Lazy & Malicious: Journalists on Christchurch Massacre

We, the great unwashed public, do not yet have all the facts in the horrific Christchurch massacre of worshippers in two mosques. All we really know (I think) is that an Australian citizen shot up the mosques killing at least fifty people and, apparently, injuring another equivalent number. We also know that the cops reacted quickly and bravely, and captured the alleged shooter (I will not state his name), who now faces, most likely, two or three decades in the slammer. We know those facts, or think we do, oh, and that he "issued" a "manifesto" seeking to explain/justify his act of mass murder.

I usually do not pay attention to drivel from mass shooters or other criminals, e.g, the Unabomber, but in this case, I read his "manifesto." Why? My BS detector pinged loudly as I took in media accounts of the shootings, and their description of the shooter and his motives. I found striking the overt attempt by much American media, and some foreign, e.g., the Daily Mail, to blame President Trump for the action of a disturbed Australian in New Zealand, and label him a "right-wing Trump supporter." That, of course, proves the sort of typical lefty nonsense we see as progs seek to shape a narrative to support their socio-political goals.

Before turning to the "manifesto," let's briefly raise a few other matters that the press has not covered well, if at all, or insists on misreporting in that special way that they do.

First, do the words of the President of the USA have such power that people all over the world do his alleged bidding? If the answer is, "Yes," then "Wow!" Have we got power or what? Seems odd, however, that this power only appears when a Republican, especially Trump, holds office. I heard no journalists blame Obama's words or actions for the Norway mass shooting in 2011, or for the multiple massacres carried out by ISIS and other Jihadis in the USA and around the world during the Obama presidency. Do the words of CAIR, or Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, or those of renowned anti-semite  Linda Sarsour, provoke Jihadis into a murderous frenzy? Just a thought. Might be worth a "national conversation."

Second, guns in New Zealand. Turns out our Kiwi cousins have a lot of them. Almost 300, 000 people (out of an age-eligible population of under 3.9 million) legally own firearms. An estimated 1.1 to 1.5 million firearms, legal and illegal, rest in private hands; getting a gun license seems relatively easy with over 99% of applications approved by the police. Must be a murderous hell, no? Well, no. NZ has a homicide rate of not quite 1 per 100, 000, about the same as Australia with its much tighter gun laws. Not clear, therefore, that restricting gun rights really does much. Despite their fearsome military and rugby reputations, Kiwis don't kill each other much, either with guns or anything else, and crime remains low compared to most other countries in the world. A pretty safe place, even with/because of those guns. Oh, and let us not forget that this alleged mass killer was a foreigner.

Third, the guns used in this case. What weapons did the unmentioned one use? Some journalists have written about a "lever action" rifle, various shotguns, and "military-style semi-auto rifles." In the wake of the murders, we hear the usual cacophony of outraged voices demanding tighter gun laws, and lots of garbled accounts of the weapons purchased by killer-boy. I went to the website of the gun store in NZ that, per the press, sold guns to this alleged shooter, whether the ones used in the massacre or others is not clear; I don't see any exotic or modern military-style weapons for sale--certainly nothing automatic. They seem to have a nice selection of standard hunting rifles and a pretty good choice of European and American handguns--not bad prices, actually.  My advice, totally worth the price paid, to Kiwi gun grabbers: figure out the issues before you start seizing guns from law-abiding citizens and writing new laws. No? Guess not. Facts don't matter when it comes to gun hysteria, here or there.

Fourth, while, of course, we should condemn and discuss the NZ horror, we should not forget the ongoing massacre of thousands of Christians in Nigeria by Muslim Jihadis--a story about which we hear little from the MSM. Will the Muslim world condemn that atrocity in the same way that all of us condemn the one in Christchurch? I kinda doubt it . . . in addition, I notice that the same media so unable to find the motives for Jihadi murderers have no trouble attributing them to this guy.

Fifth, the name of the city where this massacre at the mosques happened: Christchurch. Yes, Christchurch. Does that tell you anything about the sort of demographic changes we see even in remote New Zealand? A possible tip-off about social stresses? Ask Aussie Senator Anning what happens when you state this obvious truth: the outrage mob comes after you. He wrote a perfectly valid letter on the issue--a letter now hard to find--and, wham, the lynch mob comes for him. His note reads like some past Diplomad post (and here).

The manifesto? Well, best read it yourselves. I doubt that most of the journalists writing about this matter have gone through it. You will find it hardly "right-wing." It comes off as a solidly leftist document by an intelligent, half-educated, sociopath. The writing style is, at times, disjointed and definitely narcissistic. He clearly thinks this action will gain him fame, just like that of his idol the Norwegian mass killer of 2011. All or most of his knowledge (will discuss further below) seems to come from the internet and some limited traveling, much of it, it apparently, to Muslim countries using money from some bit coin scam/transaction. He, overwhelmingly, uses ludicrous fascist/communist language with a heavy dose of classic authoritarian "ecofascism" of the sort promoted by the US Democrat party in the "Green New Deal."

Yes, killer-boy is an environmentalist.

He declares himself an "ecofascist," and hankers back to a mythical time of green pastures; he hates corporations and urban sprawl. He's all yours, Greenies and Reds. You broke him; you bought him; you own him! As stated in the manifesto, he is,

Eco-fascist by nature. The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the People’s Republic of China.

Oh, so RIGHT WING, eh? A white supremacist environmentalist who loves non-white Red China, eh?

He also goes on to express admiration for long-dead, and pretty much forgotten, British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, who held hardly right-wing views on the economy and social structure.

What does manifesto-boy say about President Trump?

a supporter of Donald Trump? As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no.

That's it. That's all he says about Trump. Nice ringing endorsement, eh?

It's absurd to claim he is a supporter of Trump or inspired by anything Trump said--BTW, Trump supports large-scale legal migration, hardly a "racist" stance, and hardly in line with manifesto-boy's main concern (see below).

He can't hide his hatred for America, except for a weird fascination with the US Marine Corps. He wants the United States destroyed and "balkanized" into racially warring components. He hopes that his actions will provoke a destruction of Second Amendment rights in the USA, and an effort by the government to seize arms from the citizens, hence, provoking a cataclysmic civil war.

The US is torn into many factions by its second amendment, along state, social, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines. With enough pressure the left wing within the United states will seek to abolish the second amendment, and the right wing within the US will see this as an attack on their very freedom and liberty. This attempted abolishment of rights by the left will result in a dramatic polarization of the people in the United States and eventually a fracturing to create conflict between the two ideologies within the United States on the ownership of firearms in order to further the social, cultural, political and racial divide within the United states. This conflict over the 2nd amendment and the attempted removal of firearms rights will ultimately result in a civil war that will eventually balkanize the US along political, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines. This balkanization of the US will not only result in the racial separation of the people within the United States ensuring the future of the White race on the North American continent, but also ensuring the death of the “melting pot” pipe dream. Furthermore this balkanization will also reduce the USA’s ability to project power globally, and thereby ensure that never again can such a situation as the US involvement in Kosovo ever occur again(where US/NATO forces fought beside muslims and slaughtered Christian Europeans attempting to remove these Islamic occupiers from Europe).

Thanks for the good wishes, jackass.

His main issue, of course, is immigration into the West from non-European lands. With the attack on the mosques, he vows to

show the invaders that our lands will never be their lands, our homelands are our own and that, as long as a white man still lives, they will NEVER conquer our lands and they will never replace our people. To take revenge on the invaders for the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by foreign invaders in European lands throughout history. To take revenge for the enslavement of millions of Europeans taken from their lands by the Islamic slavers. To take revenge for the thousands of European lives lost to terror attacks throughout European lands. To take revenge for Ebba Akerlund. To directly reduce immigration rates to European lands by intimidating and physically removing the invaders themselves. To agitate the political enemies of my people into action, to cause them to overextend their own hand and experience the eventual and inevitable backlash as a result.

To incite violence, retaliation and further divide between the European people and the invaders currently occupying European soil. To avenge those European men and women lost in the constant and never ending wars of European history who died for their lands, died for their people only to have their lands given away to any foreign scum that bother to show up. To agitate the political enemies of my people into action, to over extend their own hand and experience the eventual backlash. To show the effect of direct action, lighting a path forward for those that wish to follow.A path for those that wish to free their ancestors lands from the invaders grasp and to be a beacon for those that wish to create a lasting culture, to tell them they are not alone. To create an atmosphere of fear and change in which drastic,powerful and revolutionary action can occur. To add momentum to the pendulum swings of history, further destabilizing and polarizing Western society in order to eventually destroy the current nihilistic, hedonistic, individualistic insanity that has taken control of Western thought. To drive a wedge between the nations of NATO that are European and the Turks that also make a part of the NATO forces, thereby turning NATO once more into a united European army . . .

OK. I think you got it.

Unlike the false prog media nonsense re Muslim radicalization on the internet, in this case radicalization did take place on the internet. Throughout his manifesto, we see Martel-boy citing Wikipedia and other stuff he picked up online. He obviously spent a lot of time playing video games, and cruising the political and social commentary on the net. I have run into a fair number of young men similar to this fellow. In their mid-to-late twenties or even thirties, frustrated and despairing of ever achieving much, they see no future other than living with their parents or room mates, and, at best, working dead-end jobs. As white males, they feel alienated, insulted, and basically spat upon by the bien pensants. Academia, the media, politics, much of the modern work force, even popular entertainment is increasingly anti-white male--the malignant "toxic white male." 

Don't believe me?

Read the stuff on diversity and inclusiveness put out by major corporations. Read the stuff by the Democrat party or any other leftist party in the Western world. Watch just about any TV show or movie and see the depiction of the white male. The good jobs, these white guys feel, are lost to women and favored ethnic groups, to the politically and socially well-connected, and to the unceasing waves of immigrants who get preferences and public support unlike what they get, to wit, lectures on white male privilege. They retreat to a delusional overwhelmingly male world of video games--and even there the feminazis make inroads and give them no respite--and to secretive and conspiratorial chat rooms where all sorts of fact and fiction get blended into a dangerous mix.

We will see more of these drifting manifesto-boys if the relentless war on men and on traditional Western culture and values does not cease.