NZ bans semi-automatic and assault rifles after mass shooting

[lannarebirth]

19 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Look I get it and I don't want to come across as too pedantic but you do keep bringing up what most of us see is a very obvious deflection from a poster who isn't exactly a liberal (perhaps our previous knowledge of the poster leads us also to this conclusion). 

I am all for people asking genuine questions that they need clarification on (which I do believe is the case with you) but you must be kinda new to this forum as this sort of thing goes on all the time with people posting nonsense inference all the time without anything to back it up. This was a guy with a lot of issues (obviously) and perhaps there was many reasons why he did what he did, but the nature of the attack (shooting 50 Muslims in a mosque) clearly demonstrates the overriding premise that he is a white supremacist and any attempt to veer away from that narrative just comes across as deflection in an attempt to justify their own prejudices. As the saying goes; if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck......... 

And the word 'equally' was my word not his. But it still rings true.   

Is being a white supremacist the same as being anti Muslim? Honest question.  I mean there must be other immigrants of color, but they don't seem to be targeted. I'm not sure the labels matter, but maybe he's crusading Christian nutjob. A Christian supremacist.  When the Buddhists were slaughtering Muslims in Burma you couldn't call them white supremacists could you?

Edited March 29, 2019 by lannarebirth

[ShortTimed]

Look I get it and I don't want to come across as too pedantic but you do keep bringing up what most of us see is a very obvious deflection from a poster who isn't exactly a liberal (perhaps our previous knowledge of the poster leads us also to this conclusion). 
I am all for people asking genuine questions that they need clarification on (which I do believe is the case with you) but you must be kinda new to this forum as this sort of thing goes on all the time with people posting nonsense inference all the time without anything to back it up. This was a guy with a lot of issues (obviously) and perhaps there was many reasons why he did what he did, but the nature of the attack (shooting 50 Muslims in a mosque) clearly demonstrates the overriding premise that he is a white supremacist and any attempt to veer away from that narrative just comes across as deflection in an attempt to justify their own prejudices. As the saying goes; if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck......... 
And the word 'equally' was my word not his. But it still rings true.   

Yep, new here but have recognized there are some locked in personalities here and sides established. It took me several days to understand that many posters here choose to communicate in very passive-aggressive methods that have been fine-tuned to fly under the radar...barely.

At first, it threw me into a likewise hostile mode of response but that really ruined my days.

Thanks for the email.

I think I am better off reading the photography sub-forum...Lol

[samran]

15 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

Is being a white supremacist the same as being anti Muslim? Honest question.  I mean there must be other immigrants of color, but they don't seem to be targeted. I'm not sure the labels matter, but maybe he's crusading Christian nutjob. A Christian supremacist.

Well if you are going for your 'bread and butter' KKK type then they bang on about western civilisation's foundation is based on Christian values. They'll hate all strands of non-protestant Christianity and have a tough time with Catholics, the two main reasons is they are supposed to be answerable to Rome and they think that Catholicism is basically the devils religion anyway. They were really suspicious with Kennedy being elected the first Catholic president.

 

Some of your more 'progressive' white supremacists will talk about Jeudo-Christianity, and your more spiritual types will bring in the Norse gods into the picture, I think because they were also the ostracised dungeon and dragon computer geeks and that helps colour their fantasy world.

 

The rest are basically mud people, mixed breeds to them, lesser humans if you will and a threat to their state of existence.

 

The Jews were their whipping boys for years and years (and still are) but you need to be careful as its politically not good for your reputation to go too hard on the Jews these days in right wing political circles. As such, the Muslims are the new favoured go to group to sink the boots into.

 

If at some point they find that it isn't politically possible to go to hard on the Muslims, theyll set them aside (like the Catholics and Jews) and find another easy target to go for. As long as they can paint that new group as 'other' then thats all they need to compensate for their penile dysfunction.

Edited March 29, 2019 by samran

[lannarebirth]

3 minutes ago, samran said:

Well if you are going for your 'bread and butter' KKK type then they bang on about western civilisation's foundation is based on Christian values. They'll hate all strands of non-protestant Christianity and have a tough time with Catholics, the two main reasons is they are supposed to be answerable to Rome and they think that Catholicism is basically the devils religion anyway. They were really suspicious with Kennedy being elected the first Catholic president.

 

Some of your more 'progressive' white supremacists will talk about Jeudo-Christianity, and your more spiritual types will bring in the Norse gods into the picture, I think because they were also the ostracised dungeon and dragon computer geeks and that helps colour their fantasy world.

 

The rest are basically mud people, mixed breeds to them, lesser humans if you will and a threat to their state of existence.

 

The Jews were their whipping boys for years and years (and still are) but you need to be careful as its politically not good for your reputation to go too hard on the Jews these days. As such, the Muslims are the new favoured whipping boys (and girls).

 

Thanks for that.  I tend to see him more as a xenophobe that just can't process people from an alien culture in his domain. Not a supremacist by any means, a scaredy cat.

[samran]

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

Thanks for that.  I tend to see him more as a xenophobe that just can't process people from an alien culture in his domain. Not a supremacist by any means, a scaredy cat.

Well, to the extent that most bullies are really fearful little turds underneath.....

 

The think they are better, implicitly cause they are white (and protestant) and that is all they need. So yeah, I think supremacist is a fair term.

[ShortTimed]

Well if you are going for your 'bread and butter' KKK type then they bang on about western civilisation's foundation is based on Christian values. They'll hate all strands of non-protestant Christianity and have a tough time with Catholics, the two main reasons is they are supposed to be answerable to Rome and they think that Catholicism is basically the devils religion anyway. They were really suspicious with Kennedy being elected the first Catholic president.

 

Some of your more 'progressive' white supremacists will talk about Jeudo-Christianity, and your more spiritual types will bring in the Norse gods into the picture, I think because they were also the ostracised dungeon and dragon computer geeks and that helps colour their fantasy world.

 

The rest are basically mud people, mixed breeds to them, lesser humans if you will and a threat to their state of existence.

 

The Jews were their whipping boys for years and years (and still are) but you need to be careful as its politically not good for your reputation to go too hard on the Jews these days in right wing political circles. As such, the Muslims are the new favoured go to group to sink the boots into.

 

If at some point they find that it isn't politically possible to go to hard on the Muslims, theyll set them aside (like the Catholics and Jews) and find another easy target to go for. As long as they can paint that new group as 'other' then thats all they need to compensate for their penile dysfunction.

 

A pretty humorous explanation but ED sufferers should rightfully be offended by your suggesting it leads to violence.

 

Do you suggest the choice of muslims as the most recent target is just chance then?

 

Nothing to do with any actions of muslims?

 

And nothing to do with their migration into predominantly anglo countries and competing for housing and jobs?

 

 

[ShortTimed]

 
Thanks for that.  I tend to see him more as a xenophobe that just can't process people from an alien culture in his domain. Not a supremacist by any means, a scaredy cat.

This is the best explanation I have heard yet.

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, ShortTimed said:

And nothing to do with their migration into predominantly anglo countries and competing for housing and jobs?

 

"competing for housing and jobs"? In Christchurch?

[justin case]

the next big war will be a local one, called RACE WARS... 

only predicted since about 30-40 years

[ShortTimed]

"competing for housing and jobs"? In Christchurch?

 

I believe the post I was responding to was a general discussion on white supremacists and I continued in that vain.

 

Thats the danger of editing quotes.

It can risk appearing as a form of a strawman argument.

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, ShortTimed said:

I continued in that vain.

I'd agree 100% with that

[samran]

13 minutes ago, ShortTimed said:

 

A pretty humorous explanation.

Do you suggest the choice of muslims as the most recent target is just chance then?

Nothing to do with any actions of muslims?

And nothing to do with their migration into predominantly anglo countries and competing for housing and jobs?
 

Not by chance, just the easiest latest target, the freshest off the boat. We are talking about a group of people who need to hate, and will find any reason for it.

 

Based on Australian and NZ migration patterns, the favoured whipping boys before the muslims in reverse chronological order have been:

 

Asians in the 80s and 90s (The Vietnamese were all commies who were out to kill us a few years earlier, remember);

Southern Europeans in the 50's and 60's (poor people, economic refugees who had just been shooting at us a few years earlier in WW2)

Jews in the lead up and post WW2 (historical whipping boy)

Chinese around the turn of the century (cause, you know, they breed like rabbits, work too hard etc etc)

Irish in the 1800's (Catholic scum)

Any native inhabitant from European settlement (easy to lace waterholes with poision to get that tract of prime grazing land)

 

As for your comment about 'competition' for housing and jobs, the goose steppers don't know if they are arthur or martha on this issue. Basically anyone on that list is Schrodinger's immigrant to you, simultaneously stealing your jobs and your benefits at the same time.

Edited March 29, 2019 by samran

[samran]

9 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

"competing for housing and jobs"? In Christchurch?

yeah, I know...funny one...

[ShortTimed]

I'd agree 100% with that

 Oh yeah good one. 

Vein not vain.

 

I appreciate the posters who correct spelling, punctuation and grammar for everyone. All too often it is under-valued on a forum but everyone needs to be appreciated.

 

 

 

[samran]

2 minutes ago, ShortTimed said:

 

Not stealing anything from me.
 

...this was the 3rd person 'you'.

[ShortTimed]

...this was the 3rd person 'you'.

 

Sadly you switched from first person “We” in your first paragraph. Best to keep it the same throughout, eh?

[Hank Gunn]

On 3/21/2019 at 9:15 AM, Spidey said:

It was your constitutional right to own slaves. That particular amendment was repealed. The same could be done for the right to bear arms.

Don’t know if this has been addressed yet, but there is/was nothing in the constitution that gave the right to own slaves. After their experience with the British, the founding fathers of the US didn’t trust strong central governments, so left it to the individual states to make it legal or illegal. In fact, by 1787, 10 states had already banned slavery.

 

The only part of the US Constitution that addresses slavey is the 13th Amendment, outlawing its practice.

[ShortTimed]

Samran,

 

I did admire your chronology of the various immigrant groups and they might very well be accurate for NZ; however, in some countries that early influx of asians resulted in a large exodus from North America so much so that their re-appearance in recent decades is more like a fresh group.

 

Yet, even though they bring with them a very unique culture and physical appearance from the existing anglo culture, they are not experiencing the same reaction as muslims.

 

Ofcourse, there have not been any Asian or SE Asian terror cells taking innocent lives in these countries either so to suggest the various islamic fundamentalist attacks have not fueled the white power movement does not appear well supported, or atleast cannot be immediately dismissed.

 

Just saying there is no connection is insufficient.

 

 

 

[Bluetongue]

19 hours ago, samran said:

 

Your posts are full of the standard tripe which does the rounds in the alt right echo chambers and which bubbles to the surface in forums such as this. 

 

Step 1: maintain the shooter wasn’t one of ‘us’.

 

Water muddying ‘oh we don’t really know the motives of the shooter’ -cause the fact that he was a Muslim hating white supremist doesn’t suit the alt-rights narrative the shooter was one and was inspired by them.

 

It doesn’t sit the narrative that the white supremist that are the same form of sub-species that bred ISIS. Same same but different as they say here. 

 

You blokes will do anything to differentiate him and make him someone else’s creation. Other versions of this spin we saw included statements that he was really an eco warrior communist and other BS. 

 

Step two: spin some more fake news about something you would have absolutely no way of knowing - but which feeble minded readers will take as gospel. 

 

So while you are sowing doubt on that front, you speak with absolute certainty on what Donnie and Ardern spoke about on the phone, again, cause it suits your agenda to paint the victims as ‘other’ and the NZ prime minister as some sort of incompetent fool. 

 

Other examples of this spin strategy were that the NZ police were slow to respond and that one of the victims actually had a gun to fight back ( he didn’t) and thus, imagine what would have happened if those kiwi gun laws weren’t so strict  (ergo, we need to arm everyone)..

 

anyway, keep your stories coming. But if you could add in a Jason Bourne angle, they’d be even more entertaing.

 

 

 

 

You really have quite a vivid imagination also. Firstly because I said we will never know exactly what the truth about the shooter is, you happily converted that to me saying the "shooter wasn't one of us" which if you are talking about us here on this forum is most likely true but isn't what I said or implied. If you believe that some boy from Grafton grew into some kind of monstrous white supremacist all on his little ownsome fine, I don't. The racists in Grafton are worried about the aboriginals walking the streets, they think manifesto is the spanish word for what a truck carries, and they would be lucky to be able to write let alone write 70 pages. He might have gone to North Korea to play tiddlywinks. Yes the most likely conclusion is that he's getting help from a group of muslim hating white supremacists but until that is proven its only a theory. Secondly I only quoted exactly what Ardern said when she talked in public about the phone call with Trump again you changed it to suit your opinion. Well done. Then you added in a paragraph of your own creation and implied that was my view also. However I would say that having the NSW police blundering about some hamlet on the North Coast 4 days after the event does make me wonder about that whole 5eyes super efficient intelligence network thing. Lastly I note that President Erdogan has been busy making political capital out of this, probably just opportunistically in your view because everything is just peace love and happiness in the real world 

[johnnybangkok]

2 hours ago, samran said:

Well if you are going for your 'bread and butter' KKK type then they bang on about western civilisation's foundation is based on Christian values. They'll hate all strands of non-protestant Christianity and have a tough time with Catholics, the two main reasons is they are supposed to be answerable to Rome and they think that Catholicism is basically the devils religion anyway. They were really suspicious with Kennedy being elected the first Catholic president.

 

Some of your more 'progressive' white supremacists will talk about Jeudo-Christianity, and your more spiritual types will bring in the Norse gods into the picture, I think because they were also the ostracised dungeon and dragon computer geeks and that helps colour their fantasy world.

 

The rest are basically mud people, mixed breeds to them, lesser humans if you will and a threat to their state of existence.

 

The Jews were their whipping boys for years and years (and still are) but you need to be careful as its politically not good for your reputation to go too hard on the Jews these days in right wing political circles. As such, the Muslims are the new favoured go to group to sink the boots into.

 

If at some point they find that it isn't politically possible to go to hard on the Muslims, theyll set them aside (like the Catholics and Jews) and find another easy target to go for. As long as they can paint that new group as 'other' then thats all they need to compensate for their penile dysfunction.

^^^What he said^^^

[johnnybangkok]

1 hour ago, ShortTimed said:

 

A pretty humorous explanation but ED sufferers should rightfully be offended by your suggesting it leads to violence.

 

Do you suggest the choice of muslims as the most recent target is just chance then?

 

Nothing to do with any actions of muslims?

 

And nothing to do with their migration into predominantly anglo countries and competing for housing and jobs?

 

 

And then you go and spoil it all with a nice bit of victim blaming.

 

[Peasandmash]

On 3/21/2019 at 10:26 AM, Spidey said:

Not what happened in the UK. Very draconian penalties for gun possession. Get caught with a gun, 5 years. And yes, if you don't surrender your gun you will get a visit and a jail sentence. The majority of guns in the hands of criminals came via thefts/burglaries from law abiding citizens. Remove guns from society and you remove guns from criminals.

 

Gun crime has reduced dramatically. Mass shootings down to zero.

 

As for the constitution, constitutions can be changed.

mmm I'd rather take my chances getting shot than live in the Islamic city of London and worry about being run over by a truck or having acid thrown in my face while on a stroll or being stabbed while eating at a restaurant. Oh sorry, that was the Islamic city of Paris where you get stabbed with your wine and cheese.

[Spidey]

24 minutes ago, Peasandmash said:

mmm I'd rather take my chances getting shot than live in the Islamic city of London and worry about being run over by a truck or having acid thrown in my face while on a stroll or being stabbed while eating at a restaurant. Oh sorry, that was the Islamic city of Paris where you get stabbed with your wine and cheese.

No. Paris is where terrorists spray a theatre with bullets. 90 dead. France doesn't have the same gun laws as the UK.

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts and replies have been removed.  Please discuss the topic rather than discuss other members. 

[roo860]

No. Paris is where terrorists spray a theatre with bullets. 90 dead. France doesn't have the same gun laws as the UK.

The weapons used in the Paris attacks were Kalashnikov automatic weapons, which are banned, but available on the black market after the Balkans conflict, France is awash with illegal firearms.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Yellowtail]

9 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Look I get it and I don't want to come across as too pedantic but you do keep bringing up what most of us see is a very obvious deflection from a poster who isn't exactly a liberal (perhaps our previous knowledge of the poster leads us also to this conclusion). 

I am all for people asking genuine questions that they need clarification on (which I do believe is the case with you) but you must be kinda new to this forum as this sort of thing goes on all the time with people posting nonsense inference all the time without anything to back it up. This was a guy with a lot of issues (obviously) and perhaps there was many reasons why he did what he did, but the nature of the attack (shooting 50 Muslims in a mosque) clearly demonstrates the overriding premise that he is a white supremacist and any attempt to veer away from that narrative just comes across as deflection in an attempt to justify their own prejudices. As the saying goes; if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck......... 

And the word 'equally' was my word not his. But it still rings true.   

You really have no business claiming to know what I may or may not infer. I inferred the guy is a white supremesist and was asking what white supremacist groups he was associated with, which received no real response other than an attack.

 

I went on to say in a second paragraph that the guy claimed to be a eco-fascist, implying perhaps the guy was not as right-wing at the left likes to presume. 

 

I think it fair to say that anything that is not in line with your strict leftist doctrine is a deflection or trolling or any number of other punishable offenses. 

[simple1]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I think it fair to say that anything that is not in line with your strict leftist doctrine is a deflection or trolling or any number of other punishable offenses. 

Stop the BS - read the manifesto - the killer is a far fight extremist

[Thainesss]

30 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Stop the BS - read the manifesto - the killer is a far fight extremist

 

Says right in the manifesto that he was an eco fascist and fan of communist China.  

[Thainesss]

28 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Please cease this kind of post.

 

It is crystal clear the guy is a far right violent extremist. Apply just a few moments of comprehension - China is a strict authoritarian dictatorship which has detained millions of Chinese Muslims in 'educations camps', doesn't permit migration of foreigners. promotes replacing ethnic minorities with 'pure blood line' - Han Chinese. The guy played ultra Serb Christian nationalist (genocidal killers of Muslims) music just before his killing spree, used the language of the far right e.g. 'invaders'.

 

Eco fascist - background

 

"important aspects of it can be found in German National Socialism, one of whose central slogans was "Blood and Soil"

 

OK - enough of the attempted deflection for the killers ideology - thanks

 

Im not going to “cease” anything and you certainly aren’t arbiter of truth by any means. 

 

Everything you just quoted is politically & environmentally LEFTWING. You clearly don’t want it to be and sure as shit don’t him to be affiliated with your side of the political spectrum, but he is, and that is a fact. 

 

Communism - LEFTWING. 

 

Socialism - LEFTWING. 

 

Eco-facsism - LEFTWING. 

 

And now the leftwing NZ government is going even more authoritarian and banning guns. 

[Thainesss]

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

Utter rubbish

 

Those are facts. Own it.