Father shields his 2 year old son from multiple bullets. He is in critical condition.
The gunman sent the Prime Minister a warning email minutes before his shooting spree.
The death toll from the New Zealand mosque massacres rose to 50 today, as the prime minister said the racist killer had emailed a “warning” to her office nine minutes before he opened fire on worshippers.
Jacinda Ardern said her staff had passed the warning – within a more than 70-page “manifesto’ written by the Australian-born shooter, Brenton Tarrant – to parliament’s security staff two minutes later. By the time the warning, which gave no location for the intended shootings, reached police, Tarrant, 28, had begun shooting at 300 worshippers in central Christchurch’s Masjid al-Noor mosque where 43 died.
Bad. /quote]
Ethnic, racial terrorist. He is a trump fanboy because he thinks that Trump believes the way he does, but Trump would not advocate mass murder or genocide.
I wasn't going to make any political comments here, as I didn't feel it appropriate, however, It is my full belief, that violent talk and actions breed and bring more violence. It indeed IS Trump who loudly and proudly hollered "punch him in the face, I will pay the lawyer fees" some folks use fists, some use firearms, each act equally as violent, hate to say it, but it's my belief that in large part this is what Trump ran his campaign and administration on and it has influenced alot of crazies as well as influenced a good number of otherwise normal People. Violence begets violence, idiotic, bigoted talk and behavior from a leader, will always beget idiotic and violent thoughts and actions in a certain amount of the People, Trump has catered to the lowest, most bigoted and hateful members of Society, these are the folks he inspires.........Peace........joe
Interesting, I would ask “at what point do people take responsibility for their own actions and quit blaming others”?
My goodness BIGV Your beloved President has spent a lifetime and made a living not taking responsibility and blaming others, no? As to Your statement,
Well, that sounds great, if You are assuming that all People are completely rational and mentally reasonable, i think we know that is not the case, i am pretty sure, from all the absolutely insane and nonsensical carnage and general hatred and bad behavior, that a good many folks are incapable of taking responsibility for their own actions, they are extremely vulnerable to being influenced by rhetoric delivered by someone powefull, wealthy and influential, all the things they are not. My best buddy over the years has been and old Vietnam Vet who refuses to retire, he is a kind and generally generous guy, he is Mr.Normal Americana in every way, he has always been hard right wing and slightly bullyish, now that he takes all his cues from Trump, he finds it completely ok to constantly belittle folks, shout at people to get what he wants, etc, here is an otherwise good guy that has been influenced by things he sees and hears on Fox News or AM Coast to Cost radio . Just saying if You think deranged People don't fall under the influence of rhetoric such as Trump delivers, I believe You would be very much wrong..........Peace.....joeFirst of all Joe, You and I do not correspond much here so I appreciate the opportunity at dialogue. Now, as I have stated on many occasions, I voted for Gary Johnson. Period.
I could not disagree more with the points you've attempted to present above. You are responsible for your actions in life, plain and simple. Step in front of a Judge and tell him your behaviors are not your own because someone, anyone, from the President to your Plumber influenced you. Write us from jail and keep us posted on how that goes. Make decisions that are beneficial to you and the ones you love, live with those choices. If you do not, I care not one Iota for any argument put forth that includes an inference towards blaming anyone else. Sorry. Your decision, your price to pay.
Nobody was saying the terrorist's behavior was not his own. That would only be the case if it was a "mental health issue".
I'm in OZ again. Got here last Friday, day of shooting. Besides deadly snakes, dangerous spiders, 4 years of record heat waves, deadly fires, biker gangs, etc, when i 1st came down in 2016 i noticed many signs of right wing extremism. Nazi symbols in sidewalks, chalk writings under bridges and anti immigrant rhetoric from politicians. Actually some of their politicians are racists themselves (like Steve King). I am not surprised by this. Racists and bigots have a safe place on the internet and they are growing.
This guy was from Australia. Funny how NZ doesn't think its to early to speak of new gun control legislation.
On a related note
He cryed in court.
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by LeglizHemp]
Besides deadly snakes, dangerous spiders, 4 years of record heat waves, deadly fires, biker gangs, etc, when i 1st came down in 2016 i noticed many signs of right wing extremism. Nazi symbols in sidewalks, chalk writings under bridges and anti immigrant rhetoric from politicians. Actually some of their politicians are racists themselves
I hope you aren't planning on working for the Australian Tourist Bureau. You make it sound like Mad Max.
LOL, actually its very nice down here. They do have the same problems we do though.
I could not disagree more with the points you've attempted to present above. You are responsible for your actions in life, plain and simple. Step in front of a Judge and tell him your behaviors are not your own because someone, anyone, from the President to your Plumber influenced you.
Nowhere in his post did he suggest such a thing. Stop trolling, or learn to comprehend.
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by BoytonBrother]
Nobody was saying the terrorist's behavior was not his own. That would only be the case if it was a "mental health issue".
OK, and my comment was not as much directed in an absolute sense at the terrorist who committed this atrocious act but, at the attitude that is displayed by people who attempt to blame or defend others for said actions.
a good many folks are incapable of taking responsibility for their own actions
now that he takes all his cues from Trump
if You think deranged People don't fall under the influence of rhetoric such as Trump delivers
All three of these statements point the finger at someone else "It's not their fault!...This person's words influenced them to act in a way they can not be held responsible for"....Once again it is the attempt at deflection of responsibility that boggles my mind. Who holds more blame?...The person who claims it was someone else's thoughts that spurred him to action?. Or the inevitable argument that will spew forward from the Attorney's mouth who was hired to defend his lack of responsibility?
All three of these statements point the finger at someone else "It's not their fault!...This person's words influenced them to act in a way they can not be held responsible for"....
They don’t say that at all. Stop embarrassing yourself by showing us all you can’t comprehend what you read.
Once again it is the attempt at deflection of responsibility that boggles my mind.
A lot seems to boggle your mind.
I don't get how being influenced is a dodge of responsibility. Every idea and action is a result of "influence".
Crazyjoe was pointing out some obvious influences stoking current oinker behavior. "I was just following orders" didn't fly at Nuremberg, and still doesn't.
The "personal responsibility" idea applies to role models and public personae as well, they need to take responsibility for what they promote.
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by BrerRabbit]
I don't get how being influenced is a dodge of responsibility. Every idea and action is a result of "influence".
Disagree, that is exactly what being "Influenced" is, especially when that is the claim. One can be "Inspired" and go in a direction he has chosen and one that he is entirely responsible for.
One can be "Inspired" and go in a direction he has chosen and one that he is entirely responsible for.
That was Chain’s exact point. Stop looking for an argument.
Semantics - "inspired by" and "influenced by", for all practical purposes the same thing. One can be influenced and go in a direction he has chosen and is entirely responsible for.
Example: Dr. Josef Mengele, directly influenced and inspired by Hitler, chose a course of action he was entirely responsible for. History has acknowledged both his influences and total personal responsibility.
There are many discussions people have to have. Questions, changes in perceptions and thinking. The entire Muslim world over in areas where we deem there are a lot of terrorists, wonder why this man has not been referred to as a terrorist. It is like we have reserved the word terrorist only for Muslims.
We could change our references to people and just call them bombers, gunmen, shooters, that takes religion out of it.
Even the word extremist has many different connotations. If we focused on the actions of the people doing these crimes it may be more accurate, that is what I am saying.
We also need to look at why we as a civilization value war and occupying other countries and covertly changing the powers and governments in charge helping to launch coups so that other people can be put in charge who will suit geo political agendas. If we as a civilization RESIST war and find other ways to solve conflicts it will be very clear and easy to see who the extremists are that want to kill people they do not agree with or those with different views than they have.
Another thing is why is it okay to train military personnell as trained killers and then when one goes rogue and goes too far just look the other way and 'neither deny nor confirm' anything. This guy reportedly went to North Korea and Pakistan 49 times before this rampage. No he was NOT radicalized in a madrassa by any Muslims, he hates the Muslims, so who else caused him to act the way some radical Muslims act (like Isis) thinking mass murder is an okay thing to do? Who trained him, who gave him those beliefs? What about the other people with him? There surely are MORE.
Even when the military are not going rogue, they place so little value on the lives of other team members they are capable of killing their own. Yes this is probably an exception, but why does it happen?
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by gina]
The mass shooter wants to represent himself in court. He goes back to court April 5th. He says he is fighting against mass migration and multi-culturalism.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/zealand-shooter-represent-himself-court-193023058.html
"Tarrant was partially inspired by Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik, who used his own trial to expand on his crazed political ideology. For instance, on the first day of his trial in 2012, Breivik claimed his attack was an act of "self-defence" against mass migration and multiculturalism. Extracts from his propaganda videos were played during the trial and on at least one occasion he gave a Nazi salute in court. "
He planned it so well. He even told his landlord weeks before the attacks he would not be needing his apartment anymore.
This is the new prison where he will probably be sent to.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12214428
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by gina]
The weapon the shooter used was a Military style weapon. He did not purchase that at the gun store.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/zealand-shooter-represent-himself-court-193023058.html
"The MSSA, military-style automatic, reportedly used by the alleged gunman was not purchased from Gun City. Gun City did not sell him an MSSA, only A-category firearms," said David Tipple."
Remarks: The gun laws currently in New Zealand do provide for background checks, but they only register the person buying a weapon, NOT the weapons themselves. They never had to be a country worrying about things such as what recently happened. If people bought weapons, they used them responsibly and there were no problems. Now there will be sweeping reforms.
Some local residents are so shaken that they are giving up their weapons. They do not want any more violence.
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by gina]
AND IT JUST GOT WORSE
Isis is calling for revenge of the deaths of the Muslims in the attacks.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12214414
"The terror organisation's spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir is believed to have issued an appeal in a 44-minute audio recording. The New York Times reports that al-Muhajir broke six months of silence to call for retaliation.
"The scenes of the massacres in the two mosques should wake up those who were fooled, and should incite the supporters of the caliphate to avenge their religion," he said.
Al-Muhajir likened the massacre to the ongoing battle at the terror organisation's only remaining piece of territory in Syria. "Here is Baghuz in Syria, where Muslims are burned to death and are bombed by all known and unknown weapons of mass destruction," he said.
"Mr al-Muhajir belittled the White House's claim of victory over the terrorist organisation, calling it a 'state of confusion and contradiction that make it impossible for any observer to know what is meant by the word 'victory'."
Remarks: It is understandable why they are incensed at Muslims being murdered just because they are Muslims. But those Muslims in those masjids were not supporters of Isis's ideology, so the unification they seek is not there with these Muslims. There is no ongoing jihad in New Zealand to establish a caliphate there. The people are content to live with the ruler that Allah has put in charge over them, because the correct belief is to accept the will of Allah, he is the one who can remove any regime or ruler at his will. This is one thing the Afghans understood, they accepted Karzai and Chani even though they did not believe in the government the way it is or some of the goals of that government. The future for them is probably to have some provinces where they have control and governance there, while the cities remain as they are now. How that all pans out if our troops leave Afghanistan is yet to be determined. When Mullah Omar and his men took over the country, he said they did it because there was no law, no order, they had to do something because of the abuse of the common people, including the women, several of whose families went to Taliban seeking justice. Omar sought to re-establish law and order in the country, which he did. He said you could even leave a bag of gold in your car nobody would steal it after they took over power. People knew punishment would come, so crime went down.
One has to wonder if there are people/groups who want to start a sectarian war between Islam and everybody else. In this particular instance the guy planned the attack for two years, but with all the planning, he didn't do a drive by to even know where the front door of the masjid was. That is very strange.
[Edited on 3/19/2019 by gina]
Semantics - "inspired by" and "influenced by", for all practical purposes the same thing. One can be influenced and go in a direction he has chosen and is entirely responsible for.
Can you believe you have to teach that?
Semantics - "inspired by" and "influenced by", for all practical purposes the same thing. One can be influenced and go in a direction he has chosen and is entirely responsible for.
Example: Dr. Josef Mengele, directly influenced and inspired by Hitler, chose a course of action he was entirely responsible for. History has acknowledged both his influences and total personal responsibility.
Thanks for the lesson in subjectivity and semantics (lol). Being "somewhat" individually interpretative, that door is always open....
"for all practical purposes"....Would you argue that point in a Court of Law? I doubt it; not very successfully.
"Inspired" to commit the annihilation and extermination of a group of people, nice example. I'll just stick with murderer. If you don't understand the difference between the two terms, well....the point being, because of their varied usage, if they are applied as a form of reason, the implication is an avoidance of personal responsibility.
I don't get how being influenced is a dodge of responsibility
Because we are referencing an individual who single handedly was responsible for the Deaths of 49 Human beings. Either he did it or, he did not. No other person here is responsible unless he conspired with others, making the words "inspired" and "influenced", totally, non-sequitur.
Not sure where you are going with that, I guess you just really don't like the idea that people influence others.
Got other fish to fry:
. . .wonder why this man has not been referred to as a terrorist.
Gina you've read more reports on this than any of us, how did you miss the main statement by the New Zealand Prime Minister on every newsfeed on the planet?
"It is clear that it can only be described as a terrorist attack."
— New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
Not sure where you are going with that, I guess you just really don't like the idea that people influence others.
I don't believe in blaming others for your actions, no matter the recipe.
I will rephrase it one last time, then let it go: How is pointing out influences shifting the blame?
Look, ok, let's frame this in a way you relate to: You are a total Barry Manilow freak right? Ok, say you prance down the street dressed in a spandex sequin suit blasting "Mandy" out of a boombox.
Now - Anyone would say "That guy is influenced by Barry Manilow, but it's his own damn fault he looks like a reptilian disco mirror ball." Nobody would blame Barry Manilow, but we would at least know what kind of weirdness Manilow was generating.
Acknowledgment of influence doesn't shift blame in any way. It does however, help us to see where the signal is coming from, so we can respond appropriately, like maybe download Barry Manilow records for free instead of paying for them - or buy his records if we like him, either way. Wag the dog - you see the effect someone is having on the world, you can make a rational decision as to the risks and rewards of supporting that influence.
[Edited on 3/20/2019 by BrerRabbit]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47648549
Christchurch shootings: New Zealand to ban military style weapons, says PM
Christchurch shootings: New Zealand to ban military style weapons, says PM
What a great country. Makes the anti-gun control crowd here in the U.S. look like a bunch of degenerate losers. Some people think an AR-15 will save them if the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corp come knocking on their door, LOL!!!!
If a ban on military assault rifles results in saving just one life during these shootings, then it's worth it.....unless you don't want to be inconvenienced by having to take a few extra steps to get your gun....then screw the victims and their families.
Christchurch shootings: New Zealand to ban military style weapons, says PM
What a great country. Makes the anti-gun control crowd here in the U.S. look like a bunch of degenerate losers. Some people think an AR-15 will save them if the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corp come knocking on their door, LOL!!!!
If a ban on military assault rifles results in saving just one life during these shootings, then it's worth it.....unless you don't want to be inconvenienced by having to take a few extra steps to get your gun....then screw the victims and their families.
Well, if you ban the gun then there are no extra steps to get one is there?
The constitutional rights issues is different among our nation and theirs obviously making it easy for one country to adopt drastic changes and difficult for ours.
Well, if you ban the gun then there are no extra steps to get one is there?
True, but the merit-based system is opposed as well.
The constitutional rights issues is different among our nation and theirs obviously making it easy for one country to adopt drastic changes and difficult for ours.
Yes. Saving innocent lives is a bit difficult.
Not sure where you are going with that, I guess you just really don't like the idea that people influence others.
Got other fish to fry:
. . .wonder why this man has not been referred to as a terrorist.
Gina you've read more reports on this than any of us, how did you miss the main statement by the New Zealand Prime Minister on every newsfeed on the planet?
"It is clear that it can only be described as a terrorist attack."
— New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
I don't like the word terrorist. I think it is easy to just categorize people and then dismiss events as terror attacks when people should look at the bigger picture. People have accepted the definition that the media and others use to label people, groups, and actions without bothering to look at why they commit acts of violence resulting in death, they just say 'terror attack' and it just becomes a non story within a week. Nobody bothers to look at what the groups associated with the attack want or give any thought to anything. The response is just shoot them in you can, or put them behind bars for life and forget about it. The commonality in thinking behind Hitler, the other supremecists, even Isis is the same, our way or die. That is the larger issue that no one will contemplate much less work on solving because they can just dismiss it as a 'terrorist attack' .
Andrew McDaniel, Representative Missouri - wrote legislation mandating people in his state ALL have AR-15's. Now he said it was a ploy to bait the left.
The bill is called the “McDaniel Militia Act.” Another measure, the “McDaniel Second Amendment Act,” would require everyone over the age of 21 to own a handgun. Each bill would also provide $1 million in tax credits for residents who purchase the weapons in compliance with the ordinances.
