My concerns around the agreed media protocols of covering the terrorist trial

30
7
Am I the only one concerned at how the entire mainstream media have colluded together to cover the white supremacist trial?
When the Allies took the Nazis to Nuremberg, it wasn’t enough that they won legally against the Nazi’s, but that their entire warped ideology was challenged and destroyed as well.
That’s what the State should be doing here against Tarrant. It shouldn’t be enough to just find this pus bag legally guilty, his demented and mutated beliefs should also be put on trial and destroyed and the media should be helping in that by righteously countering any of his crazed rantings.
Instead we have a mainstream media terrified of creating social media outrage by the perpetually outraged on twitter who demand no platforming. Fawning to the ‘I’m-feeling-unsafe-don’t-trigger-me-crowd’ under the guise of ‘responsible coverage’, they are pandering to their woke audience, not informing them or the wider news audience.
I wonder about actual the NZ generation who fought Nazi’s face to face would respond to our need for trigger free safe spaces in combating this same warped ideology.
We need independent journalism not an agreed self censorship between the big corporates.

30 COMMENTS

  1. I’m inclined to agree with you Martyn but I keep circling back to these 2:

    1. Those ideas have already been discredited beyond repair in the past and so rehashing the “debate” only flatters his atavistic degeneracy (atavistic – relating to or characterized by reversion to something ancient or ancestral)

    2. Putting his “beliefs”, “on trial” is therefore redundant, serving only to effectively distribute his manifesto, but with the key factor of the implied suggestion that those ideas merit debate.

    That last bit on point 2, I find it very chewy. And there’s a bonus 3rd point

    3. His suffering sentence begins right now with the frustrations, the uncertainty, the false hopes that get dashed repeatedly. That torment of the special justice system. That drawn out needlessness of the process. A special sort of Hell wraps around him.

    F@<K his ideas and F@<K him.

    • I agree with doc. One of the rare times I disagree with you Martyn. This needs no oxygen whatsoever and comparison twith the Nazis is drawing far too long a bow.

    • Doc,

      Are you really frightened that allowing the fetid ideas of the defendant to be suppressed is going to stop others seeing them?

      Do you opine that your fellow citizens aren’t ethical, moral or clever enough to discern the good from the bad?

      Does hiding the criminality of the defendants views from the public set a precedent? Would we have tried the Nazis in camera? Does this take us down a path where public scrutiny of the legal system is denied?

      I’m with Martyn, to be blunt shit stinks but it needs cleaning and to be seen to be clean

      • ok firstly, im not frightened about people not consuming his ridiculous concepts. why would I be? that doesn’t even.

        secondly, that’s not what I opined. What you asked if I did. So yeah

        thirdly his views are just stupid, and irrelevant… not criminal.

        fourthly he isn’t Hess or Goebbels or something, he’s a gunman. He had no reichsministry or whatever give me a break

        and lastly, the justice system? Im scrutinizing it right now son.

        You’re allowed to be with Martyn, that’s cool. It’s cool. But really, about your last point… making things clean again? You’ve got to be joking right, you’re talking about tipping out a septic bucket, you want cleanliness.

        Let me know if you think

  2. I think most of NZ want to pretend as quickly as possible that the slaughter of 51 people didn’t happen. It doesn’t fit our image of ourselves as a friendly, welcoming, peaceful nation. So the best thing to do is to make sure we (and the world) aren’t reminded of it any more than is strictly necessary in order to see the gunman behind bars and forgotten forever.
    It is a very childlike approach… if I close my eyes the bad man will stop existing. We don’t really need a chief censor at all. Just a media terrified of opening its eyes and reminding us, yes, that happened here.

    • Very much.
      The worst coping strategy ever devised is to pretend it didn’t happen.
      Nothing is learned and people are encouraged to be offended little snowflakes.
      Look the short loser in the face, tear his rantings to shreds and shut him away until he dies an old man with nothing.

    • I can attest to the fact that many New Zealanders are ‘childlike’, whether people like to hear this or not. It is such naivety and ignorance that abounds here, that men like John Key were voted in as PM three times, and that our present PM may be reelected into government again next year, simply for being such a ‘nice’ woman, marrying a ‘nice’ man and having a child while working as PM.

      Never mind the real issues and challenges, that is what keeps this country back, such ‘childlike’ and often ignorant thinking and behaviour.

      So we get ever more nanny and/or big brother approaches from governments, as the people know nothing much else.

  3. No way, Martyn, we must not have ‘political’ or even ‘ethical’ trials or whatever such subjective trials in our courts.

    If we go down that way, we will become a true dictatorship, the courts must be independent and interpret the law as it stands, no Sharia type laws and/or moral preacher kind of law application, thanks.

    The man committed mass murders, and he acted with terrorist intent, nothing else needs to be added, that is the so far alleged offender.

    • And, of course, the media should not even go that way to self censor, they should do their job as independent journalists and not sensationalise, but report facts openly.

  4. Hi me again. Had to make an add on

    People want all the dirt regarding motive in this case, dirt that just goes on and on because he built it just like he made his IED petrol bombs in the car for you. A booby trap

    – Sufficiency of mental element mens rea for the murder charge(s) is readily found in the video footage demonstrating general intent to break the law and evidence of premeditated planning.

    – Therefore no deep dive into his diaries is required by the prosecution, and…

    – The Defense lawyers know that floating his manifesto/personal beliefs in a mitigation context would be counterproductive and only aggravate his sentence further, although…

    – Were his defense to be Insanity, and he were found insane in this pre trial phase, there will be no exchange of evidence and it will conclude with indefinite mental health detention.

    So you can see there is actually nearly zero probative value attached to the scrutiny of what he may have believed was important. What matters is, he intended to kill. That’s established. And he did so in abundance and that is mass murder. The minutiae of his personal fantasies is irrelevant.

    A suitable counter-campaign to this incident, in the public arena should focus on displacing toxic beliefs with healthy ones in a rising tide of community vibe, to emphasize our best qualities and turn them up. You could call it vibe displacement. You could call it Psychoprobiotics.

    But his stuff is just diseased meat. You wouldn’t feed it to a dog… so why would you put it on the table? it aint no venison …

    aaand im done

  5. Hi me again. Had to make an add on

    People want all the dirt regarding motive in this case, dirt that just goes on and on because he built it just like he made his IED petrol bombs in the car for you. A booby trap

    – Sufficiency of mental element mens rea for the murder charge(s) is readily found in the video footage demonstrating general intent to break the law and evidence of premeditated planning.

    – Therefore no deep dive into his diaries is required by the prosecution, and…

    – The Defense lawyers know that floating his manifesto/personal beliefs in a mitigation context would be counterproductive and only aggravate his sentence further, although…

    – Were his defense to be Insanity, and he were found insane in this pre trial phase, there will be no exchange of evidence and it will conclude with indefinite mental health detention.

    So you can see there is actually nearly zero probative value attached to the scrutiny of what he may have believed was important. What matters is, he intended to kill. That’s established. And he did so in abundance and that is mass murder. The minutiae of his personal fantasies is irrelevant.

    A suitable counter-campaign to this incident, in the public arena should focus on displacing toxic beliefs with healthy ones in a rising tide of community vibe, to emphasize our best qualities and turn them up. You could call it vibe displacement. You could call it Psychoprobiotics.

    But his stuff is just diseased meat. You wouldn’t feed it to a dog… so why would you put it on the table? it aint no venison …

    aaand im done

    ps sorry if this transmits twice…

  6. “When the Allies took the Nazis to Nuremberg, it wasn’t enough that they won legally against the Nazi’s, but that their entire warped ideology was challenged and destroyed as well.”

    Two things Martyn

    1. Nazism was defeated after 6 years gruelling warfare and millions butchered. Fascism lost all credibility and it was done through physical violence we socialise by calling it “war”

    2. There was no internet to spread the hate through echo chambers

    You’re comparing apples with potatoes

    Do you really want the Christchurch terrorist to use the trial as a platform for his murderous ideology??

    Why the fuck would anyone want that??

    Please dont give us the bs that we can challenge his ideology. We can’t. You dont get a chsnce to stand up in court and give your two cents worth None of us do

    But you’d certainly be platforming him. And giving the next killer Tarrant’s ideology to motivate them

    You spend too much time fixating on allowing rightwing psychos the right to spread to toxic shit to radicalise other rightwing nutters

    At what point would you say NO, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?

  7. I can see arguments for and against shutting down this Australian mass murderer’s motivations

    However the crucial point is that he murdered in cold blood 51 people and seriously injured more ( this can not be justified no matter what your political ideology)

    He should be tried as an Australian mass murderer ( and not as an Australian terrorist, who argues ends justify means)

    As well as this Australian’s mass killing of innocent people in Christchurch …he violated the people of Christchurch and New Zealand’s sovereignty….I have yet to hear the Australians apologise to New Zealand !

    ( what conclusions can we draw from this?)

    I would very much like to know who this Australian mass murderer’s Australian and international associates were ( not just the ones he used as a cover/front ) ….and whether there were others with vested interests in his mass murder which he perpetrated in Christchurch?….was he a madman swayed by others ?…or a lone wolf?

  8. Limiting the concept of the freedom of the press is an extremely serious matter, even when they do it themselves.

    In this case it could be argued that his motivation is irrelevant, if they merely prove he did the crime that should be sufficient. The only reason to go deeper is if there is something deeper to uncover, such as other individuals involved. If he worked alone, surely the motivation for the crime becomes a lesser issue.

    Personally I think banning the manifesto is a more serious issue; it gives the impression that either;
    1. The Govt consider we are all such idiots that we don’t have the mental facilities to not be taken in by his reasoning, which is highly offensive to all NZers, or
    2. that there is something in it which the Govt want to hide from the population. This is an extremely bad look. An example of this is the claim that he said he thought communist China had the perfect government, while being described by the media as ‘far right’. The contradictions in these two statements alone are creating far more fuel to feed extremism than letting us read the ravings of a madman ever would.

    Kim Jong Un knows all about limiting the DPRK population access to the internet, in case they read something that is not good for them. Why are our leaders following his deranged example? So much for open government.

    • +100 good points

      Those who have read the manifesto don’t think he wrote it himself…it is full of Americanisms and contradictions…nor is it what one would expect from your usual white supremacist

      …so this leads to the conspiracy theory and a cover up theory ( as opposed to a lone wolf)

  9. Martyn why do his beliefs need to go on trial? A belief that you should be able to kill 51 people because they aren’t the same as you is wrong. No matter which way you look at it a belief that you can murder people has no place in society. So this is not some freedom of speech thing, it is the trial of a man who killed 51 people. He killed them, if he is not insane then he needs to be removed from society. His ideas and justifications are irrelevant and do not need to be aired.

  10. Psychiatric assessments may well restrict trial ‘accessabilities’ anyway.
    If it goes under Mental Health, the lid is on.

  11. Sorry, what? You want to give Tarrant a platform? Why would you do that??

    Giving him a platform to espouse his vile views so it motivates another neo-fascist white supremacist to go out and kill more innocent people?.

    If the blood of innocents is the price you demand for free speech Martin, that’s a price to high. Especially if it’s the blood of others.

    Tarrant had his right to free speech up until he pulled the trigger and shot to death his first victim. After that, he forfeited that right. His only right left To him is a fair trial and that’s it. He has no right for a platform. None whatsoever.

    • No Comrade – I have no desire to give this pus bag a platform, but he is defending himself so he has that. What I believe is that alongside his prosecution for the legal atrocity he has perpetrated his toxic ideology should also be denounced and defeated. jUST AS The Allies did to the Nazi’s at Nuremberg.

      • I doubt very much that the Nuremberg trials would pass the high mark of modern day jurisprudence, they were to some degree a show trial, not sticking to simply finding people guilty on evidence, but also ‘sending a message’.

        It was the occupiers’ chance to tell those following the trials to where the journey would go from there.

  12. IMMINENT INEVITABLE PERPETUAL PERMANENT DETENTION

    Case closed, thanks for coming folks. Mystery solved! Ha, yup a scumbag.

    who knew? jk folks

    If anyone is interested in floating some eco nazi commie fascist mass murder fusion ideas, freestyle, now then please FEEL FREE TO DO SO

    Now’s the fuckin time assholes

  13. Little wonder the curtains have been closed around this fellow Tarrant as from what I can find nothing we’ve been told is true. Nothing!!

      • it’s the PATHWAY to the truth that Concerns me.
        The truth requires due diligence
        Habeas Corpus
        Open Forum.
        Contest.
        What I am trying to say about it
        Is not being printed here.

  14. Not at all sure an entire generation of Kiwis fought the Nazis on righteous grounds at all — to put it mildly. Judging from retro interviews of old WWII veterans the Nazi soldiers were great soldiers who just happened to be on the other side, and the Yanks were the ones who were disdained.

Comments are closed.