The New Zealand Massacre
Almost as bad as the massacre itself are the false media claims about it. It is invariably said that the gunman was "right wing" or "far right". What in conservative thought justifies the killing of the innocents? There is nothing.
What we do know is that the gunman isued a manifesto that is decribed as full of Nazi ideas. But Nazism was a socialist sect. Conservatives -- such as Churchill -- opposed Nazism. It is nothing more than a survival of Soviet disinformation that says Nazism is rightist. Hitler was to the right of Communism but to the left of just about everyone else. Ever since the French revolution it is the Left who have been the mass murderers --Robespierre, Trotsky, Stalin, Hitler, Mao -- not conservatives -- and that was again true in Christchurch.
One thing that was Leftist about the gunman even by modern standards was his identifying himself as a representative of a group -- Western whites. He saw the Jihadi attacks on Western whites as attacks on a group that he identified with and that he wished to save. The Jihadi attacks were attacks on his people. And identity politics are a major obsession of Leftists at the moment. They try to divide everyone into groups -- blacks, whites, homosexuals, transsexuals women etc. And they then treat people according to their group identity. Conservatives, by contrast, treat people primarily as individuals.
And the gunman did make it abundantly clear that his actions were provoked by Muslim hostility towards Western whites as evidenced in the innumerable attacks on Westerners by Jihadis. He did not act at random. He was provoked. So those who provoked him bear at least some of the blame for what he did. Muslims should be deeply thankful that the Jihadis who arise from among their ranks so seldom provoke a violent reaction.
It may be however that the Christchurch massacre is the harbinger of things to come. It may not be the last time that someone horrified by Jihadi violence decides to strike back. If Muslims want to avoid that they should urge their Mullahs to stop preaching Jihad. Jihadis mostly seem to strike at random so Muslims too could be struck at random. It would be a great pity if bloody attacks on Muslims were the only thing capable of persuading Muslims to desist from attacking others.
Australian government urged to shut down Milo Yiannopoulos after Christchurch massacre
This is a typical despicable Leftist attempt to blame uninvolved others for the deeds of one man. It all hinges on the Leftist inability to see people as individuals. Leftists see people only as group members and reserve to themselves the right to say who belongs in which group. It would not be stretching their logic too far to say that Tarrant was born in Australia so therefore all Australians (including members of the Labor party!) bear a responsibility for his Christchurch attack.
I wouldn't be surprised if some Leftists do assert that. They might say (they do say) that Australia is racist and Tarrant was therefore simply expressing Australian racism
The claim below that what Leftists call "hate speech" leads to terrorist acts such as Tarrant's is an empty assertion untethered to any evidence. David Hume pointed out a couple of hundred years ago that to identify a cause you have to have constant conjunction between the cause and the effect. And there is no conjunction at all between what Leftists call "hate speech" and acts of terrorism by whites. Tens of millions of whites have heard words such as those by Yiannopoulos so where are are the acts of terrorism connected to them? The usual reaction to Yiannopoloulos is no reaction other than, perhaps, a nod of the head.
If there are ten million instances of a "cause" NOT leading to an alleged effect, that destroys the causal claim. The effect needs something else to cause it. In Tarrant's case, he seems to have seen a lot of the effects of Jihadi attacks during his extensive travels and that has enraged him.
The Australian government has been told it must cancel the visa for far-right speaker Milo Yiannopoulos following the Christchurch terrorist attack, with opposition frontbencher Tony Burke saying far-right extremism should be treated in the same way as other forms of terrorism.
The immigration minister, David Coleman, personally approved Yiannopoulos’s visa last week, against advice from the Department of Home Affairs, which earlier told Yiannopoulos he may fail the character test to enter Australia.
Burke, who is Labor’s spokesman for citizenship and multiculturalism, said rules around banning people who could be seen as supporting terrorism should be applied to all extremist ideologies.
“If someone wants to come to Australia and we know that they’ve been speaking in support of values that have given rise to other forms of terrorism, we don’t give them a visa,” Burke told ABC24.
“Only a few days ago, the government intervened against the department to provide a visa for someone to have a tour here in Australia to whip up hatred against Muslims. I would be stunned if the government goes ahead with that visa.”
The department has the ability to block a visa from a person on character grounds if it perceives there’s a risk they will commit a crime, harass people, vilify a segment of the Australian community or incite discord.
Recent speaking tours of US whistleblower Chelsea Manning and British conspiracy theorist and anti-semite David Icke were blocked after their visas were rejected on character grounds.
“We knock back people all the time with respect to other forms of hatred that have been consistent with what has resulted in terrorism actions,” Burke said. “We need to make sure the full force of the law treats this as the same as any other form of terrorism.”
Guardian Australia contacted Coleman’s office to ask if Yiannopoulos’s visa would be revoked after the Christchurch attack and did not receive an immediate response.
The prime minister, Scott Morrison, has called Friday’s massacre a “violent, extremist, right-wing terrorist attack” and also condemned comments from Queensland senator Fraser Anning, saying that “blaming the murderous attacks by a violent, right-wing, extremist terrorist in New Zealand on immigration are disgusting”.
“Those views have no place in Australia, let alone the Australian parliament,” Morrison said.
The Labor foreign affairs spokeswoman, Penny Wong, said Anning did not represent Australia.
Burke also criticised Anning’s comments but said: “the normalisation of bigotry is something that is not only confined to him.”
He said the use of hate speech was connected to violence and extremism and should be taken more seriously.
“There’s been an attempt in Australia by many people to normalise hate speech,” Burke said. “We get told, ‘Oh, it’s just freedom of speech’.”
He said that view had been pushed by “some [television] networks” and said the normalisation of hate speech was “not the whole story of what’s happened, but there is no doubt it is part of it”.
The Australian man charged with murder over the Christchurch attack was not on a terrorist watchlist, and Burke said it was possible that “up until now, many people would not have viewed this form of extremism as being as dangerous to people as every other form of extremism”.
“Anyone who had that doubt, that doubt finished yesterday,” he said.