Mass shooting at New Zealand mosque

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Something is not right.

No of course not, when someone murders 49 people something is not right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you square a "white supremacist" terrorist from New Zealand liking a black right leaning American? Clearly the man is deranged.

This makes no sense. Of course, people - both crazy and sane - can be opportunists.

But I agree - deranged. I don't care if he's a white male; he's crazy.

No one who's sane has that much hatred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy appears to be a white nationalist. He also appears to be young. I’m ashamed to admit that I watched his video of the attack. It was horrifying, especially since he appeared to enjoy it. Not everything can be blamed on mental illness. This was evil.

Photographs emerging this morning show weird, hand-written, dates and names all over his equipment (sort of like the schizophrenic navy-yard mass murderer).

And "manifesto" strongly suggests severe mental illness.

Clearly if white nationalism is attracting the mentally ill then it would be good to restrict access to guns for anyone involved in the movement.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know why this “mentally ill vs terrorist” argument is a thing. You can certainly be both. Most mass murderers are nuts by definition. They just use politics to rationalize their bloodlust. If this guy was born in Syria, he would undoubtedly be in ISIS. Since he was born white, he is a violent white supremacist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many ISIS videos show essentially the exact same massacres? (of Muslims no less).

We are supposed to follow this madman's directions - why exactly?

Whataboutism fail.

[Anonymous]

Sarah Sanders called it an "attack" - not a terrorist attack. This administration and the language they use, when white supremacists see the POTUS as "a symbol of white identity" - makes them complicit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you square a "white supremacist" terrorist from New Zealand liking a black right leaning American? Clearly the man is deranged.

This makes no sense. Of course, people - both crazy and sane - can be opportunists.

But I agree - deranged. I don't care if he's a white male; he's crazy.

No one who's sane has that much hatred.

They arrested 3 others? And deranged why because he’s white so clearly he has an excuse? Would you say that if he were another race? Evil. Hateful. Trump-supporter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sarah Sanders called it an "attack" - not a terrorist attack. This administration and the language they use, when white supremacists see the POTUS as "a symbol of white identity" - makes them complicit.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s the manifesto. Sick sh#t, he’s fully into white supremacy. Talks about the “foreign invaders” ruining “white lands”

http://download1283.mediafire.com/4h8bd39p0hwg/3vcjr5lll3r6xte/The+Great+Replacement.docx

He’s such a whiny tool.

He was also deeply into ecology and the environmental movement.

Ecofacism. That’s a new one.

His ecological views come from a far right perspective. He believes “the invaders” are responsible for climate changes because they have been reproducing to quickly. So he argues that one should kill all of them to stop climate changes.

Like many have said, he’s evil and nuts.

That’s a leftist belief actually

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why this “mentally ill vs terrorist” argument is a thing. You can certainly be both. Most mass murderers are nuts by definition. They just use politics to rationalize their bloodlust. If this guy was born in Syria, he would undoubtedly be in ISIS. Since he was born white, he is a violent white supremacist.

I think just about all mass murderers are mentally ill. The problem I have is that when the murderer is a white guy, everyone rushes to declare him mentally ill. If the killer is a Muslim, he is immediately called a terrorist, all other Muslims are expected to issue condemnations, politicians demand Muslim bans, and law enforcement heightens surveillance of Muslim communities and individuals. Muslims (and several other minority groups) don't get the "mentally ill" disclaimer. This happens even when the individual has a diagnosed mental illness. I would like to see some consistency (beyond consistent inconsistency) in how these people are treated.

[Anonymous]

Its going to be hard to argue mental illness when it was not an individual attack. Reports cited multiple vehicles rigged with IEDs. He didn't drive all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its going to be hard to argue mental illness when it was not an individual attack. Reports cited multiple vehicles rigged with IEDs. He didn't drive all of them.

Exactly. This was highly planned, deliberate, and connected to an ideology and rhetoric here in the US, and elsewhere. It's terrorism. How the Trump administration cannot call it that, is disturbing and telling.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why this “mentally ill vs terrorist” argument is a thing. You can certainly be both. Most mass murderers are nuts by definition. They just use politics to rationalize their bloodlust. If this guy was born in Syria, he would undoubtedly be in ISIS. Since he was born white, he is a violent white supremacist.

I think just about all mass murderers are mentally ill. The problem I have is that when the murderer is a white guy, everyone rushes to declare him mentally ill. If the killer is a Muslim, he is immediately called a terrorist, all other Muslims are expected to issue condemnations, politicians demand Muslim bans, and law enforcement heightens surveillance of Muslim communities and individuals. Muslims (and several other minority groups) don't get the "mentally ill" disclaimer. This happens even when the individual has a diagnosed mental illness. I would like to see some consistency (beyond consistent inconsistency) in how these people are treated.

I'd say that any killer of an innocent people is deranged and "mentally ill". Does this mean they shouldn't get consequences? No.

"Hatefulness often leads to violence."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sarah Sanders called it an "attack" - not a terrorist attack. This administration and the language they use, when white supremacists see the POTUS as "a symbol of white identity" - makes them complicit.

+1

+1000
Do you think they would have used the same milquetoast language if the perp had been Muslim? Trump would have been tweeting his head off.

[Anonymous]

This guy is goading left-wing governments and tech companies into censoring anyone right of center in order to genuinely radicalise them.

I hope that doesn't happen.