At least 40 people, including children, have been murdered in gun attacks on two mosques in Christchurch. I lived there for 35 years, and while it wasn't perfect, it was always peaceful and generally safe.
Now four white supremacist cowards, people with nothing to be proud of but the color of their skin, have opened fire on unarmed civilians. They've besmirched a beautiful city that is only just recovering from the trauma of a major earthquake.
I've no time for the mosques or the Islamic religion, but those people didn't deserve this, especially the children.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
@ Algebe
I was watching this on YouTube TV. Sad. Really sad that can happen anywhere. All due to nothing more than philosophical disagreement.
I am with you on this, "I've no time for the mosques or the Islamic religion, but those people didn't deserve this, especially the children."
I may be die-hard against religion, but this is just … abhorrent. My fight is against ideology. NEVER the people. I may seem to get a bit rough with my words, but this is NEVER the answer.
I even remember the alert my apps give me about any earthquake/volcano that occurs anywhere on the Earth.
And now this.
***humbly bows head to give a hard, heart-felt moment of silence***
rmfr
It is a tragedy, I have no sympathy for Islam but as far as I am concerned, these people were innocent, although even if there were guilty of something, this does not warrant a death penalty.
According to the biblical fairy tale Jesus demands that a certain number of believers must be killed before he returns. So it seems that if they are killed during a religious service he will be very pleased.
Surah 9:111 = "111. God has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties in exchange for Paradise. They fight in God’s way, and they kill and get killed. It is a promise binding on Him in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Quran. And who is more true to his promise than God? So rejoice in making such an exchange—that is the supreme triumph."
It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet said:
"There are no two Muslims, three of whose children die before reaching puberty, but Allah will admit them to Paradise by virtue of His mercy toward them. It will be said to them: 'Enter Paradise.' They will say: 'Not until our parents enter.' So it will be said: 'Enter Paradise, you and your parents."'
Grade : Sahih (Darussalam)
Reference : Sunan an-Nasa'i 1876
In-book reference : Book 21, Hadith 59
English translation : Vol. 3, Book 21, Hadith 1877
https://sunnah.com/nasai/21
Volume 9, Book 93, Number 621 :
Narrated by Al-Mughira
"Our Prophet has informed us our Lord's Message that whoever of us is martyred, will go to paradise."
https://www.sahih-bukhari.com/Pages/results.php
I think we can all agree that providing you have a moral compass that no one has the right to take anothers life!
No matter if you have different skin colour, theological/philosophical points of view, race, gender, sex, whatever subject you choose... no one, has that right.
Whomever did this, is nothing short of a disgusting primitive twat and should simply be locked in solitary confinement for the rest of their miserable lives and have the key thrown away.
I'm expecting Islamic retaliation. WWIII begins in New Zealand. Who would have imagined it.
Randomhero1982: Complete agreement. And then I wonder if the peaceful religion of Islam is peaceful enough to understand the situation in the same way we do?
I certainly hope so, but I'm sure this kinda of crap will continue.
How I long for a fully atheist country, based on naturalist and humanist ideals and values.
Just to get away from this medieval shit show.
Sorry,,,,, I do not believe it is possible. The best we can hope for is a majority and then the Christians will be bombing us instead of abortion clinics. Just the way I see things. Many theists are not right in the head.
"I'm expecting Islamic retaliation. WWIII begins in New Zealand. Who would have imagined it."
Just gives the other extremist side cause. Because of some crazy extreme shitheads who believe in different deities do this to each other, the rest of will suffer.
"Just gives the other extremist side cause. Because of some crazy extreme shitheads who believe in different deities do this to each other, the rest of will suffer."
Sadly that;s exactly what such acts of cowardice are meant to achieve, to bring more idiots to swell the ranks of racist and religious bigots on opposing sides. Sadly I hold little hope we will run out of such people any time soon.
The only way to fight religious and racist extremists is to live as good a life as we can, and reject their bigoted ideologies and speak out against intolerance and hatred.
Hate an idea, be intolerant of ideas that don't respect the value of a single life, or denies that we should *ALL have the same rights, but never hate people just because they disagree with you, or hate anyone for the asinine stupidity of our disparate appearance.
If you mapped the genome of two gorillas from the same forest, you'd find more genetic diversity than you would between any two humans, because we are a younger species in evolutionary terms. The sheer stupidity of the racism espoused by the cowards who committed this crime is almost beyond comprehension.
Sheldon: Nicely put!
My heart is heavy from the news of this event.
We may have our differences, but such atrocious acts of violence have no place in this world, and should be condemned by all. I hope that both theists and atheists who may visit this site find common ground in rejecting such a philosophy of horror and violence.
David Killens,
"I hope that both theists and atheists who may visit this site find common ground in rejecting such a philosophy of horror and violence."
From a religious pov I can never get upset when people are killed in churches, synagouges, or mosques. Their religions reward believers who are killed while worshiping by giving them an express ticket to heaven or paradise. And since they want to go there that seems to be an excellent way to achieve their desire. As the Bible says, Jesus demands that a certain number of believers must be killed before he returns. And because believers say that they want Jesus to return some have to pay the price with their lives. They will have a wonderful eternal life in heaven or in paradise.
One consequence of the incident is that the NZ government wants to deprive people of their right to own guns. So the killer has done in 40 minutes what no one else has been able to do very easily. He has gotten people ready to give up their freedom for the illusion of safety. This will probably turn out to be a very bad thing for them in the long run. Today it will be guns, tomorrow it will be freedom of self-expression (which is already under attack) because it might trigger someone to go nuts and turn violent. Soon everyone will be living in an oppressive police state and the dummies will think that they are free.
Imagine how hysterical the whiners will be in America after the next three mass shootings if NZ does ban guns. They will go all out to do the same thing here and around the world. What kind of freedom does anyone have if it is conditional and can be taken away from everyone (except the people in charge) because of the actions of a handful of bad people?
So I don't get upset when people get killed while worshiping their favorite deity because he demands that they get killed. He rewards them for that. That belief is part of their religions so they need to stop crying about it.
What upsets me is how the autocrats use such incidents to chip away at our freedoms. One day we won't have any. Is the guy a legitimate nutcase or had he been brainwashed into doing the killing as part of some unknown conspiracy? That can't be dismissed especially if we lose more freedoms as a result.
@Diotrephes
You should know better and not spread false information. There is zero plans for NZ government to deprive people of their rights to own guns. All that has been done so far is people to agree to talk about some possible gun control ideas on monday.
And there is zero interest in removing the freedoms of self-expression (I assume you mean freedom of speech.)
What you wrote is fear mongering. 50 unarmed innocent people died, and you want to jump in and say that people in NZ are going to lose all their freedoms from this. This will not equal a oppressive police state. Even when countries begin to enforce more gun control those countries do not turn into oppressive police states.
How anyone can argue that everyone should have easy access to powerful weapons of war assault weapons is completely beyond me. We dont let just anyone buy an RPG with unlimited ammo, same should apply to assault rifles designed to only do 1 thing well, kill a lot of people quickly and easily, and win a gun fight with greater firepower, impact damage, faster reload and larger capacities.
In the end it does not really matter to me. I think we should institute reasonable gun control laws to try and minimize horrible incidents like this, but the odds that I or anyone I know will get killed in a mass shooting is very, very low. I worry more about our over crowded highways then I do about guns as I think any logical reasonable person should.
LogicFTW,
"You should know better and not spread false information."
The plunge to full-blown oppression alway starts gently. The anal-retentives jump on incidents such as this like a pack of hyenas swarming a wounded zebra. Once they start taking away freedoms they continue until no one has any except them. They suffer from the Moses complex.
" At a news conference, the prime minister reiterated her promise that there will be changes to the country’s gun laws. She said her Cabinet will discuss the policy details Monday.
Arden used some of her strongest language yet about gun control, saying that laws need to change and “they will change.”
Neighboring Australia has virtually banned semi-automatic rifles from private ownership since a lone gunman killed 35 people with assault rifles in 1996."
https://apnews.com/419df740e2464e47b416b2dcc6128cdb
Censorship in action =
"Sky News taken off the air in New Zealand over Christchurch terror coverage"
https://www.theblaze.com/sky-news-new-zealand-terror
BTW, do you have any idea how many gun laws there are now?
In 2008 it was claimed that there were about 20,000 gun laws in the United States = https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/how-many-gun-laws-are-there-study-d.... Imagine how many more have been passed in the last 8 years.
I fully agree US gun laws are a mess, we need less of them not more. Also most any gun law is mute if it does not cover everywhere inside secured borders.
For instance chicago can institute all the gun laws it wants, but it does not really matter what chicago does if someone can drive 50 miles over state lines and pick up a ar-15 at a gun show, no paperwork necessary, no background check etc, and then order mods like bump stocks and large mags online with detailed instructions on how to install. Or even at the very least some sort of permitting system like we have for decidedly less deadly cars (cars are deadly but they are not designed to kill they are designed to protect.)
Back to the Rocket Propelled Grenade example, the US does not have a problem with RPG attacks we don't hear about 200 people killed by rpg in a crowded area, even though an rpg would even more effective at killing large groups of people easily and quickly then say an AR-15. Why because there is a lot of control over RPG's nationwide. There is no where someone can go to a legal gun show and buy an RPG + ammo.
Me personally I would be happy with 1 simple nationwide law that controls guns like how we control vehicle ownership. Permitting, licencing, classes, and the ability to take away those licences if people are not responsible with it (for example: not securing powerful weapons in a gun safe or letting kids play with it etc.)
I have zero problem with responsible gun owners, of which the vast majority of gun owners are. These gun owners should be pissed not at the law makers trying to solve the problem, but instead at the tiny minority of gun owners that betray the trust of everyone in a very open ended and currently easy to obtain guns... legally.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Censorship in action =
"Sky News taken off the air in New Zealand over Christchurch terror coverage"
https://www.theblaze.com/sky-news-new-zealand-terror
---------------------------------------------------------
I think you need to read that link rather than skimming the headline. As it wasn't censorship, it was SKY itself that has taken Sky News Australia off the air in the country over their coverage of the massacre at two mosques in Christchurch. They were reacting to the Australian network replaying footage from the atrocity, and have stated they will keep it off the air until they can be sure the footage won't be replayed.
So it's not an act of censorship but a corporate decision on how their brand behaves. Do you think it is appropriate for the families of victims to be subjected to newsreel footage of their loved ones being murdered, including children? Personally I applaud SKY news's decision, especially since the video footage was made by the murderer in the hope it's content would stir up hatred. The facts are surely terrible enough, without rerunning videos of the carnage on television.
Sheldon,
“Do you think it is appropriate for the families of victims to be subjected to newsreel footage of their loved ones being murdered, including children?”
This is a case of classic censorship since the Powers That Be (PTB) don’t want people to know what is happening in the world unless they can put their spin on it to fit their agenda. People got killed. So what? That is not out of the ordinary, it happens every day. This incident is of historical importance and people have the right to see it in the raw unedited version.
Right now the anal retentives want to throw people in prison for even having a video of the incident. Imagine what they would do if someone had a video of space aliens. If the PTB had been in charge during some past events, like 9-11, the JFK assassination, or the December 7, 1941, Pearl Harbor attack, they probably would have imposed a life sentence on anyone who had a video of the events.
New Zealand Threatens 10 Years In Prison For ‘Possessing’ Mosque Shooting Video
“New Zealand authorities have reminded citizens that they face up to 10 years in prison for “knowingly” possessing a copy of the New Zealand mosque shooting video – and up to 14 years in prison for sharing it. Corporations (such as web hosts) face an additional $200,000 ($137,000 US) fine under the same law.”
https://www.infowars.com/new-zealand-threatens-10-years-in-prison-for-po...
So it seems that one result of this incident is that it shows that the action of one person can deprive an entire nation of people their right to freedom. At this rate in a few years 1930s Nazi Germany will seem like the land of unfettered freedom.
edited for spacing.
Diotrephes -
https://www.infowars.com/...Maybe you could link a version of the story from a non-nutjob source?
it sounds a highly dubious claim to me, and as you say I couldn't find a single credible source corroborating the claim. I'm also baffled why anyone would want to see that video anyway, it goes way beyond bad taste to broadcast it.
Nyarlathotep,
"Maybe you could link a version of the story from a non-nutjob source?"
As you wish =
"The Government has made the determination that all shares of the video including by media organisations that might be edited to not show the graphic content is now objectionable."
Prior to receiving that advice on Sunday, Facebook had not wanted to intervene in editorial decisions made by the media, he said.
The maximum penalty under the Objectionable Publications Act for being in possession of an objectionable publication is 10 years in jail, while the maximum penalty for sharing such material, for example by reposting it, is 14 years."
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111358665/facebook-taking-action-agains...
New Zealand man, 22, arrested for allegedly distributing video of mosque shootings
Mar 17, 2019 5:53 AM ET
"A 22-year-old man from New Zealand has been arrested in connection with distribution of the video recording of Friday's tragic mosque shootings that killed 50 people.
The 22-year-old, who has not been named by police, will be charged under the Films Videos and Publications Classification Act. He is expected to appear in court Monday."
"We would like to remind people that it is an offence to distribute or possess an objectionable publication (under the Films Videos and Publications Classifications Act 1993), which carries a penalty of imprisonment," New Zealand police said in a statement.
https://abcnews.go.com/ABCNews/zealand-man-22-arrested-allegedly-distrib...
Australian who posted comments about Christchurch shootings cries in court
"An Adelaide man who posted social media comments in support of the Christchurch mosque massacre has been granted bail on condition he keep off the internet."
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-shooting/111384322/christc...
Different reporters may write the same story in multiple ways but in this case the control freaks are eager to throw your ass in prison for even possessing the video or writing about it.
OK thanks; I don't waste my time with the claims of Alex Jones.
So that law was already in place before this atrocity took place though? It's not like the NZ government has done anything here as those sentencing guidelines were already enacted in laws about sharing objectionable content. The law has been in place since 1993, so 26 years.
"Australian who posted comments about Christchurch shootings cries in court
"An Adelaide man who posted social media comments in support of the Christchurch mosque massacre has been granted bail on condition he keep off the internet.""
Fuck him, why should anyone sympathise with a scumbag like that?
"Different reporters may write the same story in multiple ways but in this case the control freaks are eager to throw your ass in prison for even possessing the video or writing about it."
The law in NZ prohibiting the spread of objectionable material is 26 years old, and applies to all of its citizens. So your hysteria and hyperbole are nonsensical again. It's also nonsense to claim anyone else in Australia could publish anything condoning those attacks, as the scumbag did in the story you linked, and avoid the legal consequences, and fucking rightly so.
There are grieving families out there, why should they have to view their loved ones including children being gunned down by this animal, and why the fuck should they have to read morons like that one in Australia condoning it? This is a no brainer...
Sheldon,
"There are grieving families out there, why should they have to view their loved ones including children being gunned down by this animal, and why the fuck should they have to read morons like that one in Australia condoning it? This is a no brainer..."
Crimes are committed against society, which is why societies punish the perps instead of the victms' families doing retribution. Therefore members of society have the right to know who the perp is and how he did it. It is irrelevant if the "grieving family" doesn't like it. The process must be open and transparent and not done in secret.
I don't believe in the political correctness (PC) bullshit that wimpy limpy snowflakes try to impose on humanity.
What has reporting the details of the crime got to do with the story you linked of an Australian man crying in court when he was brought to trial for condoning the vile atrocities on social media? You realise that's a crime don't you?
How on earth can people breaking the law by sharing videos of the attack be irrelevant to the suffering of the grieving families? Why do you think the NZ authorities have classed the video as objectionable material, the law is an existing one created 26 years ago, so again what's the problem?
"The process must be open and transparent and not done in secret."
What process, what's being kept secret? No one needs to see those children being murdered, that's obscene, and the guy in the story you linked who was charged and taken to court for condoning these vile racist attacks deserved it if he is guilty, so again what is your issue with this?
"I don't believe in the political correctness (PC) bullshit that wimpy limpy snowflakes try to impose on humanity."
Duly noted, Though I don't see what PC has to do with my post, since I was addressing your post and the two cases you cited of criminal acts, do you think criminals should be punished or not? I don't see what relevance PC has to that sorry.
A man broke the law in Australia by condoning the attacks - he was charged and tried, job done.
In NZ a 26 year old law prohibits objectionable material being shared. Again the NZ authorities made the correct decision that the video of these vile attacks, purportedly by the man responsible, represent objectionable material, and I wholeheartedly agree, it's hard to see how anyone can disagree to be honest. Unless you think "snuff" videos showing mass murder including children are not objectionable? It's hard to imagine a more obvious example of objectionable material in that format to be honest. hence it is illegal to share that video. I mean if you are going to insist nothing be censored where would you draw the line, how about videos and images of sexual attacks on children, must they remain in the public domain or should these be censored to avoid them being shared?
I'm simply not seeing the problem you have with either of those linked stories sorry. No one should be sharing graphic images of violent crime, and no one should be allowed to condone hate crimes and mass murder with impunity in any decent society. Luckily both NZ and Australia have laws in place prohibiting both acts.
Sheldon,
"What process, what's being kept secret? No one needs to see those children being murdered, that's obscene, and the guy in the story you linked who was charged and taken to court for condoning these vile racist attacks deserved it if he is guilty, so again what is your issue with this?"
Technically it wasn't a racist attack but a religious attack. The religious fairy tales have no problem with believers being killed for their beliefs. They insist on it and reward the victims with express tickets to heaven or to paradise. So if the people actually believe in their fairy tale the victims hit the cosmic jackpot and won't end up in hell where they will be tortured for eternity. And the child victims can get their parents into paradise, so that is a good thing for all concerned, isn't it?
They problem is that people claim to believe in the fairy tales until the shit hits the fan then they become wimpy limpy whiners. Sorry, but I don't shed any tears for anyone who is killed in a church, synagouge, or mosque. According to the fairy tales they have hit the cosmic jackpot and their favorite deity will reward them for dying while believing. I save my few tears for other victims.
BTW, the Jewish Babylonian Talmud approves of baby raping of two and three year-old infants. And most of the Bible and the Koran is disgusting. Why don't the control freaks ban those piles of crap?
"Technically it wasn't a racist attack but a religious attack."
I see, they're mutually exclusive then are they? So all the racist rhetoric was pretence I suppose? Is the KKK not a christian movement? My memory must be playing tricks on me.
I've read that first paragraph twice, and don't see how it is remotely relevant to any of this....
"What process, what's being kept secret? No one needs to see those children being murdered, that's obscene, and the guy in the story you linked who was charged and taken to court for condoning these vile racist attacks deserved it if he is guilty, so again what is your issue with this?"
"Sorry, but I don't shed any tears for anyone who is killed in a church, synagouge, or mosque. "
I don't care as it has zero relevance to anything I said in my post, but thanks for clarify your appalling views.
"the Jewish Babylonian Talmud approves of baby raping of two and three year-old infants. And most of the Bible and the Koran is disgusting. Why don't the control freaks ban those piles of crap?"
They should, but that sadly is another non-sequitur. I remember you could be strange on certain topics, but did you always leap about ignoring the previous posts like a frog on amphetamines? It's like interviewing someone with amnesia.
1) What process is being kept secret as you claimed.
2) What's the problem with this cretin in Australia being jailed for condoning mass murder on social media?
3) What's wrong with applying a law that prohibits the distribution of objectionable material to a video of mass murder, including children?
F-O-C-U-S
https://www.theblaze.com/sky-news-new-zealand-terror
Your own link shows it was not censorship by "the powers that be". SKY took their own network off the air, to ensure the appalling mass murder was not broadcast on their network, good for them, no one needs to see that, especially when there are grieving relatives out there.
"So it seems that one result of this incident is that it shows that the action of one person can deprive an entire nation of people their right to freedom. At this rate in a few years 1930s Nazi Germany will seem like the land of unfettered freedom."
That's the most ridiculous hyperbole I've ever read on here, I think you need to calm down, and dial down the paranoia.
As expected, we are dealing with white supremacists.
I refuse to use the word supremacist for these miserable cowards, and the colour of their skin is irrelevant.
They are racist, bigoted cowardly morons, and that is all the description they deserve. I hope they live long miserable lives in some hell hole prison, where they can each and every day contemplate the cowardice of this act in shame.
It wouldn't break my heart if they were forcibly buggered on a regular basis either.
"white supremacists." AKA *Extreme Right Christians*
Pages