Bitcoin Forum

Just Today, I've heard a news about the mass shooting on a mosque in New Zealand.  49 People have been killed and might be a terrorist attack.
Based on my research the alleged attacker identified as Australian citizen.


I have seen the actual video when the killer actually uploaded it on facebook. I have to still find it so you can all see how this guy is just actually acting like he is just like a famous battle royale game (PUBG).  This kind of act is purely inhuman and should be stop RIP to all the victims and justice should prevail


For now you can read the full article on the BBC news.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-asia-47578860



UPdate: I removed the video

I watched that video and the way these peaceful citizens were killed without any guilt, more than 10 minutes of shooting with all cold blood.
This is the end of violence and counter-violence. It will end only with a cease-fire in all Muslim countries and a rejection of the hate speech against Muslims.



Facebook has deleted that video. This terrorist killed them as if he was playing "Call of Duty" game.

Well yeah the incident seems tragic, still can u PM me the video link?

I cannot put it in words how sad and disturbing this event it. I found the video on another thread on the forum. I'm not sure if its appropriate for this forum, but Ill leave it to the moderators to decide.

I’m Turk and I live in Turkey. I don't understand why Europeans accept non-white and muslim refugees in their own countries. My grandfather was a soldier in the Ottoman Empire. Sometimes we don't even want to live with some radical Muslims. They don’t respect your culture and live their culture in your country. If you don’t want to live like Europeans, why did you immigrate to Europe. And know that. When they raise population of muslims in your country, they want to change your life style. Stop accepting non-white or radical refugees. Such attacks are just the beginning. It is sad but different cultures can’t live together. Defend Europe

So you think killing innocent and peaceful civilians in New Zealand is defending Europe?

No, i don’t think so. It is not fair. Therefore, Stop accepting non-white or radical islamist refugees to Europe. Although we are Turks, we have great problems with Syrian refugees. They can’t adopt our culture, they live like radical islamist. They a lot of commit crime. They want to live like Syrians in Turkey but they came to here. If they don’t like Turkish culture why did they come here?

I saw the video, I can't explain what was going on the spot. This work was not the healthy brain of man. He hasn't killed only the 49 people he has killed a society, humanity. We hate this dirty work.

The attacker's motivation was apparently to promote worldwide racial and political balkanization by increasing the solidarity of all groups while also pushing them apart. He wanted to increase tensions between Muslim and Christian, white and non-white, left and right, etc. So he's probably very happy with the world's response so far, including some of the reaction in this thread.

The attack itself was evil, of course, and this underlying goal of promoting collectivism was both particularly evil and worryingly effective.

Dude, have you ever been in ‘real’ muslim countries? I live in Turkish ‘Republic’. There is not Sharia but sometimes they really interfere in people's lifestyle. Trust me, when they raise their population you can’t live together with them. Muslim people may be good, but Muslim communities are becoming radical. If the radical Islamists had the chance, they would have killed us (normal muslim Turks) like Syria. We encourage immigrants to come from Africa to Turkey. They involved in many incidents of sexual harassment. We accepted 1 million Kurds in 1990s, they created racial terrorist groups like PKK/YPG and killed civilians. We accepted 4 million syrian refugees 7 years ago. they abuse womens, they steal, they fight, they are really garbage. Multiculturalism is bullshit.

Don’t trust refugees

When they raise their population, they will kill you. Protect ‘National Countries’, Defend Europe, Defend your country

I don't think we should recognise his motivation at all. Who cares what was in his sick mind anyway. 
Egomaniacal psychopaths are all the same, radicalism of theirs only leads to suffering and pain of innocents.
If there is a lesson to be learned from all this madness, it is to stay unaffected and give zero care about that "man".
Cold blooded murderer deserves nothing else than cold dark cell for the rest of his miserable life.

Stop making stupid people famous, rarely is more adequate.

The attacker(s) will be prosecuted, as they should be because this attack is wrong on many levels. This is very common for anti-Muslim attackers in the western world.

In the middle east, Christian killings based on religion is common in many areas, and is sometimes sanctioned by the state. These killings, when not sanctioned by the state are often not prosecuted/punished.

When there is a mass shooting in the States, it is frequently advocated that stricter gun laws are necessary. The gun laws (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1983/0044/latest/DLM72622.html) are already very strict in New Zealand, including the requirement to hold a license to be in possession of a gun, Gun sellers must be licensed, and background checks are mandatory for everyone applying for a license (you must pass a background check before the first time you buy a gun), and licenses can be revoked easily by the police.

There must be higher order reasons for the deletion. The fabric of civilization, when torn bad, can trigger unforeseen consequences.




The ancient exceptionalist exclusivist mid eastern religions and their offshoots, still today toxifies communities with ill begotten rotten dicta. These diseased dogmas, having infiltrated the globe, have no easy cure.

I can't believe it, such sad news.
It's tragedy and it seems like some act of revenge toward Muslims what is very bad.
I even heard that killer wrote names of some Serbs leaders from the war in Bosnia 1992 and Austrian military commander from the battle with Turkish in 17. century.
It seems also that Breivik, mass killer in Norway, was his inspiration.
I hope that this circle of hate and revenge will stop eventually.

How exactly do you stop such events from happening in the future if you ignore their motivations? While agree with not glorifying these people, pretending they don't exist is not a solution either. Just writing them off as insane is more comfortable than having to examine what truly motivated them. Personally I am of the opinion that this was some kind of state level operation. This was a team of well armed, seemingly well trained people in a country where those types of weapons are restricted. Also he made sure to mention a lot of the key groups and faces of dissent in the US in order to cause them to be associated with violence, and provide lots of ammo to defame and demonize them with. Their ability to manipulate the media and general public to their goals is FAR BEYOND the levels of expertise of your average psychopathic homicidal whack jobs.

This was ORGANIZED, probably at a very high level. He even stated his desired to widen social rifts internationally, specifically in the US. The key factor of intent, his desire to widen the conflict over gun control, and spur actions to further that conflict. Of course the one thing almost guaranteed to start a civil war in the USA is if they start confiscating guns (more). That's why I say this whole attack was far too articulate to just be an average group of loons. This was 100% an organized operation, probably by state level entities. You judge a man by the fruits of his labor, and when every single fruit on the tree is rotten, you need to start asking questions, because that is not organic.

Who said we need to stop this madness? We can see that the more we try, the more it's straightening itself.
The only solution is as horrible and terrifying as the discussed event, the NWO... rule of the state not the rule of the jungle?
Take away all freedoms, all rights, all possession, make people exist only for the state, eradicate them of all emotions and reflections with some drug and voila. Prison planet. Do we want this? I say no. Maybe just maybe it's time to give humanity back to human?
We need freedom not less of it, otherwise those events will continue because people are getting scared.
I know what it was, it's the fear. Scare fuelled by hatred and lacking of appreciation for human life.
Now that's just speculation, just think about it, you are blaming this on some special forces and simultaneously you take away the blame. Besides it is to early to judge, his lousy manifesto stated he is not an agent, that this is self organised and no third party is entangled, maybe except some religious order of self-proclaimed neo-templars. Such voices do more harm than good. No conspiracy is needed there, where "simple" emotions and dread suffice. Let's stay calm and wait how it will unfold.
You are exaggerating a little, last I checked 98% of all fruits are perfectly fine, browned and look delicious. Don't get this grim rhetoric poison your orchard. We are better than this, capable of beautiful deeds and sacrifices... maybe this was what was missing that day in NZ?

I think we have a serious lack of communication, mostly as a result of some sort of language barrier I think. You misunderstand, when I say stop these events from happening, I mean understand what causes people to do these things, and try to change the circumstances so that pattern is not repeated. I am pro-gun ownership, I do not want freedoms taken away. In fact my opinion is this was done IN ORDER TO allow freedoms to be taken away in reaction. That was part of my point.

I admit I am absolutely speculating, but I have knowledge of how these types of things operate as I have actively made an attempt to monitor such actions over the last couple decades as well as historical examples. There are several key indicators here that tell me this was organized.

- It was a team of people - most of these types of attacks are individuals
- The death count was exceptionally high, showing proficiency using these weapons
- They have an exceptional understanding of international political issues, as well as US domestic tensions
- They specifically mentioned several cliche 4chan/8chan memes (a major hub of US political dissent), and Candace Owens for example who advocates for the black conservative position in order to associate these groups with violence in order to justify their restriction and censorship

 My words about fruit was an allegory or metaphor of judging people by the effects they have on the world around them, not a literal discussion about fruit.  I am not taking away the blame from anyone. Nothing I said makes any of this any less horrible. I do however think it is important to point out the very high desirability of such an event from the perspective of powerful psychopaths with unlimited resources in order to push a narrative they benefit from. Every little angle of this event serves to further divide and inflame existing tensions to the point it feels like a movie script because every plot point is hit. This is not how reality works, this is how synthetic reality works.

No, I think we are literally on the same page here.
Sure it was, as of current knowledge it was prepared by this guy. He planned it himself and executed. Nothing spectacular and impossible for one man, brevik (small letter intentional) also worked alone and was far more sophisticated and sinister with it. 
So as mine. But I got a feeling you missed the point. I meant that your speculative words have the potential for fuelling the fire.
Ignition of imagination and conspiracy will only attract the crowd, more hate will follow.
I'm also pro gun however bullets solve nothing, kisses do. 

Yeah I guess we should all just throw out critical thought and speculation because it MIGHT do XYZ. I made some very solid logical points that you didn't even attempt to refute. People don't have a shortage of excuses to be hateful, having a logical discussion about it IMO is a requirement, not a liability. Kisses don't stop bullets.

Reason why teroris  live on Facebook is to make that video trend.
To make any people scare and know how terrorist kill people no mercy.
 
Stop and don't share any video about teroris in New Zealand.
Pray for New Zealand

I still do not get the logical reason, it seems a really sick person, the way he did everything, I do not know how to classify him among the thin line of Terrorista-Sick.

I think that this type of acts should never be forgiven. New Zealand is a very quiet country, it has always stood out for being very peaceful. In the first world countries this type of deplorable acts usually occur.

When I saw the video, I thought it was a publication extracted from DeepWeb, I really think that we should start with a strong policy against the possession of weapons in people, their controls should be much stricter.

This is exactly the response I expect the shooter intended to have. They want people to beg to have their freedoms taken from them. The shooters weapons were obtained legally. So much for gun control working.

The situation that is defined by the shooter in manifesto, this is going in many other more countries. Sweden, Iceland and many small countries that are calm and quite are facing same issue. These people come as refugee and goes on multiplying at huge pace. This is anything new man. World need to watch this and take necessary action.

I have watched the video, the live stream of the killer and I was so much sad for the family of the people who died in the incident. Ain't know what is the real motive of the killer but I think he just hates Muslims and is a psycho who was addicted to online video games. It is really sad and would affect the whole e-Sports industry because of the incident.`

in the Brazilian media, some articles have reported that one of the terrorists had made money by investing in cryptocurrencies. Has anyone even read or researched this? I have not seen any proof of this in other articles. Although I have read few. I believe that for all the sensationalism that usually involves subjects related to Bitcoin, I do not doubt that the media will begin to explore this.

Sad, if ever this will happen to your country and the only thing you could do is to be migrated and the world will not accept you because you are a turk then  you might probably understand how it feels to defend their lands by having no Turks in their place. You can't even understand why they are actually doing it to you just because of having the nationality you have not control off. By that type of thinking you and the suspect has the same perspective towards immigrants and Muslims.

I'm afraid you can also do that if ever.


That was also what is currently running through my mind after watching the video. based on my research the suspect was traveling around europe just scouting for immigrants or muslim communities. I personally don't know if  the main plan was to increase the tension but according to CNN



https://edition.cnn.com/asia/live-news/new-zealand-christchurch-shooting-intl/index.html

@everyone monitoring this thread:

If you want this terrorist to fail in his attempt to destroy the gains we've made in the realm of racism and bigotry, then do the exact opposite of what he wishes for.

If you're Christian, go to Mosque on Friday, and a Synagogue on Saturday.  If you're Muslim, go to a Synagogue on Saturday, and a Church on Sunday.  If you're Jewish go to a Mosque on Friday and Church on Sunday.  Introduce yourself to the congregation, tell them how you're presence is a protest to the hatred and bigotry some would have us cultivate as a result of this tragedy.

The fact that he said things like this tell me he is saying these things to purposely defame these people he mentioned. I guess it is just a total coincidence all of the people and groups he mentioned are establishment targets... Nothing to see here, move along. In fact no one talk about it ever again because we don't want him to get what he wants! Yes, the dark, lots of problems are solved in the dark.

Next I expect to see one or two small, easy to overlook media references to "the shooter was on anti-psychotic medications" and "relatives reported that he'd recently stopped taking them."

Sooner or later people are going to have to wake up to this problem instead of listening to politicians who misdirect it toward firearms while raking in huge donations from Big Pharma.

But still you cannot say whatever the attacker had done is correct. I condemn terrorism and my condolences are with the killed.


Look like you have no idea what the words "jihaad", "kaafir" and "fatwaa"  means. First they  need to distance themselves with these radicals.

I know, we Turks defend our lands until die. Europeans accepted a lot ot ‘radical muslims’, we Turks were shamanistic before Islam. We are not radical Islamists, many of our people have a normal religious belief but when we accepted other races in our country they created radical communities. Turkey is a Republic. It is a secular state, but the Islamists who migrated to our country breeded too much. Today, radical Islamists may be less in Europe, but you cannot predict how much the fertility rates are. Kurds have more than 8 children. Arabs have more than 8 children. We Turks are getting more and more radical in this shit every day. Many of the people in our country are deist. Perhaps 35% of people in our country but we accepted refugees many times and Although they were not Turkish, they became Turkish citizens. And today the Islamic government is selected with 52%. If we had not accepted these bastards in our country, maybe we could live like Europeans today.

I watched video of shooting and it was really shocking to see. It looks surreal, he made it like gameplay of shooting game. And that terrorist full of hate probably prepared for this attack for long time. He aquired guns, painted words on it, created long manifesto. And how calm he was attack, saying "subscribe to PewDiePie lads" while shooting or leaving that place after shooting with music on. Sick. Seems that this terrorist is follower of Anders Breivik, and this attack really reminds him.
And one thing that really shocked me - how much support on internet this guy got. I read comments where people saying that he done right thing by shooting muslims, that someone finally started war against muslim terrorists and etc. I can't understand how someone can justify killing of innocent people? What's wrong with these people?

While watching the video, I can't imagine what's on the mind of the terrorist.

Condolences to the victims and right judgement shall be done with the incident. I felt bad and anger when the terrorist wasn't done with his havoc, he kept shooting innocent people while driving his car.  :-\

The strange thing is that when innocents are killed in places of worship
You leave the murderer and look for the known scarecrow illusion
(Radical Islamists)
This terrorist killer you does not consider him a radical Christian?
You seem to have a problem with the Islamists in general and want them to give up their identity
They live like secularists or Christians, for example, and this is impossible
Everyone can live in peace as long as the ideas of acceptance of the other and dialogue of civilizations prevail
Not the clash of civilizations

There are two sides to this coin. In the Western word one has excuses made for it and people crying racism and bigotry every time it is called out. The other is blasted at maximum volume and taken to the most extreme interpretations. This person did not shoot these people because of religious motivations, yet most radical Muslim terrorists do regularly cite their religious beliefs as motivation. One of these happens more than the other, you are attempting to craft a false equivalency.

Plenty of Muslims move to Western nations and assimilate. They are not the enemy of Western nations. Even if they choose to not assimilate, really no one cares, they are free to live their lives that way even in Western nations. What IS the problem is Sharia law, and Muslims who move to Western nations and try to impose Sharia law. Sharia law is incompatible with freedom and Democracy. Sharia law is a political system wearing a veil of religion to hide behind.

Many of these people who support Sharia law don't give a fuck about you or your dialog and will take power by force if they are allowed. Unfortunately any time anyone points this out, there are endless cries of racism and bigotry and this discussion is never allowed to be had. If you think this problem can be solved only with dialog I suggest you take a trip to Somalia and have a dialog with the locals and report back your results. You are in a bubble of Western comfort that blinds you from the harsh realities of the rest of the world where they have no problem removing your head and selling your mother into sex slavery just because you do not worship their God. Unfortunately I think Europe is going to realize this too late.

This attack was carefully crafted to inflame both "sides" of this conflict. It is a mistake to look at the world as "if I were them I would do this..." because not everyone is like you, and some people wouldn't blink over disemboweling you in front of your family. Monsters are real, and asking them kindly not to be monsters is not a solution. That said this attack is inexcusable, and it would be equally inexcusable if it were perpetrated by a Muslim.

That's because crazy is quite opposite of logic. It does have its own dynamics, which is why we can talk about patterns of behavior in paranoia, schizophrenia, and obsessive compulsive.

I saw the video of London's Sadiq Khan condemning the attack. Moving but then I remembered his infamous "...Part and parcel of living in a big city" quote.

And that's what it is, part and parcel of living in a city. The more people there are, the more likely you'd encounter criminals and nutjobs.

Firstly, we are not talking about killer.
Secondly, why should I talk about radical Christians? They already live in Europe.

Don't distort what I say. We are not talking about Islam, we are talking about Radical Islamists. I say this as a Turkish. We do not even want to live together with radical Islamists in Turkey. The main problem here is that different cultures cannot live together.


Its true. 2% of people want sharia in Turkey(isis supporters). This is a big problem for us. 2% seems like low, but not. No joke with radical Islamists. When they gain power, they attack you. 1 christian maniac killed 49 people. 1.68M radical maniacs may kill 82.32M people.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-16/nz-threatens-10-years-prison-possessing-mosque-shooting-video-web-hosts-warned

These victims aren't even in the ground yet and this event is already being used to push expanded censorship and removal of gun ownership rights. This is how the boa constrictor of incrementalist totalitarianism works people... piles of bodies are just another day at work for the people who play these "games".

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-16/evidence-indicates-link-between-north-korean-embassy-break-and-christchurch-attacks

I am not the only one who finds this narrative suspect... this is going to be the pattern from now on folks, escalating violence in an attempt to get the population to beg to have their freedoms taken in exchange for empty promises of safety. This is Hegelian dialectic 101. Thesis + Antithesis = Synthesis

I don't think it's good idea to watch such videos.
Something like this can really hurt and damage your spirit and mind.
Yes, we can just feel bad about it but it seems as individuals we can't do much to stop it.
It should be action on the global level.

I did not believed the videos until in the end I see that guy's face. It look to me some kind of recorded game of counterstrike that I used to play.
If watching video can damage spirit and mind then what you will say about all the games that are full of voilence?
Are all gamers now have distorted  mind?

That sick-minded, terrorist and criminal person bases all his actions on the game "Call Of Duty" brought him to reality.
I also can not imagine that it could happen through the mind of someone like that, where it does everything as if it were executing with honor, it is something that those people of high sensibility should not see.

Another great breakdown by Sargon of Akkad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctNxGd1UmBg

More evidence of the shooters involvement in state level operations: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-15/turkey-claims-nz-mosque-shooter-previously-entered-turkey-assassination-attempt

In fact, some countries have already criminalize the (re)distribution of it.

People would change profile pics, light candles, form a circle and pray, rinse, repeat. Same with Orlando, Paris, etc.

They'll make these gestures but people never learn. They still allow mentally unstable people to have easy access to guns. They still allow fundamentalist groups of every flavor platform for propagating their message.

Congratulations on reacting exactly the way the shooter hoped you would by pushing censorship and gun control.

I don't have the intention of watching that video but it just popped on my newsfeed so then I watched it because of the caption and the number of views.

Really heart breaking!!!  :'(

Most videos were all deleted by video sharing and social network sites.

You sure what you're saying?

That's not what the shooter hoped. Things the shooter "pushed:"

- White supremacy
- Immigrants as invaders
- War on all Muslims

Selective censorship and gun control are a sensible reaction to the shooting. Despite your earlier claims otherwise, New Zealand had relatively lax restrictions on gun ownership up until a few days ago. They will likely follow in the footsteps of Australia, which banned guns after their last massacre, and hasn't had one since.


No, he's not. And he should relax: nobody is taking America's guns away, even if they should.

As usual you claim authority on subjects you know nothing about.

Quotes from the shooter's manifesto:

"Won’t your attack result in calls for the removal of gun rights from Whites in the United states?
Yes, that is the plan all along, you said you would fight to protect your rights and the constitution, well soon will come the time.

Won’t your attack result in calls for the removal of gun rights in the New Zealand?
The gun owners of New Zealand are a beaten, miserable bunch of baby boomers, who have long since given up the fight. When was the last time they won increased rights? Their loss was inevitable. I just accelerated things a bit. They had long since lost their cities, take a look at Auckland. Did you really expect they would not also lose their rights?"


"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 of the US along cultural and racial lines."

"The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the
People’s Republic of China."

https://observer.news/assets/The-Great-Replacement.pdf

His entire MO is to create conflict by triggering a reaction. Some will cry we need more gun control and censorship. Others will die before letting that happen. You are literally advocating for exactly what he intended to happen.

This manifesto was a meticulously created piece of psychological warfare designed to radicalize the maximum numbers of people, while getting them to beg for removal of freedoms, and impugn the most effective voices of dissent by associating himself with them. This was a state level psychological operation 100%


"easy access to guns"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_New_Zealand#Current_firearms_law

Looks pretty restrictive to me, including mental health screening, but the answer is never to reach an end goal for gun control pushers, it is always just "more", regardless of how ineffective it is.

Hmm it seems that everything is going to what he wanted us to go.

If this was the original plan, then if it is successful which is actually going there, a bigger plan might just be waiting  hmm this made me realize that "maybe" this person is just being paid by an organization for them to do what they wanted to do so?

One radical islamist guy shooted 7 people in Holland. I said I’m Turk, European countries are following a very wrong policy. We don't even want to live with radical Islamists.

https://mobile.twitter.com/PolitieUtrecht/status/110763210578011340

Won't happen in the U.S. as I said earlier, and the guy is only talking about "increased rights" in New Zealand. If a mass shooting happens on this scale, it is only natural to re-evaluate gun a nation's gun laws. He sure did push them along, you and him are right about that.

As for censorship, it seems you are completely mistaken and pulled that out of your ass. Don't let me get in the way of standing between reality and beliefs you already held before the shooting happened, however.

Also it sounds like you largely agree with the shooter in his manifesto by quoting it in the manner which you did. If not, why would you quote the bits about "they had long lost their cities"...? Only a dangerous fringe actually believe in that sort of talk.


These victims aren't even in the ground and you are already chalking their deaths up to a great conspiracy that only exists in the minds of the severely deluded.

By any chance, are you one of those "Sandy Hook was a hoax" guys?

They don't know common law down there. The position that government is trying to hide public news is deplorable.


NZ Threatens 10 Years In Prison For 'Possessing' Mosque Shooting Video... (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/257798-2019-03-17-nz-threatens-10-years-in-prison-for-possessing-mosque-shooting.htm)




Check out the links.


8)

"won't happen in the US" Well shit I am relieved now, because you are such an expert on things and you say it will never happen.

I guess I can ignore the fact that thousands of people across the US are already unconstitutionally having their guns seized without due process under so called "red flag" laws which essentially amount to having no rights since anyone (including police) can accuse you of being unstable and have their guns confiscated. Also I guess I don't have to worry about politicians openly pushing confiscation now, or national gun registries, or places like California where law abiding gun owners can become felons over night.

ITS OK EVERYONE! NUTILDUH SAYS IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!


Increased rights in New Zealand? Before you start making all these proclamations about what or wasn't said, maybe you should learn to read first.

So The People's Republic of China is the social structure he says he most associates with, but he doesn't want censorship, gun confiscation, or totalitarianism? If you had an active brain stem and were capable of reading and then examining the material critically, you would see that the shooter has a firm grasp on the process of the Hegelian Dialectic. That is again, thesis + antithesis = synthesis. He said very clearly he intended to create divisions and accelerate conflict to a civil war in the West.

You don't think censorship of all the dissidents he mentioned in his manifest will accomplish said division and reaction? You don't think people are just as willing to defend free speech with their lives? I am sorry you have such a simple mind, but I didn't just pull anything "out of my ass".



"Also it sounds like you largely agree with the shooter in his manifesto by quoting it in the manner which you did. If not, why would you quote the bits about "they had long lost their cities"...? Only a dangerous fringe actually believe in that sort of talk. "

And here we are, the point in your pathetic little retort where you attempt to associate me with the shooter because I quoted what he said. It is much easier to just try to say I am a nut rather than form a logical response to anything I have presented. Especially when you are incapable of forming a logical response. Funny, it seems that same line you didn't even read right is also your basis for claiming I agree with him. The usual high standards I expect from Nutilduh.


Once again, with lack of argument, you move directly to the personal attacks and attempts at guilt by manufactured association. Without any real argument you must again resort to trying to label me as a"Sandy Hook denier" because anything else would require a thought process that you do not have the mental capacity to handle. You are a simple creature, that is why these simple tricks work on you. Fortunately everyone is not as simple minded as you are and can see when things don't add up.

Two guys planning to rob a 7-11 is a conspiracy. Two or more people planning any crime is a conspiracy. A conspiracy is legal terminology for a crime, and conspiracies happen every day. This shooting was a conspiracy by anyones definition, but again I know you are a simple minded creature and think "conspiracy" is synonymous with "hoax only crazy people believe". Anything else would require more thought than you have the capacity to undertake.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...


ICYMI: 120 Christians Slaughtered By Muslim Herders In Nigeria - MEDIA SILENT (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/257827-2019-03-18-icymi-120-christians-slaughtered-by-muslim-herders-in-nigeria-media.htm)




Check out the links.


8)

I just asked asked you if you believed Sandy Hook was a hoax or not. Do you believe it happened, or not?

Whats that? I can't hear you over the sound of you being off topic and having no logical argument.

I'm not trying to "argue" with you. I just wanted to know if you believe Sandy Hook actually happened or not.

I know you aren't, that's why you are trying to slide the topic to something else.

Did Captain Hook happen? There's more than one Peter Pan movie, just as there's more than one Sandy Hook video.

8)

This is actually inhuman and there is no justification for this type of killing.  I think we should condemned this act and pray for the family to be able to bear this sad loss.  It is inhuman,  disheartening and painful for this wickedness to be allowed to take place.

iirc the manifesto said he made a lot of money on bitconnect and that he used that money to travel the world up until this happened..

And I will take your lack of a logical reply and your insistence of trying to take the discussion off topic to mean "I am incapable of forming a logical reply to your comments, and I should probably stop attempting to debate subjects I am poorly informed on."

That is not surprising, thinking where did this guy have a very good type of weapon which is actually not that cheap. Plus the fact that he's been travelling in europe for 3 years if I am not mistaken.

Watch the latest news here
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/18/asia/new-zealand-mosque-shooting-monday-intl/index.html
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/16/asia/new-zealand-mosque-shooting-victims/index.html



New Zealand's government is actually now doing what the suspect really wanted. Reforming their Law with regards to guns and recently the online market in selling guns from new zealand shutsdown

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-19/after-blocking-zerohedge-and-others-nz-telcos-demand-big-tech-censorship-surge

https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/isps-in-au-and-nz-start-censoring-the-internet-without-legal-precedent-a-full-list-of-blocked-websites-can-be-found-below-voat-4chan-8ch-liveleak-archive-bitchute-zerohedge-kiwifarms/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-16/new-zealand-to-change-gun-laws-after-mass-shooting-kills-49


Never let a serious crisis go to waste (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yeA_kHHLow) right? No creeping totalitarianism here just looking for an excuse. Move along, nothing to see here.

You mean like your understanding of New Zealand's gun laws?  :D


How does this even make sense? If the weapons were obtained legally, how does that reflect "gun control"? What is your solution to the problem anyway? More guns to more crazies?

You were probably confusing New Zealand with Australia, which pretty much banned guns in 1996 after their last massacre, and hasn't had one since. Nobody in Australia (besides a few psychos) seems to mind. Nobody is afraid of government tyranny or oppression there, it never comes up as a seriously entertained issue.

As usual, unable to form a cogent reply, you need to shift the topic YET AGAIN in order to make a desperate attempt to appear as if you have any idea what you are talking about rather than reply to my previous response. That statement was based on reports he legally obtained some guns from a local gun shop. The ones used in the shooting were not those weapons however.

I was absolutely talking about New Zealand gun laws, I even gave a reference which you promptly ignored: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Zealand

Gun laws only stop law abiding people from having guns. This is a fact. If you are a criminal, by definition you have no regard for the law. The weapons the shooter used were obtained on the black market, and were of a very restricted variety within New Zealand. It is good to know you speak for all of Australia when you say no one is worried about government tyranny and oppression. I guess I can ignore all the real Australians I have talked to who have said otherwise since Nutilduuh is on the scene.

What planet are you living on? The previous subject was "I don't know what I'm talking about" -- not much of a subject. You begin every single reply with a variation of this belief; its getting old and ineffective.


Which you brought up after I corrected you. The link you give proves you didn't know what you were talking about, don't know why you'd quote it here.


You don't think that gun violence would decline if it were harder to get guns? Why are there so many more gun deaths in America compared to all other western countries?

Of course you're going to reply by saying

- I don't know what I'm talking about
- I'm changing the subject

This is basically all you ever do -- don't know how you can consider that a debate tactic.

I think its pretty classless to attribute the senseless deaths of innocent people as being part of a grand state-level conspiracy. At least you referenced admission that it actually happened, that's a step in the right direction.

You forgot to mention the last part of the video. The shooter said that, subscribe to pewdiepie. The pewdiepie - T series drama has gone too far.

I agree, he massacred all of them without heart. All we can do now is to pray for the souls of the victim.

"To become licensed, the applicant must be a fit and proper person over the age of 16. They also need to have adequate secure storage for firearms, attend a safety program administered by the Mountain Safety Council, pass a written safety test, pay the requisite fee, and supply passport-standard photographs with their application. Police also individually interview the applicant and two referees, one of whom must be a close relative and the other unrelated, to determine the applicant's suitability for a license. The applicant's residence is also visited to check for appropriate storage of firearms and ammunition and to ensure any other people living there are not a security risk. Having criminal associations or a history of domestic violence almost always leads to a license being refused. An application can be refused if the applicant has indicators of drug or alcohol abuse, criminal associations, a history of domestic violence, or a physical, mental health or disability issue that would prevent them possessing or using a firearm safely. Previous denied applications or revoked licenses may also be cause for denial. "

Actually I quoted the Wikipedia in my very first reply to you. Sounds pretty restrictive to me, but you have such great reading comprehension I must be wrong. The actual previous subject was everything you had no reply to resulting in your desperate attempts to try to cast me as a "Sandy Hook denier". Why are there so many car deaths in America? Shit I guess we should stop driving since cars kill far more people. Cute you used the term "gun deaths" so that it would be maximally inclusive so that suicides, justified use of force, and self defense would be included. Real gun crime has been on a steady decline for a long time in the US, what has increased is the media exposure.

and finally

"I think its pretty classless to attribute the senseless deaths of innocent people as being part of a grand state-level conspiracy."

Everyone knows states never conspire to kill people right? War doesn't exist and national leaders WOULD NEVER kill people to get more control right? RIGHT?

Everyone take a look at what people do when they have no ability to debate and no logic to stand on when their beliefs are challenged. They mock, they make personal attacks, they accuse, they distract, then they call you insane and run away. These are the types of people responsible for most of the suffering in the world because they insist on not having their comfortable little bubble be intruded upon by harsh realities. Like a child in a burning house you run to hide in the closet telling yourself you will be safe as you die of asphyxiation. Reality doesn't give a fuck about your feelings. You keep telling yourself whatever you need to in order to keep your comfortable delusion going, otherwise you might have to critically examine your beliefs, and who wants that right?

One thing is clear to me - the utter fragility of the human state. Whether death by one bullet (per second) or tens to hundreds (per second), or mass deaths by ballistic nuclear missiles, when it is the death of an innocent we are talking about, and even done by a fairly sane law abiding enforcer, for instance, with only one bullet per second, it is still just as tragic and meaningless and completely wrong as the deaths of the 50 innocents in ChristChurch, done by an insane whaco.

HA HA No thanks..
More like "Watch the latest globalist, anti-America, anti-freedom, one world power shill propaganda here."

What this guy did was terrible, make no mistake, but all of these calls for censorship and gun control are terrible also.

This is NOT good for the cause of the right. This hurts the right, but may accelerate the left to attack the right, take rights and impose more control, to push closer to the tipping point of civil war exactly as the shooter claims he wants..

This entire situation is bad and not only has he murdered people but had done a great disservice to the right.

This guy idolizes communist china so he is probably an authoritarian lefty anyway but will be labeled right wing to propagandize just as he wants to happen..

Think for a moment that if this is some sort of false flag, "winning his money in the crypto market" is a pretty darn good way to hide where your money actually came from, you think?

This is not good and I do not want to see civil war, left vs right war, accelerated.. That would be very very not good..

There have already been retaliatory attacks across the world citing this as justification. Turkey's president Erdogon is even calling this a Christian lead war against Islam, which you can be sure will lead to even more violence. Of course as we all know hundreds of Christians slaughtered every month by radical Islamists is not worthy of reporting, but this New Zealand attack will be reported on for years to come on full blast. Unfortunately people seem unable to tell the difference between how often some thing happens in reality and how often the media reports on it.

@eddie, I completely agree with you but atleast you have to somehow consider. If censorship for the freedom to have gun is too much that is fine but reforming to at least reconsider their current laws with regards to gun.

I can't personally tell why would this guy want's or plans after the attack. If this guy really did the attack so that the government can have power in controlling how people uses guns then we should address to that certain issue.

One thing is clear to me here justice should have given to the victims and that will only happen if this guy is caught and should serve the sentence. other than that will then proceed to the other issue

I'd be the last to ask for censorship and gun ban but there should be limits. People advocating for violence should not be allowed to stay on social media recruiting people. People with mental problems shouldn't have guns and there should be regular evaluation.


Heard from a family member that someone burned a bus in Italy. There were kids inside. Of course the guy was black and likely M.

Direct calls for violence are a crime in most parts of the world already, but law enforcement and social media are quite selective over which of these they choose to act on. Who gets to set the standards for evaluation? What is stopping them from making those standards so impossible to meet that no one meets them? In the USA gun ownership is a right, not a privilege pending evaluation and government permission.

Regarding the bus fire, I have also read about this story. Fortunately no one was killed, but setting a bus full of children on fire clearly shows the intent to. Tell me, how much media coverage have you seen about this?

Give that in the last week there were 25 Islamic attacks in 12 different countries, resulting in 149 killed and 91 injured, plus 2 suicide blasts, this is indeed a good question.

Yeah, like basically lift all of the current restrictions.
No permits for pistols or full autos or silencers. No permits for concealed carry.
Something like, Freedom to keep and bear arms.. I could go along with that..


How about fuck this guy? Who cares other than those trying to use it to destroy liberty?

I mean sure it sucks some people died, he is an asshole for killing a few people, but on the grand scale it is nothing at all but a useful backstory for those who seek to achieve ultimate power..

It's only 50 people, out of billions of people.
Their are like 7,700,000,000 people in the world.
Something like 150,000 people die every day.
50 people is nothing.. Insignificant..

Communism and totalitarian regimes have slaughtered 100,000,000 easy, and counting.
What did Hitler do first? Take the guns..
People are out of their minds to give up their guns over 50 people here and there..

People are so spoiled these days. It has been too long for them to remember why people need to be free and free to protect themselves.
Good times breed weak men.  The western-cultured world of good times has been breeding weak men for too long and we are seeing the signs of weak men bringing on hard times..

New Zealand just banned all semiautomatic weapons (other than .22)

Certain semi-automatic firearms declared to be military style semi-automatic firearms

"For the purposes of the Arms Act 1983, the following firearms are declared to be military style semi-automatic firearms:
(a)

a semi-automatic firearm that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine (other than one designed to hold 0.22-inch or less rimfire cartridges) that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges:
(b)

a semi-automatic firearm that is a shotgun and that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges."

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0055/latest/LMS173651.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_arms+order_resel_25_a&p=1

https://www.shopalexanderarms.com/img-.17_HMR_rifle.jpg
https://www.shopalexanderarms.com/Rifles-_17_HMR_-_Complete_Rifle.html
https://www.mossberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/02-22vs17hmr-Mossberg.jpg
There you go Kiwis..

Or.. Someone just needs to wildcat a 5.56mm rimfire cartrige, and make/modify a rimfire bolt for the standard AR, and convert them all to rimfire.. Pretty easy..
Call it a .219

An AR is a .22, just centerfire..

Just when gun control was rolling along nicely in NZ, something like this mass shooting has to go and happen. No wonder government wants to censor this. People are up in arms about this. The question is, will people listen to their formal government? Or will they rise up and put government in its place by getting rid of gun control altogether?


The Chilling Censorship of the Christchurch Shooting (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/258199-2019-03-23-the-chilling-censorship-of-the-christchurch-shooting.htm)




8)

Does this look like sane behavior to you?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-24/nz-edge-festival-evacuated-over-far-right-tattoo-gov-criminalizes-download

We are approaching the event horizon people. You can't cower from harsh realities much longer before we pass the point of no return and the consequences of ignoring them will directly result in horrible violence. You can ignore reality forever, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality forever.

"Reasons shootings like Christchurch will happen again" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89KkpX_ANds

Why is techy trying to censor your question?

No doubt he will now report this post in an attempt to censor me.  :(

On Topic:   Religion causes violence.   Ignorance causes Religion.  We need to spend more on education, not military.

I left you a merit because you are obviously in desperate need of validation.

Bravo! LOL! You are such a great example to follow! Me leavum merit too... LOL.

 :D

How funny that I was drawn here by your (censored) obvious and desperate need for validation.  :)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103785.msg50314684#msg50314684

On topic: Can anyone provide any other global solution other than waiting for religion to die?

Well we could try giving more, bigger guns to more crazy extremists and see how that plays out.

I'm just not on board with the idea that gun control = government tyranny and loss of liberty. The U.S. military could crush any militia no matter how well armed. I think Waco and the handful of other militia-led incidents in the past 30 years pretty much proved this. But as mentioned earlier, I strongly believe this isn't going to effect U.S. gun laws, largely because of the NRA. There's no such equivalent in New Zealand. Regardless, New Zealand still has a comparatively large proportion of gun owners; nobody's taking their guns away either, they're just saying you can't have the really big and fast guns. Seems smart IMHO.

No one is advocating "giving more, bigger guns to more crazy extremists", and this statement is indicative of your unwillingness to have a legitimate debate over this subject. While this is about much more than just preventing government tyranny, lets address that point.

"The U.S. military could crush any militia no matter how well armed."

First of all, using the US military against the domestic population is generally not legal, but lets ignore that fact and break down what may theoretically happen, and what has happened historically. Generally speaking "crushing" an uprising of domestic population is not going to be popular among the military, nor would it be productive in quelling such an uprising as once the people see this, the government makes its intentions of murdering dissidents clear which will result in even more resistance nationally. This tired argument is often made by people who do not understand anything about the logistics of the military, their oaths, or their training.

The fact is you don't occupy land with tanks, jets, and nukes. You occupy land with soldiers, and soldiers are not bullet proof. Furthermore that hardware requires logistical supply lines which again rely on people on the ground. Also nuking ones own population would be quite counterproductive considering the goal of tyranny is usually to control more resources, and laying waste to those resources is contradicted. Additionally wars like have been happening in Afghanistan show you exactly how long people with small arms can hold off the most advanced military in the world.

Short of full on warfare there have been many examples of people preserving their freedoms against a tyrannical government such as "The Battle of Athens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29)" in 1946 in Athens Tennessee where the local population stood up against the corrupt local government to prevent vote fraud. Other more recent examples are the standoff at The Bundy ranch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff), and at the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge). Giving a corrupt government force the choice between having to resort to violence to gain control in of itself is a method of maintaining freedom because it forces those involved to be DAMN SURE they are in the right, or else they will be the ones in a box or a cage after it all gets settled. This is what is known as deterrent effect, and it is not easily quantified resulting in it being dismissed by casual observers such as yourself.

Waco was a mass execution, and the charges which brought them there to begin with were based on fraud. Of course I don't expect you to know any of this being the casual tourist to these topics that you are. Even this is a perfect example of what results when the corrupt forces make the choice of murder over backing down, and the world witnessed this holocaust, took note, and made preparations for further tyranny. Again, this is just addressing the SINGLE ISSUE of government tyranny, not even touching on the right to self defense, national defense, criminal deterrence, etc.

Unfortunately these events are being used to systematically take rights of self defense and free speech by playing off the manipulations of fearful simpletons such as yourself reacting in a knee jerk response with little to no critical thought. You might have strong beliefs, but if they are based on your emotions they don't count for much. Additionally I find it convenient you simultaneously are pro-gun control while you spout about your beliefs as if what you believe is not skewed by your bias. Excuse me if I don't really give a shit about your poorly informed belief system.

^^^ Unfortunately, people have spent too much time delving into their pleasures to learn the methods for protecting themselves from other people who use big government to harm them. In the below list, I will show several of the methods. I will, however, leave the most important one out.

The methods have to do with using the law against government people when they break the law. Start learning them now, because you won't be able to learn them overnight when you need them. The Waco massacre could have been completely avoided if Koresh and his people had thoroughly understood and used the following:

1. Common Law, shown by Karl Lentz and others. As of this writing, the only place on the Net that I know of where to find Karl's sort-of complete list of discussions - hours and hours of explanation and talks with other people - is at http://jurorinlaw.com/talkshoe/klentz/. Take the time to listen to the first 20 episodes.

2. Private Membership Association (PMA). Youtube search on "Private Membership Association." Government is a public organization. It controls the public. A PMA is a private organization. It is basically off-limits to government, and government states this in Constitution, Amendments, laws/codes, and many Supreme Court cases. But if you don't know this stuff, government people can run all over you. Three links to listen to that will give you the basics of what this is all about are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lupSn80_PY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13OHj_2TOOA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTq13vOxpZk.
None of this means that the PMA is limited to only the things said in these talks. There is a wide range of PMA stuff that is being exercised, that is way beyond what is being said in the videos. The videos show only one slice of the PMA pie. Another great slice is in #3, below, and is not stated to be, or even known to be, a PMA. But it essentially is a PMA.

3. Corporation Sole... done the right way. Much of the stuff in these two links goes way beyond what it is being used for. But you need to understand what it's about, and put your thinking cap on. The links:
https://apeacefulsolution.wordpress.com/
http://www.theultimateinassetprotection.com/?ref=SWC.

If Koresh and his followers had understood and used the above 3 things, there would have been no massacre. Not only that, the controversy was so great in Waco, that cancelling out the government would have spread freedom all over the place. But you can't use what you don't know that you have... except by accident, of course.

8)

P.S.  New Zealand is a common law country, same as the USA. With a few changes in method, these above things (which are USA things) can be adapted to NZ.

It is really pretty tough to think, as a human being it is our nature to act violently. Regardless of having a weapon or not, or whatever reason why would they do it. From that fact alone you really can't get killing in our system. Yet if i were given a chance to lessen this kind of act.

I will probably be hitting first the politics because for me this is one of the most toxic system a human being have ever made. Then i will start to educate people the importance of valuing your life like you do value other persons life.

Oh sh*t  people still do whatever they wanted to do no matter what I will do nvm.

Did the Koreshians win or lose the fight?

The idea that Americans having guns will prevent government tyranny is false. Maybe it was true a couple centuries ago. Its certainly not true today.

Irrelevant. The government was forced to expose itself as murderous criminal tyrants allowing others to prepare for more action of the same. In the other cases they DID win, and once again you are a simple creature who doesn't understand deterrent effect. The government is made of people. People will think twice about an action if they think they may get shot in the process. It is a really simple equation.

Here is the video.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/OFtr5kDOz7yh/

god is clearly speaking here... the free will of one nutjob is more important than the lives of 50 people that worship him.

Or he was sleeping, like during the world wars...  :/

Well that's some way to tick off the religious peeps in here 🤣 though putting that aside, it's really sad for the families of the victims to have their loved ones end this way. Nothing can justify such an act but plain blatant terrorism. And i'm wondering if this could've been handled better by the authorities since it took quite a while before the gunman was appehended.

How long do you think it will be before they start declaring you unfit for XYZ? Are you seeing the pattern yet?

http://www.hideoutnow.com/2019/04/new-zealand-police-confiscate-airsoft.html

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2019/03/luis-valdes/nz-confiscations-begin-police-going-to-gun-owners-homes-jobs-one-gun-owner-dead/

@TECSHARE

Now it is actually becoming ridiculous, I can't even imagine  my self being caught up for having an Airgun by a hypocrite police who's just basing by his "own" opinion.

behold New Zealand is now becoming an "Open Prison"  (we are only allowed to see what they want us to see - which is starting to make no sense) that's why  I hate politics

People who are unstable and not mentally sound are getting hold of guns and until that can be sorted out, these horrible things will happen and it is really unfortunate, in majority of the mass shooting incidents i have followed, everyone does have a history of mental illness who does not have any remorse or empathy towards another human being, if he wants to challenge himself one on one combat is the best way rather than hiding behind a gun like a coward.

It is indeed a tragedy, but let's look at some of the facts before being drawn down the wrong path:

*From what I've heard so far, the shooter was described as:

-A little left, a little right.
-Was not a fan of Trump.
-Hoped Conservatism was dead.
-Was an eco-fascist.
-Was a fan of Communist China.
-Did not choose Muslims for the fact that they were Muslims, but simply because they were a convenient group to target for his intended purposes.
-Was not a Christian (as some have tried to claim - not surprising as they also tried to claim Bravick was a Christian too, when he was a self-described Odinist who despised Jesus and Christianity).
-Was an Australian citizen.
-Was a white nationalist.
-Wanted to increase racial tensions and start a civil war - that was his main intention (which the liberal establishment media seems to love pushing ever since Trump got in office).

-ADDED by a user below (thank you very much): "Very nice summary. One thing you kind of overlooked is that he specifically said he intended to cause freedoms such as second amendment rights to be taken in reaction to his acts, specifically in the USA, which he hoped would result in civil war (probably right). The fact is these governments around the world are giving him everything he had hoped for on a silver platter."



*What's some of the aftermaths?

-He randomly mentioned conservative voices (including a black lady) who had nothing to do with what he did, but the mainstream media jumped all over that and attacked them and blamed them for the attack.

-People blamed President Trump for the attack, which happened on the other side of the planet, by a citizen of a completely different nationality, who didn't even like President Trump.

-People blamed "anti-Muslim rhetoric" and started getting harder on people who peacefully refute and criticize Islam, and condemn violence. When he did not choose Muslims based on a hatred of Muslims (he had even visited Muslim countries), nor was his intent aimed at Muslims, but rather to escalate racial tensions broadband, and start a civil war.

-I saw a video where a prominent Muslim leader in NZ was speaking at a supposedly "anti-hate" rally, and he had suspicions (without offering any evidence) of who funded the shooter (because he obviously couldn't have funded himself, right? Eye-roll), can you guess? It was (he suspected) Israel's special forces. And Zionist businesses around NZ. Essentially: the JEWS did it! And you can hear people in the background yelling that. So, you can expect a new round of anti-Semitism in New Zealand... but don't expect to see it on the news.

-Pretty much immediately after the attack, GUNS are also the bad guys, even though the second shooting was cut short by a citizen wielding a gun (I heard some stories that he actually fired back, and another that he threw the gun and it smashed their car's window). Essentially, "let's make sure future NZ citizens can't defend themselves against future terror attacks." The left wants the disarmament of citizens, when in fact, you will not stop criminals from finding a way to get guns, nor are guns the only means by which a determined individual can kill lots of people, and it's a fact of history that tyrannical governments have disarmed their citizens prior to committing atrocities and genocides on their own populous (based on religious views - Christians often getting the brunt of it - differing political views, transfer of wealth and power, etc).



*Now let's look at some of the utter hypocrisy:

-The ONLY reasons this got massive media coverage was because: A. the shooter was a white male, and B. the victims were Muslims, and (somewhat) C. It was in an otherwise peaceful and obscure corner of the globe (with ready access to the media). If it had been a Muslim committing an act of terror against Christians - which happens ALL THE TIME in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa, two such incidences of which occurred right after the NZ shooting - and you don't get nearly the same coverage, if any.

-People blamed and attacked President Trump, Conservatives, people who peacefully criticize Islam (which demands hatred of unbelievers and the violent subjugation of the world) who themselves condemn violence, white people, etc, when in fact NONE of these had anything to do with the shooter's actions.

-People, including on this thread, are saying we need to stop the anti-Muslim rhetoric. And what does that mean? That means, to liberals and those who don't actually care about searching out the truth and forming solutions based on that and peaceful discussion, that all criticism of Islam (no matter the facts) must be canned, silenced, deplatformed, etc. Not realizing that it is this very silencing of legitimate concerns and peaceful dialogue that has led to the frustrated backlashes of people like Anders Bravick, who saw problems and violence that Islam was bringing to their communities, and came to the conclusion that talking will get them no-where, and that to get the world to listen they had to do something drastic (a bad conclusion, but that was their line of reasoning). And also not realizing that Islam's texts DO call for the hatred of non-Muslims and the violent subjugation of the entire world. The left refuses to look at the actual sources, and continues to condemn people who are trying to point these things out. Yes there are peaceful Muslims, but: A. that's because many of them don't know or follow the Islamic texts as they should, B. have been heavily influenced by Western society (largely influenced by Christianity and Judaism), C. don't have the right mindset to follow the commands of Islam and the examples of Muhammad, and D. would be considered apostates and hypocrites worthy of death by more practicing and devout Muslims. But the left does not want to look at sources. They don't want to bother themselves with actually searching out truth. They want to blindly say that all religions are fundamentally the same, and are all equally capable of violence, which couldn't be further from the truth. Many of them, such as Atheists, evolutionists, etc, will even deny the fact that their own worldview is a religious one, and have been responsible for some of the biggest atrocities, shaping the worldview of the figures that committed those atrocities over the last 200 years (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, & others, mass murdering the Aborigines for their skulls to sell to Museums, Columbine shooters, etc).

-Just as an extra example of such hypocrisy, the world has recently been inflamed with Brunei for its recent implementation of Sharia Law, Islamic political law which exacts harsh punishments (which amazingly CNN admitted), which (among other things) calls for the death penalty of homosexuals and for adultery, mutilation for stealing, etc. And yet, these same media organizations, political leaders, celebrities, etc. haven't had a problem with the existence of Sharia Law as a part of Islam. They've insisted that Islam is peaceful and purely a religion. They've had spokespeople say Sharia is a beautiful thing and is simply a way of living, by choice of the individual. They maintain diplomatic ties with countries (such as Saudi Arabia and others) that are also under Sharia Law and do not condemn them. They allow such countries to participate in human rights councils, etc.  



*What will people focus on, and why they really shouldn't:

-They will focus on silencing all criticism of Islam (no matter how legitimate such concerns are) and call those who bring up these concerns (even if they have been personally affected by it) as Islamaphobes, bigots, and racists (which doesn't make any sense). No matter what is done in the name of Islam or how often. This, unfortunately, will only lead to more frustrated people who believe their only chance of getting the world to listen to their concerns is by doing an act of violence, which will only feed the downward spiral of silencing legitimate concerns and then more backlashes. They will also refuse to highlight acts of Islamic terror because quite honestly they happen far too frequently, and those ignoring them don't want to believe that they have anything to do with Islam. In doing so, they will also completely ignore, as they have been doing, Christians and other minorities who are constantly under attack for their faith. Church bombings, executions, kidnappings, torture, etc. Even Christian refugees can't stay in the refugee camps, and many who apply for refugee status in countries like the UK are unfortunately mocked and denied. They will highlight any further attacks against Muslims to give the false impression that Muslims are constantly under threat.

-They will focus on President Trump, conservatives, and Christians, and paint them as the enemy, when they had nothing to do with this.

-They will focus on stricter gun laws, even though the best way to stop a future shooting rampage, or knife stabbing spree, or vehicles plowing through crowds of people, etc, is an armed populous, well trained, and the enforcement of laws already on the books to ensure people with criminal records or (true) mental health issues can't legitimately purchase a firearm.

-They will likely focus on painting themselves (hypocrites that they are) as being the ones that truly want peace, and truly want to stop violence and hatred, AND are the ones with the answers on doing so. While they silence, hate, and smear everyone who disagrees with them, and ignore (or obfuscate and twist some of) the constant terror attacks happening around the world from the Muslim community (again, there are peaceful Muslims, yes, but that is despite the clear teachings of the Islamic sources, not according to those sources). Yet, instead of looking into it, the left wants to ignore it and silence any peaceful criticism of it (which only leads to a build-up of tension), then explode in selective moral outrage when a loose nut finally breaks and backlashes.



The ONLY real solution, or perhaps first steps to a solution, is the allowance and encouragement of peaceful dialogue, and to treat the Muslim community, and their religion, and Muhammad the same as everyone else. Everyone else is subject to scrutiny, criticism, mockery, defending their positions, etc, and NO ONE else commits acts of violence over these things (no matter how sacred the thing is that such scrutiny is being directed towards). Yet, the Muslim community is protected from this normal Western way of doing things, because a good many of them will react with violence to such things which everyone else is subject to. You don't have a right in the West to be protected from your feelings getting hurt, or from your belief or a religious figure you follow from being criticized, or even mocked. Well, I guess NOW you do, as the political left continues to act as though WE were living under Sharia Law.


And that's that. Please take the facts into consideration, and don't do what the mainstream media wants you to do. PS, I live in a Muslim majority country, I have Muslim friends and family, pay attention to people who look behind the scenes, don't work dirty like the mainstream media does, and who keep track of the news you don't hear every day, and I've actually looked into the Islamic sources myself. I'm also a Christian, so I know how the two compare.  

The opinions and views in this reply do not necessarily reflect those of the Cyberius company as a whole.
Have a great day,
The Cyberius team.

Very nice summary. One thing you kind of overlooked is that he specifically said he intended to cause freedoms such as second amendment rights to be taken in reaction to his acts, specifically in the USA, which he hoped would result in civil war (probably right). The fact is these governments around the world are giving him everything he had hoped for on a silver platter.

Thank you very much. I'll amend my reply with your quote. Thank you.

Max Igan Banned From Youtube For Exposing Christchurch Massacre
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov6ZqMeT-MM

There will be no civil war in America for a long time. I'm willing to place a gentleman's wager with you. You tell me the number of years you want to wait and I'll agree to it. 5, 10, 15, 20... have your pick. Regardless of what you think this guy wanted, if anybody else had done it who hadn't written a "manifesto" beforehand, the New Zealand government would have responded in the exact same way.

How's your 2nd amendment freedom being effected because of this again?

An Australian shoots up a mosque in New Zealand, and American conspiracy theorists are going beserk, blaming some invisible world government instead of the shooter. That's nice.

Define your terms. What is civil war? Give me an objective metric.

This event is being used to disseminate several narratives, mostly based on fear, which are being used by various governments world wide to remove human rights, such as the constitutional rights to free speech and self defense. This event is being used to condition people using fear to give up these rights based on the promise that if they do submit they will be safer. This is a game of incremental stripping of rights event by event, each time chipping away piece by piece until we are all basically in a global prison system. We are all connected, we are all here on the internet watching these events unfold and discussing them. To pretend these events happen in isolation is asinine. One day its in New Zealand, the next it is in Europe, then in the US, each event cast in such a way as to build upon this narrative of fear. It is classic Hegelian dialectic.

THESIS + ANTITHESIS = SYNTHESIS

Submit your rights and we will make the fear go away. This is the perpetual and unyielding refrain of dictators and slave masters. Just give up a LITTLE BIT more and everything will be ok. The masses are being prepared for harvest. You can ignore this message if you want, but it will not ignore you.

This one (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil%20war) is pretty good.


For reference is the American Civil War. I would think it would mean a prolonged, armed conflict between two deeply divided factions within the same country. If one half of the military supports one side, and the other supports the other, that's a civil war.


It just seems like doomsday has already been imminent for hundreds of years already. At any given point in history there is always a contingency that feels society is on the brink of collapse. No doubt the U.S. will not last forever; perhaps its greatest days are behind it -- perhaps not.

The U.S. is far too unified for there to be an all-out revolt. Everyone is too comfortable and doesn't want to risk giving up what little they have in exchange for anarchy.

Hey, if there's riots in the streets with an organized movement dedicated to toppling the elite, more power to them. Occupy Wall Street was the closest anybody got in recent times, which was still pretty far away, and that ended with a dud.

I'd love nothing more than to see a massive redistribution of wealth from the top 0.1% to the impoverished, but that just ain't happening until something gives way.

Bringing it all back around, bitcoin has certainly helped create a new class of wealth, and sometimes it is being used to level the financial playing field, but it seems like it will soon be another tool of Wall Street from which to profit.

That's not a metric, that is just a definition. I know what the definition of civil war is. You offered a wager, now unless you can define an objective metric for us to judge this standard by the whole idea is meaningless.

I would like to point out I at no point said this was an assured event, but one we are in fact being driven towards, and the entire purpose of me even mentioning it is to bring awareness of this trend in the hope that it can be stopped.

I never said anything about doomsday. Everything is cyclical. This is a constant struggle that is as old as society itself. It is a constant give and take between the masses and the elite that never ends. My point is the elite are again making a play for total control once again. This isn't "doomsday" but it might as well be because it has the potential to become that if not addressed. Additionally the fact that it hasn't happened yet is only a result of the fact that people are aware of these happenings and actively resist them. Writing this off because people have been saying it will happen forever is like saying people have been warning me for years that if I stop breathing I will die, but it hasn't happened yet, therefore they must be wrong and I can live without breathing.

Pretty soon the abundance will end, that's when these divisions will really begin to escalate. This time of suffering can either be short lived and something that can be healed, or it can be prolonged or even permanent. Once this starts manifesting there will be no more time to have this discussion, it will be the law of the jungle and survival of the fittest. This is not the end of the world, just another struggle in a long line of struggles that is humanity. This is perpetual and it doesn't go away just because you are convinced it is not an issue. You can ignore reality forever, but you can not ignore the consequences of ignoring reality forever. We can either collectively address these issues or simply tell ourselves everything will be ok while the tumor grows and festers within us eventually destroying everything. Big changes are coming for better or worse and we need to be prepared, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, physically, and otherwise. Normality is gone, come to terms with it and adapt, or get run over.

OK well I have a feeling whatever I propose isn't going to be sufficient, so you name the metric.

That's not how this works buddy. I don't really care about your dumb wager, but you suggested it. Unless you can define an objective standard for judging it you are just pulling shit out of your ass for your own personal entertainment. So pick one, define a metric or admit your offer of a wager is a failure.

(Probably wrong). There's no impending civil war in America. But whatever, I already offered to play a game with you. I'm not playing this new one because there's no way to win. Those are the only games you like to play. I could offer you a bunch of different scenarios and you would all say they are invalid, so why waste our respective times.

Well shit, since you said so with zero retort or substantiation, you must be right! Don't get pissy with me because you made a dumb statement then can't even define a metric by which to judge it as is standard literally for every bet ever made, but enjoy your self proclaimed correctitude.

poli - means many, ticks are blood sucking bugs, no one in their right mind likes those  ::)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/_TSum0TG75M/ worth a mention that this was the vid that got him in to trouble.
Its hard to disagree with Max, he's logical and very strict with "question everything" policy.

"Former PM Helen Clark is throwing her support behind changing NZ's hate speech laws"

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12230745

^^^ Hate speech laws are really hate speech. They are simply hate speech against hate speech. Anybody who is accused of hate speech under hate speech laws - especially in NZ - shuld reverse the law, using it against whoever is using it against them.

I mean, if someone verbally attacks and takes you to court, they are using hate speech against you by doing it. The least you should do is accuse them right back so that the damages are neutralized.

8)

ex·trem·ism
/ikˈstrēˌmizəm/
noun
the holding of extreme political or religious views; fanaticism.

So whatever political party is in charge decides what is extreme and what isn't.

This is the great danger we always face without gun control, how can a person in his right sense take a gun and kill another person it totally inhuman and gun control must be enacted in full force. May the soul of those killed rest in good peace, what can really result to this level of killing?

^^^ Now you are getting it. Gun control in full force. The force that is stronger than no guns is guns, unless you want to use A-bombs.

Take a look at the USA. There are millions of people who want to control their own guns. How are you going to take their guns away from them? They aren't going to listen to you when you tell them to trash their guns. So, how are you going to do it "in full force?" Are you going to go against your own principles, and use guns to force them to have no guns?

8)

"Police Question Citizen About His Facebook Posts?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLCFQaxf150

^^^ What an opportunity the NZ homeowner had to help out his friends, neighbors, and all freedom lovers! But he blew it.

When the cops came to the door and politely knocked and politely did what they did, they were starting negotiations. They were asking the homeowner for audience. And, the homeowner did a reasonable job of simple negotiation. His negotiation was to be able to film them during further negotiations. The cops declined his terms.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE COPS ASKED. THE HOMEOWNER GAVE THEM HIS TERMS. THEY DIDN'T ACCEPT HIS TERMS. THEY COULD HAVE COUNTER OFFERED.

What could the cops have done differently? They could have thrown out a second set of terms in which they would be filmed for part of it, and not filmed for the rest. In place of filming the rest, they could have offered the homeowner to get a witness or two who could write down what was said. But they didn't.

In other words, the cops made an offer, the homeowner made a counter offer, and the cops simply turned him down rather than making a counter-counter offer.

All that this type of homeowner negotiation does is to make any other homeowner who sees it, feel that he will be on the defensive. Here's what the homeowner should have done.

He should have counter offered with a requirement for a $10,000,000 bond from the cops, to sit out on the front yard with them, and hold an interview. And they would sign a hold-harmless clause for the bond money. He should, also, have required a cash amount for holding the interview. And, he would shut the camera off if he could have a couple of witnesses of his own choosing attend the interview and take notes.

Why would this be better, since the cops would still say "No?" Because average homeowners always need money. And when they see this short footage, the idea of being paid for an interview, along with a $bond for protection, will start to get some of the average homeowners to go on the offensive.

IF the cops and government happened to be willing to do this for the interview, other people would start to do the same, and the country would be bankrupted if government continued.


Cops are just cops. They are not kings, dictators, or God. Neither are the rest of the people in government. NZ is a common law country, with the jury ruling via Queen's Bench. If a cop wants an interview, give it to him... on your terms... and make a chunk of money in the process... or get him to leave you alone.

8)

NEVER give up your right to self defence. EVER.

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/after-new-zealand-banned-guns-only-530-of-300000-people-turned-them-in/

You clearly didn't read the original article sourced by your conspiracy enthusiast website (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/free-thought-project/):

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12235230


TL;DR: has nothing to do with "the right to self defense." Your story took one fact and spun it into a narrative that has nothing to do with the original news article.

LOL! Let me get this straight Nutilduhh... you chastise me saying I didn't read the article, then say TL;DR, shortly after claiming I am making assumptions directly after parroting the assumptions in the article for reasons why people aren't turning in their firearms. How do you even function in the real world with that kind of inability to use simple logic? I think you are just a fearful little boy afraid of real men willing to stand up for their natural human right to self defense (yes this is directly related to self defense). Weak men often feel the need to attack stronger men because they are intimidated by what they will never be, some one with a pair of nuts. Of course when there is blood in the streets you are the first to run and hide behind them. As usual, nearly every gun control argument comes from a position of Pathos.

Just admit you didn't read the article. Your version of the article is making assumptions that its reader base (you) want to hear. That's how that website supports itself: constructing fearmongering, conspiratorial narratives that resonate within the echo chamber hive mind of its readership, reinforcing absurd and religiously-held beliefs. Your article didn't say peep about the fact that maybe (just maybe) the gun owners are waiting for clarification on how much money they will receive for forking over their military-grade weapons. What you and the story you quoted fail to mention is, they are allowed to keep the rest of their guns!

The rest of your comment is just too petty, ridiculous and hypocritical (and off-topic) to respond to.

The fact is very few people complied. Sure, I made an assumption (one I didn't actually even explicitly state BTW), and so did the article. So your assumption is some how more valid than my assumption? LOL, K.

I love the hypocrisy as you simultaneously call me a hypocrite. What I said is very much on topic. You are a fearful little man, and you form your opinions from a position of Pathos, not Logos. Your emotions rule you to the point you are unable to use simple logic to see how your own statements are self contradictory.

OOooO they are "allowed" to keep the rest of their guns. How gracious of them to "allow" them to have an inalienable human right. I will let all the people know who have had "the rest of their guns" taken, up to and including air rifles. I am sure they will be glad to hear they get to keep a handful of pea shooters. BTW, what the fuck is a "military-grade weapon" anyway? Let me guess, the black scary looking ones? You don't have a fucking clue what you are even talking about, please stop pretending you know shit about firearms.

By that logic your opinions mean nothing as well. I can find quotes from people living there that agree with me too. Furthermore it does directly effect me because weak minded people like you will use policies like this as justification for stripping my rights here. This was even explicitly the intent of the shooter as stated in his manifesto.

Yeah, what spoiled Americans we are with our highfalutin rights to not be subjects to the violence of tyrants and criminals. Also "pasty class" is that a racial reference you fucking bigot?

Not hyperbole, fact (http://www.hideoutnow.com/2019/04/new-zealand-police-confiscate-airsoft.html). You quoting the New Zealand law doesn't magically impart knowledge of firearms to you. I am well aware of the language of the law, and it consists of completely arbitrary standards designed to make the nation defenseless and dependent on the state monopoly of force. Just because other retards use the term "military-style weapons" does not magically make it less of a totally arbitrary terminology. You seem upset. Didn't you just get done accusing me of being motivated by my emotions?

Yet even more evidence gun control is about the inability of some individuals to control their emotions, not logic.

"SNOWFLAKES Shut Down Toy Gun Store Because it Made Them Uncomfortable" https://www.bitchute.com/video/xivdAsb9UwI/

I completely agree with you: everybody who over-reacts out of fear that the government is going to take their guns from them and winds themselves up into conspiracy mode every time there's a mass shooting need to embrace common sense logic that perhaps gun ownership and access laws need to be reviewed.

Here's some logic for you: its harder to commit a gun-related crime if you don't have a gun.

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10259683/mother_jones_gun_deaths_by_state.png

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10328765/GUN_SCATTERPLOT_2x.png

So do you ever have any thoughts of your own, or do you have to wait for some one like me to have one so you can repeat it back to them? The word conspiracy is just a pathetic attempt to stigmatize the very real fact that the leading cause of non-natural death since the 20th century is government (https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM). Your argument presumes the state is some how morally superior to the individual. What a joke. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Every time there is a mass shooting fearful weak little boys like you scream we need "gun control" (euphemism for confiscation/ban) from the rooftops because you can not manage your emotional reaction to the events, then you attribute the reaction from the law abiding gun owners as irrational. They are reacting to people like you politicizing these events and attempting to take their rights, not the event itself. In short, people like you cause the reaction directly then call it irrational by characterizing it as "conspiracy". By the way you might want to learn the actual definition of that word seeing as you use it as a cudgel to attempt to utilize conditioned negative connotations to that word. It doesn't mean what you think it means. People afraid of reality love calling everything they don't agree with "conspiracy".

Regarding your "logic", it is also harder to die from AIDs if no one has sex, I guess we should have mandatory abstinence right? Oh you like sex? Guess what, people like being able to not rely on government to defend themselves, especially since they are usually 10-20 minutes away, that is assuming they don't shoot you when they get there. Your chances of dying in a car accident are significantly reduced if you don't own a car, I guess we should ban cars too. Pools? Nah, people drown in pools. BAN. Just because you live in a place where you feel safe without owning a gun does not mean everyone does. In fact the people who most need to be armed are the poorest among us, but fuck them right? You live in a gated community with an armed guard, and guns are scary. You have no logos, your arguments are 100% from a position of emotional instability and fear like nearly every gun control argument.

Zzzzzzzz


We've been over this ad nauseum: You've made a facetious comparison here. Guns are designed to be lethal weapons. Sex, cars, and pools are not. Why is this so difficult to understand?


I present to you a bit of logical evidence to support the idea that more guns = more gun deaths (a pretty simply concept really) and you delve head-first into long-winded, overly emotional personal attacks in an attempt to counter it. I would say you are the one who is unstable here. Really, I don't even need to read your walls of sniveling hate text to know you're a bit off your rocker. Every day you bang your head against the wall here and expect different results. That's lunacy.

Convenient you just throw the logical points out the window because a sentence next to it hurt your frail fee fees. Man debate is so much easier that way!

Yes, we have been over this ad nauseum. The comparison is legitimate. Guns are designed to provide PROTECTION for people. You summarily excluding this primary use case is what is fallacious ( I know you meant to use this word instead of facetious (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/facetious), but you have trouble with the definitions of words and simple logic).

You provided statistics that ignore totally the positive use cases and lives saved and protected by firearms. You don't get to just erase arguments and statistics (http://gunssavelives.net/blog/cdc-report-on-guns-ordered-by-obama-says-self-defense-is-common-gun-carriers-less-likely-to-be-harmed/) that work against your point, that is not how debate works. Just because you plug your ears and go "LALALALA CONTRARY FACTS DON'T EXIST!" doesn't make the contrary facts disappear. So, 3 paragraphs = "walls of text?" Next time I will draw a cartoon for you, maybe that will be more your speed since 3 paragraphs is a difficult task for you. You were saying something about personal attacks... just before you use personal attacks... but I am the emotional one right?

btw there was a second guy who tried to do mass murder in nz church at the same moment, but he was neutralized by the churchgoers. thanks to civilian weapons, who have again proofed that they are essential

With the kind of nation NZ is, if cops go about forcefully taking guns away, there will be a change in elected officials, following a bunch-of-dead-cops bloodbath.


Kiwis 'Just Say No' To Gun Ban (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/262705-2019-06-10-kiwis-just-say-no-to-gun-ban.htm)




So, it isn't only the USA that has gun freedom. But NZ is more like frontier USA... how the West was won.


8)

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/07/new-zealand-gun-control-falters-maybe-ca-editorial-explains-why/

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/07/twitter-suspends-john-r-lott-jr-over-factual-new-zealand-tweet/

Here we are, exactly as predicted, these events are being used to end free speech and 2nd amendment rights. I am sure all the shooters used Facebook too. Why is it Facebook is not responsible for radicalizing them?

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/network-provider-cloudflare-drop-8chan-after-el-paso-shooting-n1039151

http://shoebat.com/2019/06/18/major-scandal-as-fbi-accidentally-outs-itself-provoking-violence-on-8chan-over-earnest-shooting/

Oh no, Cloudflare, a private company, decided it didn't want to host a website notorious for sharing child porn, what an outrage.  :'(

They have already headed over to the company used to host The Daily Stormer and other important websites of equal caliber content.


Free speech and 2nd amendment rights have truly ended.  ::)

All this is very sad, but it is not the weapon that kills, but the man. Should not change the 2nd amendment.

https://i.imgur.com/knj0gi8.jpg

Any website that acts as a public forum is pretty much guaranteed to have child porn on it at one time or another, the host is not responsible for the actions of individual users as is any site. I love the way you phrased this and just skipped over the whole fascistic stifling of free speech and framed it in such a way as if I am arguing against you I am arguing in support of child porn. Not disingenuous at all. I know you think this is cute right now because you think it is being applied to "your enemies" but the fact is these are your rights being taken. I am just not as retarded as you and understand this means the end of rights for all of us, not just "one side". Hopefully one day in the future when you realize how much you were cheering for creating the prison you and all your loved ones will be doomed to live in, the torment of realizing what you advocated for won't make you want to just blow your brains out on the spot. You still have time.

Uh, no. Child porn is unfortunately endemic on the internet on all the most popular social media sites. The difference is they have larger staff to remove it faster or do so using automation. People like you love saying "build your own site" but that is exactly what 8chan did. Now they are being denied critical infrastructure to make that possible. This is no different than fascism with corporate and government entities operating in coordination to prevent targeted groups from being able to speak freely. Would you make the same argument that Verizon should be able to decide people are unfit to use a phone because of their legally protected speech? When does it end? How long will it be before you can't buy food or water if you say the wrong things by your metric?

You get that feeling because you tend to project your own emotional state onto others. I don't much care what people with their heads buried up their asses think of me. Don't listen to me, listen to reality all around you that you work so very hard to ignore every single day.

No, they're not. The story you linked said they had already found another company to host them. Regardless, Cloudflare is not obligated to continue hosting them.


Again, you go straight to the hyperbole in lieu of reasoned debate. I know you like to present any 'ol conspiracy that pops into your head as fact but there's zero evidence of "corporate and government entities operating in coordination." If this was the case, why wouldn't the government demand that Bitmitigate cease hosting 8chan?


Absolutely. That is their right. However, they are not going to do this because it would not be a good move business-wise for them. If it was in the best interest of their business, perhaps they would.


More hyperbolic hyperbole. Absolute ridiculousness. Never. The answer is it will never be that long. You're way too paranoid. You are the #1 threat to yourself, always have been, always will be.


That's a long-winded way of writing "no u."


OK.

So your point is all of these companies have the right to form effective monopolies, then deny anyone they don't like services? How long do you think it will be before sites like Bitcointalk are denied these services? Ask Theymos how things would run around here without access to Cloudflare. It is not at all hyperbole. Just because it is happening indirectly doesn't mean it isn't happening. For you to pretend that censorship is not brought on by government and corporate pressure is absolutely asinine and intentionally ignorant. It is not even up for debate. Just because they haven't crushed everyone on every outlet yet does not mean they aren't denying access to tons of basic services which are in effect monopolies.

Regarding Verizon, you are incorrect. They do not have that right, as they are regulated as a utility, as such they do not have the legal authority to deny people service based on their speech (short of it violating law). Again, this is 100% a valid point as this trend has been and will continue, and by your metric its perfectly ok to deny basic goods and services to people based only upon their speech. This is the INEVITABLE result of your logic. You just pretending it will never go that far is not a valid retort. All this is, is the American version of the Chinese social credit system. Soon people who say the wrong things will not be able to leave the country, use public transport, open a bank account, have a phone, or any of the basic necessities in a modern life. Don't worry though, you called me paranoid, so everything will be fine.


https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/the-brain-washing-of-the-partisan-bubbles-and-the-erosion-of-civil-liberties-to-stop-a-preceived-existential-threat/

It's concerning. 8chan is a "free platform" site like bitcointalk.org, aiming to maximize what users can do. I'll be interested to see how they fare with their new DDoS protection. If they're still using it in a year, I'll look into switching to it for bitcointalk.org.

The ultimate solution here is decentralized forums, though. I wish there was more work in this direction, but most of it is minimal-effort hype without substance. If section 230 is eliminated as some have proposed, centralized "territories of freedom" won't really be able to exist.

We already are IMPRISONED BY THE $YNDICATE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ot2FFc_Qq4

✔️Beaten by my own police multiple times
✔️Used as a $lave my entire live
✔️Medical department holding me down being peaceful injecting me with random needles

Who the fuck cares at this point END ME! YOU DO ME A FAVOR MOTHER FUCKER! SICK FUCKING BASTARDS

Give everyone 1280937192873981 nukes and rifles! we don`t fucking deserve to live as a race HUMAN. We fucking enslave other species and fuck them up for our own greed, heck were so fucking dumb we even en$lave our own fucking kind. I can`t wait for aliens to come by and look at what we do to cows and carrots and fuck us all in the ass. I accept the probe as reparations to all the other species our race has fucked and what we have done to this world.

We all deserve to be wiped.

Creator, take my life, forgive them for they not know what they do, Forgive me for I was one of them before, Give them more duration to understand, We all grow at different rates, BTW PEDOS that is why young cheeries and grapes taste very sour, the are not ready to eaten, look into nature you will solve this life. It is all around you!

FAREWELL

No, I never said any of that. Obviously what Cloudflare does isn't a monopoly.


Never, because this isn't the breeding grounds of manifesto-writing mass murderers.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/founder-8chan-wishes-he-could-uncreate-forum-popular-white-supremacists-n1039496



It is hyperbole until it happens, or comes close to happening. What's happening is you like getting worked up over conspiracies that don't effect you in any way, shape, or form. We're on the brink of civil war according to you, so its hard to take anything you have to say very seriously.


Provide some evidence. Just a shred. Its not up for debate with you because you can't present a rational debate. You live in the richest, free-est country in the world, and all you do is bitch about how unfair everything is and how America is on the brink of ruin. Get a grip.


OK, well I can't find any specific law that backs this statement, but I will give the benefit of the doubt here because it actually makes sense at face value.


There is a giant difference between being denied food and water and being denied DDoS protection services. Only in a place as spoiled and entitled as America would people get this confused.


Its more valid than pretending that it will, because so far, you're wrong, and I'm right. It hasn't happened. When people are denied food and water based on the content of their speech, I will admit I was wrong. Until then, you're wrong.


Hasn't happened. Won't happen. Yes, you are paranoid. Where do you think is a better place to live in the world? I am genuinely curious. Which nation do you think does a better job of protecting your freedoms?

Except by every metric it does. Lets look at Cloudflare's market share.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/985443/worldwide-ddos-bot-protection-market-share/

Over 81% of market share. Check.

Lets look at the requisites for determining a monopoly according to the FTC.

"Market Power

Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power. Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area. Some courts have required much higher percentages. In addition, that leading position must be sustainable over time: if competitive forces or the entry of new firms could discipline the conduct of the leading firm, courts are unlikely to find that the firm has lasting market power.


Exclusionary Conduct

Judging the conduct of an alleged monopolist requires an in-depth analysis of the market and the means used to achieve or maintain the monopoly. Obtaining a monopoly by superior products, innovation, or business acumen is legal; however, the same result achieved by exclusionary or predatory acts may raise antitrust concerns.

Exclusionary or predatory acts may include such things as exclusive supply or purchase agreements; tying; predatory pricing; or refusal to deal. These topics are discussed in separate Fact Sheets for Single Firm Conduct."

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined

Exclusionary acts. Check. Cloudflare is very arguably an illegal monopoly. Furthermore almost no one can handle the amount of traffic that Cloudflare can, putting them in a unique position that other competitors can not functionally replace.


A "breeding grounds of manifesto-writing mass murderers" according to what factual information? Oh you mean the former owner. I am sure there is no bias there. No need to actually prove the claims either, just make them and they become fact by virtue of media magic. They say it, and you repeat it as fact. Nothing at all subjective about this. Nope. 8chan creates mass murdering Nazis. End of story! They certainly aren't created by other factors and happen to congregate in places where speech is not restricted. Everyone knows (unproven) correlation always equals causation! It's science!

Your denial does not count as a valid logical retort, neither does your accusations of "getting worked up over conspiracies that don't effect you in any way". That has nothing to do with the argument and is simply an ad hominem attack. Also just because you are too dense to realize this effects all of us doesn't mean it doesn't effect me. If one person loses their rights, it is only a matter of time before we all do, because that is how law works. Via precedent. Coincidentally this is also the same process that allows willfully ignorant ostriches such as you to acclimate to their new found servitude, via incrementalism. If you were only walking towards your own enslavement I wouldn't mind, but you and people like you are dragging us all along for the ride the whole time never once questioning if you could be wrong.


No problem. It is not up for debate because anyone who cares to make any effort to look will see it everywhere. Here are a few sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_United_States

https://harvardlawreview.org/2014/06/the-brave-new-world-of-social-media-censorship/

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/censorship_in_the_social_media_age.php

https://www.eff.org/es/deeplinks/2018/03/how-congress-censored-internet

https://www.rt.com/news/436058-censorship-left-right-facebook-google/


You are right, this is a great country, and I want to protect the laws and culture that keep it great. The statement that "all you do is bitch about how unfair everything is and how America is on the brink of ruin" is completely projection on your part. Calling attention to a problem is not equivalent to calling it inevitable or unsolvable. Unfortunately ostriches such as yourself make it much more likely because by the time the slower folks realize what happened it will be far too late to change it without considerable costs and suffering.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/report-verizon-fios-gets-perks-from-government-while-avoiding-regulations/

What is the difference? Tell me. How do you buy food without a bank account or credit card? How do you pay for a place to live? Pay for utilities? People are already being stripped of their bank accounts for their speech currently. What exactly prevents this trend from continuing and expanding? Once again your argument consists entirely of an ad hominem attack.

"Its more valid than pretending that it will, because so far, you're wrong, and I'm right."

Well shit, since you declare you are right and I am wrong, that is all the logical argument needed! The problem with your logic is by the time you pull your head out of your ass it will be far too late to do anything about it and cost individuals far too much to resist, so they won't. We still have a window of opportunity to expose and resist this trend, but that is closing fast.

Again, your argument consists of nothing but ad hominem attacks. There doesn't have to be a place with better protections for my arguments to be valid. You just claiming it hasn't happened and won't happen is not an argument. That is called denial. Denial with zero substantiation.

The shootings in New Zealand as well as in the USA are being used as pretext to condition the general public to the idea of giving up freedom for the promise of security. This is a fools bargain and is a lie. Giving up freedom for the promise of security will result in having neither.

Cloudflare has a right to do what they want with their property, but it's concerning all the same.

The Internet is, unfortunately, not a magic cloud where things can live on their own. It's service providers all the way down:
 - Terrorists post on 8/pol/. These people are bad.
 - The 8/pol/ board owner may or may not want the terrorists posting there. If not, then he's an innocent third-party, but he's blamed. (In one of the previous shootings, I read that the 8/pol/ moderators removed the shooter's posts and reported it to the police within minutes.)
 - 8/pol/ lives on 8chan, a huge collection of boards, many of them completely unrelated to politics. 8chan's boards are similar to Reddit's subreddits, with independent board owners. But 8chan as a whole is blamed for the terrorists.
 - 8chan uses several service providers directly: hosting, domain registration, etc. These are blamed for the terrorists.
 - Because the Internet is fundamentally flawed, every site needs DDoS protection, and Cloudflare offers by far the best value in that area. (I think that they're probably subsidized by the NSA in order to act as a honeypot, but perhaps they're just really effective.) You could use a different service or roll your own, but this would cost several thousand $/month more to get equivalent service, and in any case you're introducing more service providers who will be blamed for the terrorists.
 - The hosting companies have their own ISPs, who have their own ISPs, etc., who could all be blamed for the terrorists. At the top, you have the backbone providers who mutually rely on each other and could blame each other for terrorists on their network.
 
For freedom to exist, at some point service providers have to have the courage to say, "Those people using my services through n degrees of separation are evil, but trying to stop them would harm freedom more than help it, so I'm not going to do so." By dropping a site with very few real issues, based on uninformed public outcry, Cloudflare failed here. The government should stay out of it, but it creates an argument for Cloudflare being unreliable & anti-freedom. (They also opened up a huge can of worms, since now they'll get complaints about basically every site they host.)

The whole situation also exposes the serious flaws of the Internet, which may someday destroy it: firstly, the fact that DDoS protection is needed at all; and secondly, the existence of this endless chain of services that you need to trust not to take you down.

Just because they haven't been prosecuted doesn't make it not a monopoly. The fact is Cloudflare meets all the requisite terms for a monopoly. I don't have to be a court to observe facts. Furthermore the CEO is talking about revenue, not market share. These are very different things.

9/11 is the perfect example of using fear to strip rights. 9/11 was the perfect excuse to create massive uncontrolled surveillance programs, strip habeas corpus, posse comitatus, and train people to subject themselves to the regular submission of their rights in the name of security. There was more American freedom taken away under The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act than any terrorist could ever take. I find it amazing you are aware of this concept yet some how find it valid to argue it has not continued to escalate along this same path of stripping freedom for promises of security.

I don't see any ad hominems directed at you, and even if they were there the difference is mine are surrounded by logical arguments, while yours consist only of personal attacks and are devoid of any other substance. I have arguments, you have only denial and name calling. Politicians are openly talking about abridging free speech and removing second amendment rights, and people such as yourself cheer because people always feel more comfortable thinking it is not for them, but only for "the bad guys". It is for everyone, including you, and just because you have chosen to pluck your own eyes out doesn't change this.


"I AM THE MAJORITY!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIwf3d7hP9g


"Joe Biden on whether his admin is 'going to come' for people's guns: 'Bingo'"

http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/08/joe-biden-on-whether-his-admin-is-going.html


The rhetoric of stripping the rights of free speech and self defense are right out in the open among many of the mainstream candidates and press. Regardless of how many examples I present, you push your head even further up your ass and cry "NONONONONONO", because you are too weak too look at the painful reality of the situation and instead choose the comfortable lies, the promises these people give that it is only for the bad ones. BULLSHIT. They are coming for YOU and YOURS. This is always how it starts, and bloodshed is always how it ends. How about we just skip the part in the middle and the end and just preserve the rights?



In general I tend to agree with your libertarian stance. The problem is any ideology in its absolutist form is flawed, because any ideology can be subverted and abused to create the opposite of the intended effect. Drinking lots of water is good, but if they pass a law that you must be force fed gallons of water every day when you wake up, guess what, you are going to die. Any organization or ideology can be subverted, as a result decisions need to be made on the RESULTS of actions, not just on an ideological basis.

That said, monopoly anti-trust laws exist for good reason, and have been a part of this country's legal process for a very long time. In fact when this nation was created corporations were very tightly controlled entities that at any moment could be crushed by revoking their charter the moment they did not serve the public good. Cloudflare DOES NOT have the right to occupy the position of a monopoly and thus deny people access to the infrastructure required to be a part of the modern world. You yourself admitted alternatives are not exactly available. Furthermore by the vary nature of this technology it can only exist at scale and as a result competition is limited and ineffectual in comparison. If this trend continues no one will be able to do simple things like use transportation, use electronic payment systems, communication systems, or any of the other basic necessities that are a requirement of survival in modern life, and I think you know this.

More evidence of censorship https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/08/14/google-machine-learning-fairness-whistleblower-goes-public-says-burden-lifted-off-of-my-soul/

"Philly Cop-Shooter Was Federal Informant"

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-21/philly-cop-shooter-was-federal-informant

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-push-to-kill-cash-australias-proposed-ban-shows-its-not-conspiracy-theory/

Well gee, if they ban cash we will be totally dependent on banks and other private payment systems who are already refusing services to people for their words. This certainly isn't more proof of the ability to unperson and blacklist certain people for their views and deny them access to the free market now is it?

What does any of this have to do with the shooting in New Zealand? You've seemingly hijacked this thread to make it a launchpad for your own conspiracy theories.

What happens when cash is banned an all that is available is private enterprise free to abuse their monopolies to crush any opposition with the full backing of the monopoly of force of government?

I repeat my original question:


And you just doubled-down on this with your last reply. You're quite literally inventing fears at this point, none of which have anything to do with the New Zealand shooting. 

I already answered your question in the form of a quote covering the related subject matter of using these events to strip rights.