Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack in... NZ?

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has released a statement, but it doesn't appear to be on their website at this time. It's reproduced on the Guardian live blog, to which I have linked several times.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, if you have hate crime laws already, it seems like that should include white supremacy.
Click to expand...

We also have free speech. Simply being a White Supremacist isn't enough to be a crime. Acting on it is crime though.
 
A brave man tried to tackle the shooter but was shot just before he was able to grab ahold. Someone could've ran away while he distracted the gunman. Man died a hero.
 
Bill Shorten: “Do not watch the footage, that is what the bad people want us to do. This is not normal, do not make this violence normal. We must do everything we can to unite and prevent this happening again.”
 
Baylor said:
The terrorist threats on this forum I am referring to are from anti-Trump, anti-white, pro-immigration extremists. Not an "illegal immigrant."
Click to expand...

Except this was a Pro-Trump, white supremacist, anti-immigration extremist, the exact opposite of what you were going on about.
 
LTC8K6 said:
More and more though we have what is termed "hate speech", which some countries do not protect.

NZ has a very wide interpretation of free speech, though.

I expect re-examinations of free speech laws.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Using harsh language is one thing, using bullets is something else.
 
dudalb said:
Real classy guy.

Maybe some people here should think about where this kind of bigotry..even the "non violent" kind..inevitably leads to.
Click to expand...

In another thread here not long ago about the Baltimore synagogue terror attack, I took a poster on this forum to task for his (non-violent!) rhetoric about "white genocide" - which the synagogue attacker also believed in - explaining how true belief in such a concept must almost inevitably lead a believer to resort to armed resistance against the perceived perpetrators.

Now here again. The same BS about "intruders" and "our lands".

I no longer consider this rhetoric non-violent, by definition.
 
Checkmite said:
In another thread here not long ago about the Baltimore synagogue terror attack, I took a poster on this forum to task for his (non-violent!) rhetoric about "white genocide" - which the synagogue attacker also believed in - explaining how true belief in such a concept must almost inevitably lead a believer to resort to armed resistance against the perceived perpetrators.

Now here again. The same BS about "intruders" and "our lands".

I no longer consider this rhetoric non-violent, by definition.
Click to expand...

It has never been "non violent". It's violent by definition, and it should not be covered by so called "free speech". This **** should be beaten down and silenced.

Fascism and white supremacy did not die in 1945. It's still here, and we need to take it seriously.
 
Last edited:
Checkmite said:
In another thread here not long ago about the Baltimore synagogue terror attack, I took a poster on this forum to task for his (non-violent!) rhetoric about "white genocide" - which the synagogue attacker also believed in - explaining how true belief in such a concept must almost inevitably lead a believer to resort to armed resistance against the perceived perpetrators.

Now here again. The same BS about "intruders" and "our lands".

I no longer consider this rhetoric non-violent, by definition.
Click to expand...

Neither the hi-lited nor the "taking to task" ever happened.
 
Apparently there just happened to be a massive AOS (Police Armed Offenders Squad) training excersize happening in ChCh, which is why there was such a huge response city wide.

Probably bad to describe this as "a good thing", but kind of handy
 
PhantomWolf said:
Well until an idiot right wing, racist, white supremacist came here and shot up a bunch of people who were peacefully going about their business, we had no reason to worry about it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you think this is a relevant reply to the discussion were having.
 
Checkmite said:
In another thread here not long ago about the Baltimore synagogue terror attack, I took a poster on this forum to task for his (non-violent!) rhetoric about "white genocide" - which the synagogue attacker also believed in - explaining how true belief in such a concept must almost inevitably lead a believer to resort to armed resistance against the perceived perpetrators.

Now here again. The same BS about "intruders" and "our lands".

I no longer consider this rhetoric non-violent, by definition.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as non violent bigotry. Just flimsily disguised violent bigotry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom