The poster you are replying to is not naive. They know exactly what they are doing.
There is an effort to normalize this utter filth all over the internet, and do not for one single second think that this particular website is immune to that effort.
Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack in... NZ?
- Thread starter The Atheist
- Start date
The poster you are replying to is not naive. They know exactly what they are doing.
There is an effort to normalize this utter filth all over the internet, and do not for one single second think that this particular website is immune to that effort.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
I took some time to scan through the full law that you linked, including the definitions and section 131. The absence of the word 'view' seems consistent, as you claim. This absence appears to allow the viewing of such things as child porn if you do not actually possess it. Are there, to your knowledge, any laws in NZ that do actually prohibit bit the viewing of such materials?
Edit: partially answered by the Atheist. I think there must be restrictions on viewing as well. Interested to see where it is spelled out in law.
Last edited:
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Nope, I'm not walking anything back.
I have just had a conversation with one of the Nelson Area Police Commander's Staff. I told her I was concerned that my son has seen the video (which he has) and that he is worried he might be in legal jeopardy because of it.
Her answer was, no, it is not illegal to view the video, but it is illegal to have a copy, either as a digital file on or off a computer, and it is illegal to distribute it either electronically or manually. I told her about the OFLC, and she said they already knew about that and that it is a guidance not a law, so it carries no legal weight.
She made a point that even if it was illegal, it would be almost impossible to prove. A witness would have to testify that you were watching it, and they would be committing an illegal act themselves because would have needed to be watching it as well.
I stand by what I said earlier - there is nothing in the law which says it is illegal to view, and in any case, such a law would be unenforceable
From the link you posted
"I don’t think New Zealanders innocently caught up in the social media storm following these horrific events need to be concerned. The enforcement focus will likely be on those actively and maliciously involved in spreading this material, and taking actions such as deliberately distorting it to avoid blocks and detection software"
“Every New Zealander should now be clear that this clip is an illegal, harmful and reprehensible record created to promote a terrorist cause. If you have a record of it, you must delete it. If you see it, you should report it. Possessing or distributing it is illegal, and only supports a criminal agenda.”
“Every New Zealander should now be clear that this clip is an illegal, harmful and reprehensible record created to promote a terrorist cause. If you have a record of it, you must delete it. If you see it, you should report it. Possessing or distributing it is illegal, and only supports a criminal agenda.”
Note he says "should report it" not must report it
If it was illegal view, why would they expect anyone to report it and admit committing a crime as they do so. That would surely work against efforts to put a stop to its distribution.
And here is another point... the OLFC doesn't make Laws, Parliament does, and Parliament is not in session at the moment. AFAIK there has been no emergency session since the A-attack.
Interesting since from memory I am that poster.
Therefore you might expand on what I am doing.
This forum is pretty good because an international perspective is developing. There is really no chance of that within New Zealand currently.
For example the New Zealand media to my knowledge are yet to point out his father was an asbestosis victim eschewed by James Hardie when they created a shell company in the Netherlands to avoid paying any compensation.
He hanged himself in the hall when Tarrant was 18, to be found by mother and son when they opened the front door. Maybe he went off the rails at that point.
Then I might get accused of making a plea in mitigation when I am suggesting the brutality of an international corporation might have created a downstream effect however loose the association.
For pity's sake we own all this stuff one way or another.
I don't think people who watched it on the day should worry to much.
There were injury victims, non injured and family of people who were actually in the mosque who watched it to try to work out who had not made it, so they are hardly going to go full Erin Brockovich
They also have to show you knew what it actually was before watching it and not just innocently clicking a link someone sent.
It is more the people distributing it around still and viewing it.
It is emotive stuff and the communication skills of the privacy commission and police have a lot to be desired (With the video. Been outstanding otherwise)
There were injury victims, non injured and family of people who were actually in the mosque who watched it to try to work out who had not made it, so they are hardly going to go full Erin Brockovich
They also have to show you knew what it actually was before watching it and not just innocently clicking a link someone sent.
It is more the people distributing it around still and viewing it.
It is emotive stuff and the communication skills of the privacy commission and police have a lot to be desired (With the video. Been outstanding otherwise)
Yes, let us all make excuses for the angelic little boy with the horrible childhood who was bullied into this.
There is no way he was radicalized by the extreme-right talking heads you can find all over the internet, and made a conscious decision to massacre as many muslims as possible because he thought it was the right thing to do.
What ever happened to the concept of "personal responsibility"? I suppose that only applies to poor people, communists, and the brown-skinned.
trustbutverify
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 5, 2007
- Messages
- 10,541
I could live without odd children being cyber-bullied to suicide.
angrysoba
Philosophile
Wow! That could have gone badly.
angrysoba
Philosophile
“My father was an asbestos victim!”
Holy crap! This is the most idiotic attempt at apologetics I have ever heard. A lot of people have **** things happen to them. Thanks to this ******* the families of 50 more people have untold misery to deal with.
Just looking at this bloke who has been charged for distributing it.
He owns a insulation firm which has a black sun symbol for a company logo and a massive $14.88 per meter sign on his vans.
Both the symbol and the number are white supremacist symbols, so I think that might have something to do with him being made an example of
The font of his company adds a finishing touch
******* idiot
Photo of vans
He owns a insulation firm which has a black sun symbol for a company logo and a massive $14.88 per meter sign on his vans.
Both the symbol and the number are white supremacist symbols, so I think that might have something to do with him being made an example of
The font of his company adds a finishing touch
******* idiot
Photo of vans
Last edited:
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
And here is the thing... how would anyone prove that you watched it?
I'm on unlimited fibre here, so I pretty much don't care how many GB I use.
From the moment I get home during the working week, I am livestreaming American news channels (usually CNN and MSNBC) as well as Al Jazeera. I'm not actually watching it all the time. At other times, I will have YouTube playing on autoplay on one tab, and I'm listening to in while I do some work, maybe on another tab, or maybe I'm doing some photoshop work or splicing a video for a customer, or doing some accounts, paying bills online, doing the GST for last the month, or PAYE as I will be doing tonight. My computer might be streaming some video, but that isn't proof I have watched any of it. It is not uncommon for me to go out and leave the computer running (it stay on 24/7 anyway) connected to the internet, on YouTube playing videos, or streaming news..... and I'm not even at home!
That you have streamed something is not proof that you have watched it?
Different for having an objectionable video on your hard drive... there is physical evidence if that
Different for having shared video with someone else, there is digital trail of that.
I'm on unlimited fibre here, so I pretty much don't care how many GB I use.
From the moment I get home during the working week, I am livestreaming American news channels (usually CNN and MSNBC) as well as Al Jazeera. I'm not actually watching it all the time. At other times, I will have YouTube playing on autoplay on one tab, and I'm listening to in while I do some work, maybe on another tab, or maybe I'm doing some photoshop work or splicing a video for a customer, or doing some accounts, paying bills online, doing the GST for last the month, or PAYE as I will be doing tonight. My computer might be streaming some video, but that isn't proof I have watched any of it. It is not uncommon for me to go out and leave the computer running (it stay on 24/7 anyway) connected to the internet, on YouTube playing videos, or streaming news..... and I'm not even at home!
That you have streamed something is not proof that you have watched it?
Different for having an objectionable video on your hard drive... there is physical evidence if that
Different for having shared video with someone else, there is digital trail of that.
trustbutverify
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 5, 2007
- Messages
- 10,541
Perhaps Tarrant mistook these Muslims for home invaders. He maybe as much a victim as they are!
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Not only that, the font for the company name on the sides of the vans looks suspiciously like "Fraktur" the official font used by Nazi Germany for documents, and by Hitler on the cover of Mein Kampf.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraktur
Apologetics?
No, inevitably the complete biography is worth discussing, otherwise we would never understand the New Zealand chief justice and the part she is playing in a constitutional crisis.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Something tells me he won't be winning a NZ racial inclusivity spokesman of the year award any time soon
My dad is an "asbestos victim". He worked as a carpenter in the 50's and 60's, that stuff was everywhere back then, and he has asbestos fragments incapsulated in his lungs. Gave us one hell of a cancer scare when he got an x-ray a few years back. We'll hopefully be celebrating his 80th birthday this year.
And yet, here I am: Not a white supremacist, and not a mass murderer.
Imagine that.
Last edited:
The mass murderer's father hanged himself to be found by his son after being shafted by Hardie asbestos products incorporated.
There is a difference and that is the principle behind chaos theory, a butterfly beats its wings....
Biography always helps, but may play no part in excusing.
For pity's sake you blessed and happy being.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Excuses, excuses, excuses!
Plenty of people have had tragedies in their lives. they didn't all go on to be mass murderers!
I wonder if Samson also makes excuses for members of IS who saw their entire families get blown up by bombs dropped from US drones.