Christchurch Gunman in Mosque



  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    Anyone know why the u-turn over terrorist charges? From memory they weren't going to go down that route as it could result in more of a shit show

    They haven't said I don't think. I disagree with calling it terrorism. They should reduce it to what it was, some quack with a gun

    No. It was terrorism.

    Without trying to belittle your opinion 9/11 wasn't just some dicks who stole a plane.

    This bloke went and murdered a lot of people to make a political point.



  • @No-Quarter said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    Anyone know why the u-turn over terrorist charges? From memory they weren't going to go down that route as it could result in more of a shit show

    They haven't said I don't think. I disagree with calling it terrorism. They should reduce it to what it was, some quack with a gun

    There's a fair number of people that believe that if the perpetrator is brown it is terrorism, if white then it's not. So I think that may have played into the decision to charge terrorism.

    I kind of agree with you though, it's not easy to discern the ideology he was following as he is just all over the place and appears to be more of a troll trying to start conflict than anything else. You could call him an ethno-nationalist I guess but then he praised black people in the States so...

    Thought the highlighted text above qualified as terrorism.



  • @Hooroo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @taniwharugby said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    so he has plead not guilty to the 90 odd charges against him, a trial date is likely to be May next year...

    They need a media blackout for the whole trial. Don't give the grub any oxygen

    I don't know about this. They live streamed the Breivik trial in Norway. They even provided a stream with an English interpreter. It just showed him to be the nutter that he was. Reckon that may be the way to go rather than have him be this mysterious figure.

    That actually sounds a good idea. This guy is not going to be the sharpest tool in the shed

    Yep, honestly this media blackout and jailtime for having or distributing the video and his manifesto is only making him and his ideas infinitely more popular in the dark recesses of the internet.

    YEah but who cares about the 'dark recesses of the internet'? Most live in the real and light world of life

    You know? the victims probably lived in the real and light world of life before some fluffybunny shot them.

    Hiding the crime in my opinion drives it underground. Makes it edgy and attractive to conspiracists.

    I'm not advocating making it a circus but report it so we know the enemy.

    Dont hide it so some nascent Tarrant wannabe starts to develop a warped ideology which noone detects until he goes postal.

    Justice must not only be done it must be seen to be done. NZ is not a Police state. We should be transparent in our justice system.



  • @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Hooroo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @taniwharugby said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    so he has plead not guilty to the 90 odd charges against him, a trial date is likely to be May next year...

    They need a media blackout for the whole trial. Don't give the grub any oxygen

    I don't know about this. They live streamed the Breivik trial in Norway. They even provided a stream with an English interpreter. It just showed him to be the nutter that he was. Reckon that may be the way to go rather than have him be this mysterious figure.

    That actually sounds a good idea. This guy is not going to be the sharpest tool in the shed

    Yep, honestly this media blackout and jailtime for having or distributing the video and his manifesto is only making him and his ideas infinitely more popular in the dark recesses of the internet.

    YEah but who cares about the 'dark recesses of the internet'? Most live in the real and light world of life

    We all should, Brendan Tarrant lived there.

    Which is where the danger lurks @Hooroo .

    Pretending it doesn't allows for acts like this to happen IMO.



  • @booboo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Hooroo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @taniwharugby said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    so he has plead not guilty to the 90 odd charges against him, a trial date is likely to be May next year...

    They need a media blackout for the whole trial. Don't give the grub any oxygen

    I don't know about this. They live streamed the Breivik trial in Norway. They even provided a stream with an English interpreter. It just showed him to be the nutter that he was. Reckon that may be the way to go rather than have him be this mysterious figure.

    That actually sounds a good idea. This guy is not going to be the sharpest tool in the shed

    Yep, honestly this media blackout and jailtime for having or distributing the video and his manifesto is only making him and his ideas infinitely more popular in the dark recesses of the internet.

    YEah but who cares about the 'dark recesses of the internet'? Most live in the real and light world of life

    We all should, Brendan Tarrant lived there.

    Which is where the danger lurks @Hooroo .

    Pretending it doesn't allows for acts like this to happen IMO.

    Who’s pretending? All it is, is not giving the guy a face.



  • @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @taniwharugby said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    so he has plead not guilty to the 90 odd charges against him, a trial date is likely to be May next year...

    They need a media blackout for the whole trial. Don't give the grub any oxygen

    I don't know about this. They live streamed the Breivik trial in Norway. They even provided a stream with an English interpreter. It just showed him to be the nutter that he was. Reckon that may be the way to go rather than have him be this mysterious figure.

    That actually sounds a good idea. This guy is not going to be the sharpest tool in the shed

    Unfortunately the above isn't always the case. Many of mankinds worst offenders are extremely intelligent. I wonder if the fear of televising is he turns out to be very smart and has the ability to influence.

    You only have to hear one thing which actually makes a bit of sense, and then the ball is rolling ...



  • @MajorRage said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @taniwharugby said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    so he has plead not guilty to the 90 odd charges against him, a trial date is likely to be May next year...

    They need a media blackout for the whole trial. Don't give the grub any oxygen

    I don't know about this. They live streamed the Breivik trial in Norway. They even provided a stream with an English interpreter. It just showed him to be the nutter that he was. Reckon that may be the way to go rather than have him be this mysterious figure.

    That actually sounds a good idea. This guy is not going to be the sharpest tool in the shed

    Unfortunately the above isn't always the case. Many of mankinds worst offenders are extremely intelligent. I wonder if the fear of televising is he turns out to be very smart and has the ability to influence.

    You only have to hear one thing which actually makes a bit of sense, and then the ball is rolling ...

    He isn't going to convince normal people anyway. It might give him a platform to reach other people like him though....



  • They can’t seal the trial, but they can refuse cameras. His words are enough, nobody needs to see & hear this psychopath.



  • @booboo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    No. It was terrorism.
    This bloke went and murdered a lot of people to make a political point.

    I don’t get hung up on the semantics, that’s for other people to stamp their feet. But does make me wonder whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a terrorist or an assassin. Likely both, but he’s rarely-if-ever been referred as the former. Is it the politics? The fact he was (allegedly) a lone gunman? Is it the body-count? Or the 21st century framing??



  • @Salacious-Crumb said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @booboo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    No. It was terrorism.
    This bloke went and murdered a lot of people to make a political point.

    I don’t get hung up on the semantics, that’s for other people to stamp their feet. But does make me wonder whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a terrorist or an assassin. Likely both, but he’s rarely-if-ever been referred as the former. Is it the politics? The fact he was (allegedly) a lone gunman? Is it the body-count? Or the 21st century framing??

    As I recall the practice of terrorism (and the term) did not have legs until the late '60's - early '70's.

    Kennedy was killed in '63 (I was thirteen) and up until then we had the aftermath of conventional war (Korea settling down to opposing forces glaring at each other across a demilitarised zone, Vietnam cranking up); the Iron Curtain keeping the military might of the Soviets and the USA apart; spies in overcoats with their collars turned up and their hats turned down; and Chairman Mao preparing his cultural revolution phase in the closed shop that was China.

    It wasn't until the late '60's that "terrorism" became a familiar word, when the IRA got cracking in the late '60's at the same time as militant groups became evident, mainly in the Middle East.

    Most of my contemporaries would identify Black September's massacre of the Israeli weightlifters at the '72 Munich Olympics as their first recollection of "terrorism".

    After that it was declared on for young and old, with the rapid growth of proclaimed terrorist groups such as Baader–Meinhof, increased activity by Yasser Arafat's PLO, a decade or three of plane hijackings, kidnappings, bombings and all that we see now.



  • The purpose of terrorism is too terrorise. This suggests that the randomness of it is just as much a weapon. Kennedy was a dominant political figure at a time of great stress, even if Oswald killed him for political reasons (highly likely), then the purpose was not to terrorise the populus but go get rid of that one person.



  • @Salacious-Crumb said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    They can’t seal the trial, but they can refuse cameras. His words are enough, nobody needs to see & hear this psychopath.

    I'm the opposite mate.

    I want to hear lots about ALL mass terrorists.

    For 20 years now the western world has been cowering behind this Terrorist adjective and I'm fuggen sick of it.

    like all existential threats I think we should research and educate about these menaces. We should face these fears head on and in the light so we're not scared of them, and more importantly so our Fuggen ruling classes can't continue trotting out fear and "mummy knows best" circular announcements all the while fast tracking surveilance and restrictive laws and regulations upon a population that is forced to say "well sure, if you say so..."

    20 years and not one improvement on terrorism!!! If so, where?

    We've smashed poverty, cut violent crime dramatically, and connected the world through hand held devices in that time but not a single new thing about terrorists than, "lone wolf", "radical" or "white supremacist".

    We know what makes a paedo (broadly speaking), we know what contributes to violent individuals, we know what to do in an earthquake, we know how to look for suicide candidates, we know all about all manner of existential threats but when it comes to terrorist killers we're fobbed off with the "can't tell you, it might encourage others bullshit"

    Encourage fuggen who? All we know the likely candidates are, is Islamic extremists and white supremacists. That's it. We're encouraged that white men are the danger yet nearly ALL the terrorists are brown men AND women. What is the difference between a muslim and an Islamic terrorist? (my 72 year old mother asked me that, I've yet to deliver a compelling, succinct explanation). So what makes an Islamic terrorist do what they do? (yes i have Muslim friends and family, wife grew up in muslim regions, so don't start that nonsense - they can't articulate the difference either!)

    The other classic is "Don't give his identity, don't give him his fame"

    Too fuggen late!!! from about the time these cocks pull the first trigger. It's not 1919, where you can deny a story simply by just not telling it!

    No, enough I reckon - 20 years of being shackled by "Terror Threat". All the laws passed to cease this threat - none of it has worked! (they say it has though....)

    So why can't we find out what makes a terrorist and have that broadcasted and disseminated accurately. All these pricks, white, black and brown.
    What changed them?
    What did they read? honestly.
    Who preached to them?
    What were the signs they were heading down a dark path?
    What organisations were involved?
    How strong was the religious fervour?
    What services might have stopped this trajectory? Suicide helpline type services useful?
    What can somebody do if they feel marginalised?
    What made them do it?
    Was it worth it? Why?

    We do all this for suicide and we're all about 5 million times more likely to have our lives disrupted by suicide than by a nut job terrorist, but no we're treated like ignorant children scared by the notion of a random boogey man lurking just around the corner, tomorrow maybe.

    For context, I'm not suggesting the trial be the forum for this but imagine a NZ government that put together a team to disseminate this pricks life and have mature public discussions and references for what made Voldermort here turn troppo, andhow many more people feel specifically like he does. And what can we do so as not to feel helpless to terrorism - you'd almost think extolling terror was good for business or being in office...

    Shine light on our fears

    Anyone asking for suppression of the high resolution facts, causes or motives of terrorists is either maintaining control or too scared to look life in the face

    I'm not scared of these fluffybunnies, but I am sick of them!
    In my opinion 🙂



  • @Siam said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Salacious-Crumb said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    They can’t seal the trial, but they can refuse cameras. His words are enough, nobody needs to see & hear this psychopath.

    I'm the opposite mate.

    I want to hear lots about ALL mass terrorists.

    For 20 years now the western world has been cowering behind this Terrorist adjective and I'm fuggen sick of it.

    like all existential threats I think we should research and educate about these menaces. We should face these fears head on and in the light so we're not scared of them, and more importantly so our Fuggen ruling classes can't continue trotting out fear and "mummy knows best" circular announcements all the while fast tracking surveilance and restrictive laws and regulations upon a population that is forced to say "well sure, if you say so..."

    20 years and not one improvement on terrorism!!! If so, where?

    We've smashed poverty, cut violent crime dramatically, and connected the world through hand held devices in that time but not a single new thing about terrorists than, "lone wolf", "radical" or "white supremacist".

    We know what makes a paedo (broadly speaking), we know what contributes to violent individuals, we know what to do in an earthquake, we know how to look for suicide candidates, we know all about all manner of existential threats but when it comes to terrorist killers we're fobbed off with the "can't tell you, it might encourage others bullshit"

    Encourage fuggen who? All we know the likely candidates are, is Islamic extremists and white supremacists. That's it. We're encouraged that white men are the danger yet nearly ALL the terrorists are brown men AND women. What is the difference between a muslim and an Islamic terrorist? (my 72 year old mother asked me that, I've yet to deliver a compelling, succinct explanation). So what makes an Islamic terrorist do what they do? (yes i have Muslim friends and family, wife grew up in muslim regions, so don't start that nonsense - they can't articulate the difference either!)

    The other classic is "Don't give his identity, don't give him his fame"

    Too fuggen late!!! from about the time these cocks pull the first trigger. It's not 1919, where you can deny a story simply by just not telling it!

    No, enough I reckon - 20 years of being shackled by "Terror Threat". All the laws passed to cease this threat - none of it has worked! (they say it has though....)

    So why can't we find out what makes a terrorist and have that broadcasted and disseminated accurately. All these pricks, white, black and brown.
    What changed them?
    What did they read? honestly.
    Who preached to them?
    What were the signs they were heading down a dark path?
    What organisations were involved?
    How strong was the religious fervour?
    What services might have stopped this trajectory? Suicide helpline type services useful?
    What can somebody do if they feel marginalised?
    What made them do it?
    Was it worth it? Why?

    We do all this for suicide and we're all about 5 million times more likely to have our lives disrupted by suicide than by a nut job terrorist, but no we're treated like ignorant children scared by the notion of a random boogey man lurking just around the corner, tomorrow maybe.

    For context, I'm not suggesting the trial be the forum for this but imagine a NZ government that put together a team to disseminate this pricks life and have mature public discussions and references for what made Voldermort here turn troppo, andhow many more people feel specifically like he does. And what can we do so as not to feel helpless to terrorism - you'd almost think extolling terror was good for business or being in office...

    Shine light on our fears

    Anyone asking for suppression of the high resolution facts, causes or motives of terrorists is either maintaining control or too scared to look life in the face

    I'm not scared of these fluffybunnies, but I am sick of them!
    In my opinion 🙂

    Thanks for the impressive rant mate and I must say I completely agree with the majority of it. Today’s measures are, IMO, a good step or two back from how we dealt with the IRA terror attacks some years back. Then it was all about personal vigilance, what to look out for, how to restrict opportunity. Now it is just sound bites and surveillance that catches no-one except the bloke who puts the wrong rubbish in the recycling bin.



  • @Siam said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Salacious-Crumb said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    They can’t seal the trial, but they can refuse cameras. His words are enough, nobody needs to see & hear this psychopath.

    I'm the opposite mate.

    I want to hear lots about ALL mass terrorists.

    For 20 years now the western world has been cowering behind this Terrorist adjective and I'm fuggen sick of it.

    like all existential threats I think we should research and educate about these menaces. We should face these fears head on and in the light so we're not scared of them, and more importantly so our Fuggen ruling classes can't continue trotting out fear and "mummy knows best" circular announcements all the while fast tracking surveilance and restrictive laws and regulations upon a population that is forced to say "well sure, if you say so..."

    20 years and not one improvement on terrorism!!! If so, where?

    We've smashed poverty, cut violent crime dramatically, and connected the world through hand held devices in that time but not a single new thing about terrorists than, "lone wolf", "radical" or "white supremacist".

    We know what makes a paedo (broadly speaking), we know what contributes to violent individuals, we know what to do in an earthquake, we know how to look for suicide candidates, we know all about all manner of existential threats but when it comes to terrorist killers we're fobbed off with the "can't tell you, it might encourage others bullshit"

    Encourage fuggen who? All we know the likely candidates are, is Islamic extremists and white supremacists. That's it. We're encouraged that white men are the danger yet nearly ALL the terrorists are brown men AND women. What is the difference between a muslim and an Islamic terrorist? (my 72 year old mother asked me that, I've yet to deliver a compelling, succinct explanation). So what makes an Islamic terrorist do what they do? (yes i have Muslim friends and family, wife grew up in muslim regions, so don't start that nonsense - they can't articulate the difference either!)

    The other classic is "Don't give his identity, don't give him his fame"

    Too fuggen late!!! from about the time these cocks pull the first trigger. It's not 1919, where you can deny a story simply by just not telling it!

    No, enough I reckon - 20 years of being shackled by "Terror Threat". All the laws passed to cease this threat - none of it has worked! (they say it has though....)

    So why can't we find out what makes a terrorist and have that broadcasted and disseminated accurately. All these pricks, white, black and brown.
    What changed them?
    What did they read? honestly.
    Who preached to them?
    What were the signs they were heading down a dark path?
    What organisations were involved?
    How strong was the religious fervour?
    What services might have stopped this trajectory? Suicide helpline type services useful?
    What can somebody do if they feel marginalised?
    What made them do it?
    Was it worth it? Why?

    We do all this for suicide and we're all about 5 million times more likely to have our lives disrupted by suicide than by a nut job terrorist, but no we're treated like ignorant children scared by the notion of a random boogey man lurking just around the corner, tomorrow maybe.

    For context, I'm not suggesting the trial be the forum for this but imagine a NZ government that put together a team to disseminate this pricks life and have mature public discussions and references for what made Voldermort here turn troppo, andhow many more people feel specifically like he does. And what can we do so as not to feel helpless to terrorism - you'd almost think extolling terror was good for business or being in office...

    Shine light on our fears

    Anyone asking for suppression of the high resolution facts, causes or motives of terrorists is either maintaining control or too scared to look life in the face

    I'm not scared of these fluffybunnies, but I am sick of them!
    In my opinion 🙂

    I'm reading Maajid Nawaz's book Radical at the moment. Details how he was radicalised into Islamic extremism, how he radicalised others and then how he came back from that and now dedicates himself into fighting extremism. Well worth a read, a little terrifying though considering today's climate.



  • @Siam said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Salacious-Crumb said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    They can’t seal the trial, but they can refuse cameras. His words are enough, nobody needs to see & hear this psychopath.

    I'm the opposite mate.

    I want to hear lots about ALL mass terrorists.

    For 20 years now the western world has been cowering behind this Terrorist adjective and I'm fuggen sick of it.

    like all existential threats I think we should research and educate about these menaces. We should face these fears head on and in the light so we're not scared of them, and more importantly so our Fuggen ruling classes can't continue trotting out fear and "mummy knows best" circular announcements all the while fast tracking surveilance and restrictive laws and regulations upon a population that is forced to say "well sure, if you say so..."

    20 years and not one improvement on terrorism!!! If so, where?

    We've smashed poverty, cut violent crime dramatically, and connected the world through hand held devices in that time but not a single new thing about terrorists than, "lone wolf", "radical" or "white supremacist".

    We know what makes a paedo (broadly speaking), we know what contributes to violent individuals, we know what to do in an earthquake, we know how to look for suicide candidates, we know all about all manner of existential threats but when it comes to terrorist killers we're fobbed off with the "can't tell you, it might encourage others bullshit"

    Encourage fuggen who? All we know the likely candidates are, is Islamic extremists and white supremacists. That's it. We're encouraged that white men are the danger yet nearly ALL the terrorists are brown men AND women. What is the difference between a muslim and an Islamic terrorist? (my 72 year old mother asked me that, I've yet to deliver a compelling, succinct explanation). So what makes an Islamic terrorist do what they do? (yes i have Muslim friends and family, wife grew up in muslim regions, so don't start that nonsense - they can't articulate the difference either!)

    The other classic is "Don't give his identity, don't give him his fame"

    Too fuggen late!!! from about the time these cocks pull the first trigger. It's not 1919, where you can deny a story simply by just not telling it!

    No, enough I reckon - 20 years of being shackled by "Terror Threat". All the laws passed to cease this threat - none of it has worked! (they say it has though....)

    So why can't we find out what makes a terrorist and have that broadcasted and disseminated accurately. All these pricks, white, black and brown.
    What changed them?
    What did they read? honestly.
    Who preached to them?
    What were the signs they were heading down a dark path?
    What organisations were involved?
    How strong was the religious fervour?
    What services might have stopped this trajectory? Suicide helpline type services useful?
    What can somebody do if they feel marginalised?
    What made them do it?
    Was it worth it? Why?

    We do all this for suicide and we're all about 5 million times more likely to have our lives disrupted by suicide than by a nut job terrorist, but no we're treated like ignorant children scared by the notion of a random boogey man lurking just around the corner, tomorrow maybe.

    For context, I'm not suggesting the trial be the forum for this but imagine a NZ government that put together a team to disseminate this pricks life and have mature public discussions and references for what made Voldermort here turn troppo, andhow many more people feel specifically like he does. And what can we do so as not to feel helpless to terrorism - you'd almost think extolling terror was good for business or being in office...

    Shine light on our fears

    Anyone asking for suppression of the high resolution facts, causes or motives of terrorists is either maintaining control or too scared to look life in the face

    I'm not scared of these fluffybunnies, but I am sick of them!
    In my opinion 🙂

    Excellent post Siam. I'm not sure why there is this obsession with putting the lid on everything in this case. The atrocity has already been committed. Is it out of respect to the victims? If that's the case then no info, pics etc of any murderer or criminal should be provided.

    I just remember being in Norway when Anders Bering Breivik killed 69 people, many of them kids. The trial and the spot light on him didn't glamourise him. It accentuated what a monster he was and the horror of the atrocities he committed. He didn't appear as a hero of the far-right but as a coward who shot people in the back and surrendered immediately when the police came. He was exposed as a crackpot and nutcase.

    Bring these vampires into the light. You stand a better chance of killing them than in the dark.



  • @booboo said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @No-Quarter said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @canefan said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    @Rembrandt said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    Anyone know why the u-turn over terrorist charges? From memory they weren't going to go down that route as it could result in more of a shit show

    They haven't said I don't think. I disagree with calling it terrorism. They should reduce it to what it was, some quack with a gun

    There's a fair number of people that believe that if the perpetrator is brown it is terrorism, if white then it's not. So I think that may have played into the decision to charge terrorism.

    I kind of agree with you though, it's not easy to discern the ideology he was following as he is just all over the place and appears to be more of a troll trying to start conflict than anything else. You could call him an ethno-nationalist I guess but then he praised black people in the States so...

    Thought the highlighted text above qualified as terrorism.

    Ethno-nationalist absolutely qualifies as terrorism.

    What concerns me most about Tarrant is not that he is a white nationalist, but that he isn't. If he isn't (and I don' think he is) then ironic nihilist 'shitposting' internet culture has become a threat - essentially trolling has spilled over into actual violence.

    People (well those that got to read it) look at his manifesto as either sincere or trolling. But it was actually kind of both - sincere AND trolling. That means the threshold of hate for committing heinous acts is lowered to just shitposting/trolling. There are some seriously disturbed people hanging out in the worlds of 8chan, the last thing we want is that spilling over into the real world.

    None of what Jacinda has proposed even addresses what I'm talking about; to be honest I don't think there is anyone in parliament that even understands the sub-cultures that have grown in places like 4chan/8chan and what motivates people like Tarrant to do what he did.



  • Tarrant's document is still censored. So please don't discuss the contents



  • @Duluth said in Christchurch Gunman in Mosque:

    Tarrant's document is still censored. So please don't discuss the contents

    Which itself is pretty incredible in a supposedly free society.


Log in to reply