act seeking to conflate acts of terror with "causative factors such as racism, Islamophobia, curtailing freedoms through securitisation, duplicitous foreign policies and military intervention".   Why is it that the governing body of Australian Muslim leaders can get away with saying such things, yet Senator Anning is hung out to dry?  Is it only evil and disgusting when someone on the Right says it?

I guess my point is that what Senator Anning said was terrible and disgusting but he is no way the first to say it.  It has become somewhat culture among the Left to dispense outrage based on the racial and religious identity characteristics of victims and perpetrators involved in incidents of terror.  If the roles were reversed and the Christchurch attack was committed by a Muslim on a Christian church the usual suspects would be out in force doing their best to downplay the incident, arguing that these were the actions not of a Muslim but a madman and that disenfranchisement due to racism is the real cause.

lol

I stand refuted :(

Would it matter if there were no white humans left on the planet?
Apparently the gunman was afraid that this might happen and he needed to protect the white people.

Now watch Rusty claim the exact opposite.

Its the exact opposite

Mun I noticed this post and I picked up a few spelling errors so I hope you don't mind me correcting them.

I don't know if that happened or not but what we're doing as a society isn't working. Meeting hatred with hatred is just causing more problems a bigger man would do what politicians are doing in New Zealand and meeting the hatred with compassion.

What was particularly galling about his comments is that he insinuated that New Zealand has a problem with Muslim extremists. We don't, I can't think of any incidents at all, none. We might have people radicalising on both sides after all this though. The other galling thing is the perpetrator is an Australian and the evidence seems to show that he did it completely alone, we don't even have radicalised enough white supremacists to help him out. This was something completely engineered by someone foreign to us.

That last point, the fact that a person from Annings own country did this to us should have kept his tongue tied.

We've been absolutely violated and it's sickening.

It might be hard to comprehend what this is like because there are more race related problems in Australia, but New Zealand is a small country and reasonably safe. I used to work in the emergency services and we had every single emergency come through our systems on a board on the wall and there would be hours where nothing was happening, then something would come in and it would be call out the fire service because there's ducklings stuck in a stormwater drain, a big night would be during a storm when roofing iron got loose and flew around a town. That was all emergency services call outs (fire, ambulance, police) for the whole country.

Annings trying to create problems where they don't exist just for attention is just messed up.

Ok Rus.

Fuck me the amount of people trying to point to "b-b-b-b-but the Mosques had been reported for radicalizing people" as some form of justification for the murders is fucking stupid.

Why are there so many uneducated fuckwits on social media?

-PB

You keep pushing this point over and over, and the more you do the more I'm starting to feel you're trying to push some cheap Australia vs New Zealand narratives.

Pretty sad mate. I understand you're upset but you're burying your head in the sand if you think this is the fault of Australian right wing extremism. This is a community that by and large operates and interacts on the web and has supporters across the western world, including NZ. 

I'm pushing the point precisely because people are putting their heads in the sand. No one can say this isn't us because it is us. It goes for Trumps statements as well as Morrisons statements.

There is nothing cheap about it, here there's a lot of soul searching going on too.

It's been debunked iirc. They had one guy but everyone at the mosque dissuaded  him

It's drawing a long bow to link the attack to Morisson and Trump, and other figures on the Right, which really amounts to political opportunism.  It's no different than blaming all Muslims for the actions of a few terrorists.  You can't on one hand say the Christchurch attack is the fault of the Right, and Islamic terror attacks in no way are reflective or representative of the broader Islamic community.  That's called a double standard.

It's not.

Surely calling for an end to muslim immigration, saying they don't assimilate, saying they have no place in Australia and how their culture is not compatible multiple times across multiple platforms winds up these people on the fringes even more though.

Would you not agree?  It may not be the root cause but it's definitely a contributing factor.

FWIW I think Morrison is pretty moderate.  I think Hanson, Anning and their ilk are the major cause of all this sort of lunacy.  Back in the day these fuckwits wouldn't have seen the light of day.  Now they're given a platform.  

Making a comment or even enshrining something in policy is worlds away from carrying out a despicable act of violence or terror. It’s not like Hanson, Anning and others have been calling for bloodshed to end Immigration, they have always but not necessarily elegantly sought to pursue their policies through the democratic process.

If you’re going to ban criticism against them then you have to apply the same logic to all forms of criticism. You would have to ban media and Democrat criticism of Trump and the Republicans because that might cause some nutter to shoot up Republican senators at a kids baseball.  You would have to ban criticism against US and their allies because that might provide ammo for Islamists to carry out terrorist acts against Western nations.  You would have to ban criticism against Jews because that might cause some disgruntled Muslim or neo  nazi to shoot up a synagogue.

You just can’t pick and choose which forms or criticism should and shouldn’t be allowed based on your politics.  This was an isolated incident and free speech shouldn’t be eviscerated on the basis of one persons actions.  The best way to handle Anning, Hanson and the terrorist apologists in the Greens and Labor is to not give their views airtime on media platforms and secondly to boot them out of the parliament.  Sadly if you’re going to allow one side of extremism to fester you open up the door to the other side.  what Anning said is no different from what others in the parliament and media have frequently said in relation to attacks against the West,  blaming the victims and aplogising for the terrorists.  As a great Australian once said, the standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

Julie Bishop's head covering sends the wrong message to Iranian
Julie Bishop should have shunned headscarf on Iran ... - The Guardian
Julie Bishop cops more criticism for wearing head scarf in Iran | Daily .
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop sparks debate over headscarf in Iran ..

----------------------

Christchurch shooting: Jacinda Ardern's empathetic hijab photo
Jacinda Ardern Wore Hijab To Support New Zealand People
Face of empathy: Jacinda Ardern photo resonates with the world after terror attack
Hijab-wearing New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern hailed for ... - Geo.tv

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Can you point out some examples of Australian media and politicians directly blaming the victims of Islamic terrorist attacks?

"You just can’t pick and choose which forms or criticism should and shouldn’t be allowed based on your politics."

You absolutely can when it's fucking hate speech.