It was heartwarming to be part of such a big and diverse crowd in Auckland’s Aotea Square yesterday standing in solidarity with the Islamic community after the terrible massacre in Christchurch. There were many passionate speeches highlighting the need to come together to fight racism and Islamophobia.
Many New Zealanders have picked up Jacinda Ardern’s theme “this is not us” but unfortunately this message is only partly true. Islamophobia is deeply embedded in our society. Former Race Relations commissioner Susan Devoy says that “every single Muslim woman I know has faced racist abuse of some kind right here in our towns, on Facebook, in the media.”
In order to deal with this we have to understand where New Zealand’s Islamophobia comes from, and what sustains it. It goes a long way back. Settlers in colonial New Zealand were deeply Islamophobic and white supremacist. Our white settlers saw themselves as superior to the “dark” people in the Muslim world and they treated Christianity as the only true religion. New Zealand supported Britain’s wars in the Middle East and south Asia in the 19th and 20th centuries. These wars continue up until today, but with Britain now playing a subordinate role to the United States.
The white supremacist and Islamophobic message presented today is that Islam is a violent religion, or at least has the capacity to take a violent form, and this has to be combated by the intervention of Western powers. This is the excuse given for Western military action in several Islamic nations including Libya, Somalia, the Yemen, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Of course, there have been violent and extreme political currents in some of these Islamic countries, often generating a public flowing from their opposition to corrupt (Western-backed) governments, or their opposition to foreign military intervention. Now we are in a vicious circle of foreign intervention begetting jihadism, and jihadism begetting foreign intervention, and so it goes on. And that has set off another vicious circle with the Islamophobia in Western nations upsetting the local Muslim community, motivating a few extreme elements to commit violent acts, which results in more Islamophobia, and so it goes around.
Whether consciously or not, successive New Zealand governments have helped foster this modern Islamophobia by participating in the American-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and not speaking out against Western military action in places like the Yemen, Libya and Somalia. The Western propaganda around those wars has fostered prejudice towards Muslims living in New Zealand.
If we really want to combat Islamophobia and white nationalism we should withdraw our remaining soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan and not participate further in America’s wars in Islamic countries.
We should also withdraw from the Five Eyes, and intelligence network based on the white supremacist premise that five “anglo” nations (the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) have the right to spy on every other nation. The Five Eyes operates mainly in the interests of Donald Trump’s America helping him, for example, to implement his Islamophobic ban on the citizens of several Islamic nations entering the United States. It should be noted that the killer in Christchurch, Brenton Tarrant, called Trump “a symbol of renewed white identity” in his manifesto justifying the massacre.
Given the Islamophobic ethos of Western intelligence agencies, led by the United States, we should be against strengthening our anti-terrorist laws or allowing more intrusive state surveillance. Such an approach won’t help the Muslim community.
The reality is that the longstanding Crimes Act, which has been used to charge the current offender, covers all cases of murder, kidnapping, bombing and membership of a criminal group. Separate anti-terrorism legislation is clearly unnecessary. The only (failed) attempt to use the existing Terrorism Suppression Act has been against local dissenters, in the Operation 8 case.
One takeaway from the Christchurch massacre seems to be that a violent act by a “lone wolf” is very hard to detect. Rather than move towards a surveillance society, our resources would be better devoted to promoting community tolerance and the understanding of diverse cultures. Reducing the prevalence of Islamophobia in our society is the best path to take.
Thank you Keith
At last!
For showing the bigger picture rather than individualising the islamaphobia….as a nutcase outlier rather than a susceptible product of decades of war propaganda that “others” Muslims so as to buy public consent to slaughter them for their resources.
The only way Western countries can influence politics in countries where we think the political structure could be improved is by showing a better example. Not by moving into these countries, forcing different structures and social/ economic / political changes and taking over managing their natural resources. They don’t respond any differently to the way we would respond to an outside power taking over our government.
The West needs to back off and offer real help from outside when it is asked for. And only as much as is asked for.
D J S
White supremacy? When every identity status declares its own distinct position and rights what do you expect other marginalised identities to do? If you tell marginalised white working class people whose jobs have been offshored, whose religion and local institutions have been eroded, that they are thick, uneducated boofheads….well there is a good chance that they will gang together for all the wrong reasons.
That NZ was colonial with what we regard today as unhealthy attitudes to race and religion shows two things.
First that we have advanced hugely in terms of common acceptance. Look at how many turned out from every part of our nation to greive, we are no longer the Anglo centric uniculture. We’ve embraced diversity, so let’s celebrate that.
Second we need to stop searching out and excluding people based on current or past perceived misdeeds. Being descended from colonial whites is not a demerit, to identify “whites” as racist, intolerant etc is to hold a mirror to oneself. To be Islamic doesn’t make you a threat or subversive infiltrator.
The events have superheated the debate. Blaming “white supremacists” is just too easy. Who are they? Have you ever met one? Id suggest that academics like Keith, and Left leaning politicians, and middle class educated bloggers actually talk to the great mass of common garden whites of all classes. They will tell you to stop challenging their culture and past, and to address real issues like offshoring jobs, rather than telling them their attitude sucks. We have to stop unhealthy narratives that give succor to warped minds. We need to be one.
You are starting to sound suspiciously close to being an apologist with white supremacists, Nick. There is no room for that kind of racist scumbaggery in our society. End of.
Suspicion is for ideologues and witch hunters Frank. Diversity of opinion requires open debate. You want to label me prove it.
No need for me to do that, Nick. Your own words are sufficient.
Carry on.
keep to open debate Frank. Don’t try to close people down by applying labels. Calling someone an apologist and talking of racial scumbaggery is just the other side of the coin that the supremacists use.
Not at all, Peter. Calling it out is rejecting their toxic ideology. If you have a better solution, feel free to share it.
I look forward to understanding how you would deal with the poison of nationalism, white supremacists, and other far right dogma.
I don’t think Nick was writing as an apologist for white supremacists I think he was trying to narrate some of the reasons some white people feel marginalized even in an overwhelmingly white culture. Whether or not they have any valid reason to feel this way,if their logic is twisted, their facts are wrong their view of history distorted does not matter. They ‘feel’ marginalized and some will act on that feeling. We need to find the reasons some people become white supremacists. Nick was offering some reasons. Trying to understand doesn’t mean supporting them.
If so, Peter, not only would a simple clarification have resolved that – I probably would’ve agreed that there are indeed underlying causes. (Which Gosman, on another blogpost discussion is anxious to deflect from.)
If that is indeed the case, we both screwed up on our assessment of each other.
I would be very careful here yourself Frank. You are guilty of trying to close down debate yourself AND to be incredibly judgmental about someone you have probably never met. Seeking and exploring historical and contemporary explanations/root causes is not the same as supporting or condoning – you damned well know it doesn’t. Racism exists in New Zealand just like anywhere else (I assume New Zealander’s are human – or are they truly Godzone?) – look at the numerous attacks on Asians in Auckland and elsewhere, exploitation of immigrant workers. It extends from (relatively) mild Anglophobia through to outright scorn and contempt of Maori – from the mouths of apparently “decent” middle class Pakeha. Part of the problem here, as I see it from an Englisman’s view, is the incredible smugness with which (white) Kiwis see themselves – you included.
Liminal, I make no judgements except from what I’m reading;
How else should one interpret those comments?
If Nick has not made himself clear, then he should explain what he means.
If it is “smug” to challenge white supremacist views – count me in.
Frank you interpret comments by engaging your brain and taking off your ideological blinkers. I’m prepared to be wrong, it’s part of the engagement. I have read enough of you to know that you hold ideological certainty and prejudgement. At best that is lazy, at worse it leads to good intentions doing evil.
Nick, you may need to give greater clarity in your,earning. When I first read your comments aboveI certainly mistook them to be apologist for white supremacy. If you’re coming at this from an observational standpoint, we just need that amplified.
Otherwise I hate to say it, but it comes across too ambiguous to be certain of your position.
Nick has been commenting here and on Bowalley Road
for a long time so his opinions on a wide range of subjects are well represented. If you Frank , can mike any kind of bigot out of him you will include every person of European decent but yourself in that category.
D J S
Actually David, if you look at Nick’s commebts above, they certsinly sound like an apologist for white supremacy. What about you? Playing the man but not what’s been said?
If Nick resiles from white supremacist views, he has the forum here to say it.
I’ve just looked again at the comments Frank chose to exemplify . Starting “white supremacy ?” a question. He is asking for a definition.Then I assume he refers to Hillary Clinton’s term “Deplorables”and the section of US population that term was meant to refer to. Followed by the election of Donald Trump with that section of US society’s support. That is a historical fact . Those people felt marginalised . Many in another time would have been democrat supporters .
In this I agree with Nick in this, he didn’t say they made the right choice, he said their choice could be explained.
I also agree with the other two quotes. If you don’t I think you should think about them . Again if that makes Nick (and me ) a “White Supremacist” then it makes all people of European decent white supremacists .
In saying “Blaming “white supremacists” is just too easy.” he is not defending white supremacists , he is saying that using that term without definition of identification as an explanation for this atrocity is grossly inadequate and I agree.
D J S
David, I am not referring to the issue of Clinton’s “deplorables”. Stop deflecting by raising a strawman argument I never made. That is dishonest. It’s also obviously a desperate smear attempt from you.
So the question remains, David; do you identify/support/endorse the White Supremacist agenbda. It’s a fairly straight forward question. A simple “Hell Yes!” or “Fuck No!” will suffice.
Your suggestion that the use of the white supremacist “term without definition of identification as an explanation for this atrocity is grossly inadequate” flies in the face of the ‘manifesto’ that the alleged terrorist distributed. His entire ‘manifesto’ is bog-standard white supremacy stuff. Your denial of that flies in the face of the alleged shooter’s own admissions.
White supremacists are only one part of the far-right movement. In this case, the label is applied correctly.
“Say you aren’t a racist or you are a racist” you are better than that Frank.
Just as it’s possible to discuss what contributes to Islamic terrorism, surely it’s important to examine the roots of far right terrorists.
The deeds are deplorable but if we want to prevent recurrence then we are going to have to go much deeper than rounding on 250000 blameless law abiding gun owners in NZ as is currently the vogue.
It’s a call for a simple clarification, Keepcalmcarryon. It’s what I do. If I have the ‘wrong end of the stick’, I bite my tongue and move on. But I’d like clarification.
Agreed.
I doubt anyone is considering “rounding on 250000 blameless law abiding gun owners”. If we go down the Aussie road, it would mean a ban on semi-automatic weapons and probably a buy-back scheme.
The world didn’t end for Australia. But what did end was mass shootings by maniacs using MSSAs. That has to be a good thing.
Going by some comments on social media, there appears to be the germinating of cross-party agreement between some National Party affiliated people, and many on the left. Only some of the conservatives are resisting.
I was referencing your quotation of the comment that Nick made. I was making assumptions of what he meant not what you meant Frank.
If the manifesto is a good enough example of a white supremacist definition then “hell No” would be the obvious response. I’m quite sure Nick’s is the same.
D J S
Fair enough, David. *thumbs up*
Smugness refers to the general attitude New Zealanders have about themselves – being superior in moral quality/ tolerance/kindness etc over other nationalities (particularly Australians and English). It is persistent and prevalent in the media as well – even on this website, and blinds to you realities. Societal problems and tensions are not as severe here as they are in countries such as the UK, much of Europe and Australia because immigration patterns, including those of Islamic faith, are not similar or equivalent. So, it is not surprising that the existential shock following the Christchurch attack has been severe, but racism here does exist, does express itself violently sometimes,and NZ has been complicit in killing (probably illegally) Muslims abroad too.
“I would be very careful here yourself Frank. You are guilty of trying to close down debate”
Rubbish. He addressed a point that Nick made. It seems you and your buddy are very very defensive all of a sudden. Play the point, not the man. I’d like to know what Nick meant about “other marginalised identities” as well.
If he’s not doing a Sean plunket or mike Hisking on us, just say so. Are you both pimping for white supremacists or not?? Simple fucking question.
Actually a moronic question. Not really a question at all, more of a provocative bit of virtue signalling. What I hear from you is “I’m so bloody pure and wonderful that anything I think and believe is self evidently true, but that allows me to accuse anybody of being untermenschen if I so desire”. Pure narcissism. Have you not considered that an excrable Aussie also believed he was completely right, all I’m asking is not to jump to conclusions, to be cautious and question. That obviously makes me alt Right.
Nick, now you’re making persionalised attacks on Mjolnir?
Are you unable to defend your point of view with personalising this issue? That indicates your position is untenable and indefensible.
The questions I put to you are fairly basic: do you endorse White Supremacy or not? If I’ve mis-read your original comment on this issue, please say so. Your avoidance of an answer leads to an inescapable conclusion.
As does your rejection of the (alleged) terrorist as a white supremacist – opting instead to re-define the narrative that he is a “narcissist”. He may be a narcissist. But he’s also a white supremacist. His so-called “manifesto” spelling out his desire for a race war and to “purify” Europe and NATO spells that out clearly. His covert hand signal in the Courtroom witness box is a White Supremacist hand-sign.
It beggars belief and raises questions as to what motivates you to attempt to re-define the narrative in this way. It’s almost as if you are attempting to “sanitise” the event by using American-style definitions:
1. If the mass-shooter is an Islamist, he’s labelled a terrorist.
2. If he’s not, then the mass-shooter is “mentally disturbed”.
Either way, the narrative is deflected away from gun control and US policy in the Middle East.
Frank if you read your comments it is you and your associate who have flowed invective my way, I’m a implied to be a white supremacist sympathiser. My comment above refers to a moronic question and I imply that the person who put it is virtue signalling narcissistically. Yes I answered brutal personalised accusations that are very offensive in a front on manner. Play the man it’s what you get.
At no point in my comments do I reject that the shooter is a white supremacists, nor do I draw or reject any longer straws you draw. You really do need to learn to read, think, consider. And you need to stop getting personal based upon assumptions.
Yeah right on, totally agree. Don’t deflect from describing what white supremacists are: a terrorist group with a religious doctrine, albeit not a very intelligent one. Innocent NZers with guns need to rethink their relationship with guns, this seems to be where a lot of defensive rhetoric is coming from. Guns kill, semiautomatic kill lots, just because you are law abiding and reasonable gun owner doesn’t cut the mustard the writing is on the wall and gun laws will and have to change. If you have a semi give it up and be glad to! Otherwise you are a scary asshole. The gun law changes in Oz are the litmus test of a successful policy and we must do the same.
It is also interesting and important to delve into why people become fanatics. The shooter was only 28, he became radical somehow, apparently quite quickly. Also the way he was financed or financing himself is unusual, and the way he killed people like he was the terminator or like he was playing a video game is very disturbing. His humanity clearly on hold what did that to him?
“Don’t deflect from describing what white supremacists are: a terrorist group with a religious doctrine, albeit not a very intelligent one. ”
Nailed it 100%
What a cheek. Why so hostile? I’ve no idea who Nick is, nor his posting history. So, I am a white-supremacist apologist? I think this is absolutely outrageous and I am only commenting here to point out that New Zealand society is not “whiter than white” (sorry about the pun) when it comes to racism, institutional and personal, and that a hysterical witch-hunts such is happening on this site and thread lead nowhere. I can’t stand the hypocrisy and self-regarding that prevails here. The Christchurch assassin didn’t appear out of nowhere even though he has the ultimate responsibility for his appalling act.
Who are they? Have you ever met one? Well, to the first, they are not just people whose jobs have been offshored, but often relatively educated people whose world view is like Trump’s – as their manifesto acknowledges – and who are good at using social media to advance those views.
Have I ever met one? Yes. Neighbours of a friend of mine are exactly those people. She was a publicist for Pauline Hanson. My friend is afraid of them. They are smart and organised.
People whose livelihoods have been threatened by the neo-liberal agenda may grumble and can be very racist, but survival is their main objective. You are right that we need to address the causes of local inequality. WE also need to address the causes of global instability and acknowledge our country’s part in them.
You are right Janine, our country and our associations seem to me deeply compromised. We are very intertwined with and beholdent to the “empire”. How we break lose who knows? I do know that we marched enmasse in 1981 to send a message, today I don’t see we have critical mass or commitment to do this. I hope I’m wrong.
Keith what you are talking about is removing or countering the causes of Islamophobia or other demonisation of groups, and withdrawing from wars and warlike activity.
Plain common sense ignored by all NZ govts.
It was not only followers of Islam who have been rejected as fellow human beings but the yellow peril, the Vietnamese, Koreans, Turks, Russians, Boers, atheists, pacifists, LGBTs and many others.
The wealthy power players who seem to have a problem with universal humanity, don’t want peace among humankind but manipulate and divide populations using fear, faux patriotism, half truths, outright lies, false flag events, character assassination, religion, control of news and media, coining of terms such a radicalised, antisemitism, leftist and any name that can be coined by PR firms who work for them in controlling public opinion.
In the 20th century many million were slaughtered and many more millions left with damaged bodies minds and communities though deliberately manufactured wars. After a war has passed the history is written by the victorious in a version that suits their agenda. The glorious dead is a myth we are encouraged to subscribe to.
It is not the person in the street nor the mother or father of families who want war but they bear the consequences with families paying dearly in many ways for the viscous unconcienced power play between marauding fractions stealing land, resources or other prizes to increase their peronal wealth.
Until we have a more open education system teaching both young and old about critical thinking, then there will be insufficient understanding in the community to counter the manipulation we suffer under.
NZ is quick to jump into wars lead by the UK and now the USA.
john key moved us into NATO without any public discussion or mandate from the people to do so, and yet there was no outcry from the harnessed MSM. Manipulation from the top but acting for who, not NZ.
Them and us, fear and anxiety, retribution and greed are all used in a dangerous distortion of the universal values held by most people of the world.
Those things have to be recognised
As the grief settles and the fifty dead New Zealanders are laid to rest, it is time to act so the chances of this ever happening again are reduced.
At the very least:
1.Royal commission into why our security services failed us. We’ve passed umpteen laws increasing surveillance; doubled and trebled spy agency budgets since 2008. But they still failed us.
Real questions need to be asked.
And resignations made.
2.Ban all semi-automatic weapons – these killing machines are not needed in private hands.
3.Stop visiting alt-right “missionaries” from overseas. Coming to our country is not some inalienable right.We don’t need them. The consequences when someone acts on their toxic ideology has been shown to be deadly.
We don’t allow ISIS, Al Qaeda, et al, to come here. So why do we allow other extremists to visit?
These are a start. This is not a “knee jerk”. If we don’t review and act now, we’ll never do it.
Thank you Keith.
I’m quite happy to label myself Islamophobic.
It is a stand against aspects of an ideology, not the people who practise it. The later might or should better be termed muslimophopia, something I reject.
I stand for the values of the enlightenment and reason. I reject cultural and religious persecution and murder of the LGBT community, of atheists, of blasphemers and apostates. I reject the subjugation of women, violent punishments for adultery, theft and religious trangression.
I can say with certainty that your knowledge of Islam is minimal at best and drawn from dubious sources at least. Sources that are incapable of distinguishing a Shiite from a sh*thead. Were they to apply the same myopia to Christianity they would be unable to tell the Jim Jones cult from the Salvation army.
Agree Richard Christie 100%. Disagree Keith Locke. It seems Keith thinks we white people are thought governed by our old links from the olden days. That’s insulting and damn inaccurate as hell. I judge people by what they do, not what they say and certainly not history. I don’t like the way they treat there women, is one thing, this is not promoting hate, is it?
Try Yvonne Ridley on women in Islam:
https://youtu.be/xFZrSPUoH3I?t=19
Totally agree with your message here Keith, and I would add that clamping down on people’s freedoms to speak, assemble, or organize, do not help Muslims or make any of us any safer either. In fact I believe they do the opposite, and I’ve sent Bomber a guest blog piece explaining exactly why, which I hope gets published on TDB.
One thing I’m not so convinced of is this:
> One takeaway from the Christchurch massacre seems to be that a violent act by a “lone wolf” is very hard to detect.
Firstly, this man was not a “lone wolf”. He was part of the Bruce Rifle Club in Dunedin, which according to a very convincing video by a teary-eyed gun owner, had been reported to the local Police as a potential source of hate crimes.
Secondly, the Police have demonstrated an impressive ability to infiltrate activist groups who go to great lengths to conceal *non-violent* direct actions until they happen (remember Nick Hagar’s expose on Rob Gilchrist). Given the resources they poured into Operation 8, I find it extremely worrying that they did not seem to investigate a club carrying out firearms training in a politicized cultural atmosphere and monitor its members for any signs of plans to carry out a *violent* act. There’s more to this story.
The Tama Iti and the Urewera Raids got more attention from the SIS and the NZ Police than the Bruce Gun Club ?
May be it was a skin colour issue with the SIS, NZ Police and Helen Clarke ?
Keith, thankyou for your blog, putting an historical context on current events.
Although it’s positive to see the widespread sympathy for Muslims and rejection of the massacre, there are several things I find contradictory. First, a part of the sympathy seems to me a rejection of what people previously thought about Muslims. Certainly, a social move led by Jacinda, towards accepting Muslims is a positive thing.
I heard a woman called Imogen talking on RNZ (18/3) about the Muslim women’s group she is part of, lobbying government to get support to counter the racism they encounter daily. She detailed the many demands they made over recent years. One was that funding to support them should match the money spent on surveillance of them. No government has met any of their demands.
Another disturbing aspect of the massacre was the support for the live footage from hundreds of people on facebook.
Some of these posts mention smugness and complacency. I agree, we can praise ourselves for what we do right, but recognise what is nasty in our society. Thank you for spelling this out Janine, Nick J,John W and the others who did.
I have checked with RNZ. The Muslim woman I heard is Anjum Rahman of the Islamic Women’s Council of NZ. Susan Devoy is speaking out about the same rejections she had from government when she spoke with/for the Islamic Women’s Council. I am impressed with Dame Susan then and now.
A while ago I wrote in a blog something that was completely misconstrued. The phrase was something like “useless gays like Richard the Lionheart and Alexander the Great”. This was of course meant to be satirical, they were amazing men. To my amazement the comment was deleted and now, when for example I published a blog with the word “nightmare” in it (relating to overcrowded cities), I find my comment is “awaiting moderation”. Censorship? You bet.
Assuming this text does not also get deleted, I feel I should point out some facts relevant to the Christchurch massacre.
We are all a type of ape. It’s official – if you’re prepared to believe Stephan Hawking. What makes us different is the 1 or 2 percent DNA differences that have almost certainly led to the towering difference – speech. Speech has allowed us to hand knowledge down to our children. It has led us to the enormous differences in the way we live compared to our cousins.
Unfortunately, it has also led to the continued existence of superstition. Our natural fear of death has of course led to religion. Unfortunately, the selfish characteristics which we needed to survive on the Serengeti have often worked against us when it came to religion. The (Catholic) church has a horrific history that is entirely related to the power it had. Read the history of the Cathars in early 13th century France if you want some graphic examples. Popes and Cardinals were politicians (for “politician” read “opportunist”). The Church was the only way to power if you were not born into the aristocracy.
Fortunately for us, the Church eventually lost it’s power and has now subsided into relative obscurity (apart from where we all know they still had some power – no more said). The process of removing that power took hundreds of years.
So, what about Islam? Much the same hisory but the power is still very much there. The history is however tragically different in one respect: Islam was born amidst a series of vicious conflicts between the Church and anyone who dared think differently. This is of course reflected in the text of the Quran. If the Quran were anything but the statement of such a powerful religion it would of course (and quite rightly) face criticism as a hate speech manual.
Now, enter the concept of what I will call Group Dynamics (GD) and their effect on large disparate groups by the acts of a small percentage of extremists. There’s no doubt that the perpetrator of the Christchurch massacre is a psychopath. Notwithstanding that, the act was of course waiting to happen. You don’t get a constant stream of similar acts across the world by a small percentage of one group (calling themselves the voice of their religion) without something like this eventually happening. How many churches will pay as a result? We don’t know, we only know they will.
So, the GDs of isolation and fear rule the roost. The acts of the few have led to the isolation of the many and a mutual feeling of fear and hostility between neighbors. This has inevitably escalated, isolation leads to more unemployment etc etc – a feedback effect.
In the case of Islam all this is unfortunately exacerbated by the degree to which the holders of that faith are bound to it. Christians go to church once a week. They do their worshipping 5 times a day. The unfortunate psychological outcome is that they are virtually blind to the necessary action: The Quran MUST be edited. It’s a red flag to every extremist bull. I know those who suggest it will initially face the same forces as the Church used against it’s internal critics. But it MUST happen.
Stability through censorship simply won’t cut it. Addressing the problem will require a major effort to convince Muslims that the Quran in it’s current form is quite literally a danger to society. It’s not a task I would envy anyone and certainly not one our clueless media would currently dream of even mentioning. However, the consequences of failure are huge. Eventually, a physical separation of the communities with all that that implies. Impossible you say? It has already happened once in Europe’s history. There is already a real risk of serious civil unrest in countries like France We simply cannot afford to ignore the elephant and continue to turn the other cheek.
Constructive replies appreciated, cries of “Racist”, “Far Right” etc. etc. expected.
Thank you Keith. I enjoy your articles. And I guess you would know how wonderful our NZ security services are having been surveilled by them since childhood.
“Many New Zealanders have picked up Jacinda Ardern’s theme “this is not us” but unfortunately this message is only partly true. Islamophobia is deeply embedded in our society.”
Racism is deeply embedded in our society. Unfortunately it is us.
From the security intelligence services, police, public service who deem that only controlled people are to be allowed in positions of power. To the agencies who control our controllers.
To the nice people who are shocked by this horrific event but once burn out will go back to their boxes and continue on with life as normal.
And yes we send troops to help fight Muslims in the Middle East because we have to do our duty. Millions of Muslims have been killed in wars in the ME. And we have been complicit in this.
Madeline Albright thinks killing 500,000 Iraqi children was worth it. And Israel’s despicable actions against Palestinians in Gaza? Shhsh we can’t say anything because that’s anti-semetic. So ME countries are bombed back to the stone age because ‘democracy’ oh and ‘weapons of mass destruction’. But really It’s all about the oil baby.
So we worry why radicalised Muslims? The answer is pretty obvious.
And the EU lets in refugees from those Middle Eastern countries they helped destroy. And the leaders of countries who don’t want unfettered immigration (a la NZ) eg Hungary, Poland, Austria to a lesser extent, are labelled as fascists and Nationalists – verging on ‘white supremacists’. Nazis even. While the Nazis in the Ukraine are armed and loved. (They might be Neo Nazis but they’re our Neo Nazis). Trump in the USA. (except Obama sent more illegal immigrants home than Trump has). And now the right is evil and the left are angels.
And suddenly we get a white supremacist shooting Muslims in New Zealand?
So how did this happen?
NZ is a small place – someone knows someone who knows someone else.
The police were warned about the rifle club he belonged to – they did nothing
The police were warned about the growing white supremacist faction in Christchurch and their love affair with guns – they did nothing
We belong to 5 eyes. They share intelligence – they did nothing
John Podesta and Clinton were here a few days before the shooting and met with Ardern – ever read Podesta’s emails? And still we know nothing.
The alleged shooter was in Turkey prior to the bombings and left shortly after. He would have been flagged and on everyone’s list – we did nothing.
The SIS said he had no criminal convictions so they did nothing.
NSA data gathers are at work – they did nothing.
I’m sure Keith knows that if these agencies really wanted to they would have done something. This is 2019. The technological age. Available Equipment, including mind altering techniques supersedes anything James Bond would have had and still NOTHING was done.
I’m obviously missing something.
ANd Frank you are a bit missionary in your zeal. Black and white, right and wrong. If you don’t agree with me I’m not open to different view points. Kia kaha bro.
That’s fine, Ian. Feel free to point out where you disagree. We can weight up the merits of different opinions thereafter.
why is it my longer pieces go straight to moderation. i don’t get a chance to edit them.
Also normies don’t get a chance to publish terrorist bibles here, or islamaphobia, or white guilt. It kind of forces people to be more reasonable and better people. In my opinion it wasn’t some social media strategy it was just a way of differentiating the Daily Blog from the other sewer blogs. Want instant highes there plenty of that out there.
The GCSB and SIS don’t investigate White Supremists because they regard them as being in their team.It’s practically in the job description!!!
Comments are closed.