50 dead in mosque shootings in Christchurch, NZ

[FireGilbert]

Can we just arrest Fraser Anning already for publicly supporting a terrorist? He was back at it again tonight trying to kick start the “Conservative Nationalist Party”. Such a tool. At least he was egged. Not every hero wears a cape.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1106801008661815296

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Oh #### you.

Such an articulate and well thought out response. Well done.

[DownInFlames]

Ok so before the thread gets locked... the shooter was actively trying to further division. It was no accident he praised Trump’s influence on the rise of white nationalism while criticizing his politics. Liberal sites point out the former while places like “The Donald” use the latter to defend Trump as usual.

Speaking of The Donald, Reddit banned a bunch of “gore” subreddits that feature violence but T_D praises Anning’s hateful letter and gets to stay.

I don’t condone the kid egging Anning but hitting him back was a stupid move. He should have just had him arrested, like Klein did when he got pied, but Anning’s a piece of #### so it’s to be expected that he met (a tiny bit of) violence with violence.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by calumniate

So you're quoting brian eno now even though you admitted you have sigs disabled? It's just for our pleasure then? Your politics are also pretty suspect! Frig off

Maybe 49 dead is not the ideal spot to show interesting idealistic colours. But that's probably just me

I have no idea what the second part of your post means, but as to the first part, someone asked me to change my signature, and I figured it had been the same for a while, so I did. Not sure why that's bad.

[Fuzz]

It would be better if it wasn't soooo...bold.

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Quite good but he needs to familiarize himself with Finsbury Park Mosque, particularly when taking about terrorism.

Rather than keeping us guessing about what type of repugnant calculus you’ve got going on in your head, maybe you should explain what you mean?

[Duruss]

Is it time to talk about how white terrorists...sorry I mean lone wolves are now a far bigger threat here in the west than the Jihadists, who for the most part are stuck in their own back yards.

Also Pewdiepie is a gateway drug to the altriech mainly because of YouTube's screwed up algorithms? His videos get linked to gamergate and comicsgate crap because of that no? Actual question and if you can't answer politely just don't.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It would be better if it wasn't soooo...bold.

Don't ever say I don't listen to you.

[TheScorpion]

what the hell...

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Duruss

Is it time to talk about how white terrorists...sorry I mean lone wolves are now a far bigger threat here in the west than the Jihadists, who for the most part are stuck in their own back yards.

This isn't a new thing though, which is I guess was sort of what I was trying to get at before my emotions got the better of me. Outside of 9/11, angry white men with guns have caused far more death and destruction in North America and much of the developed world than Islamic extremists. We've now had major mosque shootings in Canada, the U.S., and New Zealand (and I'm sure there are others I'm missing). At one point do we start holding the people, particularly politicians, who stoke the flames of extremism with dog-whistling and rhetoric, accountable?

It's not so much about tying good conservatives with the bad ones through association. It's about asking conservatives to take an honest appraisal of what their politicians are saying and why it seems to attract the violent, fringe elements, and maybe changing or toning down the rhetoric, especially on topics such as immigration. We have ample social media activity, literature, electoral, and real-world evidence now that the beliefs these shooters share aren't as fringe as we'd like to believe they are, even if most people who share similar beliefs wouldn't act upon them.

Historically the left has had violent anarchists and revolutionaries in its ranks, but there just really isn't a modern day left-wing equivalent to the racialized, conspiracy-driven rhetoric and violence coming from the far-right. Even if you want to bring Antifa into the equation, their numbers and the scale of violence completely pales in comparison to the full-scale rage and lunacy at the other end of the spectrum.

[snootchiebootchies]

That kid with the egg is my hero. I hope he gets rewarded with mucho hook-up action.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

what the hell...

Obviously 49 people is the cutoff between maniac and not a maniac.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

what the hell...

Is this legit?

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Obviously 49 people is the cutoff between maniac and not a maniac.

Looks like another person in NZ has passed from injuries so that makes 50. Now we have two maniacs.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This isn't a new thing though, which is I guess was sort of what I was trying to get at before my emotions got the better of me. Outside of 9/11, angry white men with guns have caused far more death and destruction in North America and much of the developed world than Islamic extremists. We've now had major mosque shootings in Canada, the U.S., and New Zealand (and I'm sure there are others I'm missing). At one point do we start holding the people, particularly politicians, who stoke the flames of extremism with dog-whistling and rhetoric, accountable?

It's not so much about tying good conservatives with the bad ones through association. It's about asking conservatives to take an honest appraisal of what their politicians are saying and why it seems to attract the violent, fringe elements, and maybe changing or toning down the rhetoric, especially on topics such as immigration. We have ample social media activity, literature, electoral, and real-world evidence now that the beliefs these shooters share aren't as fringe as we'd like to believe they are, even if most people who share similar beliefs wouldn't act upon them.

Historically the left has had violent anarchists and revolutionaries in its ranks, but there just really isn't a modern day left-wing equivalent to the racialized, conspiracy-driven rhetoric and violence coming from the far-right. Even if you want to bring Antifa into the equation, their numbers and the scale of violence completely pales in comparison to the full-scale rage and lunacy at the other end of the spectrum.

Nice identitarian spin on things. Fact: Most mass shootings in the places you speak of are not politically motivated. Fact: There is a small percent of people who are capable of caring out these types of crimes that come in all shapes and sizes. So go ahead! Throw all those pesky cons in the slammer and pat your self on the back cause you've eliminated mass shootings!

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Nice identitarian spin on things. Fact: Most mass shootings in the places you speak of are not politically motivated. Fact: There is a small percent of people who are capable of caring out these types of crimes that come in all shapes and sizes. So go ahead! Throw all those pesky cons in the slammer and pat your self on the back cause you've eliminated mass shootings!

Sources?

[8 Ball]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This isn't a new thing though, which is I guess was sort of what I was trying to get at before my emotions got the better of me. Outside of 9/11, angry white men with guns have caused far more death and destruction in North America and much of the developed world than Islamic extremists. We've now had major mosque shootings in Canada, the U.S., and New Zealand (and I'm sure there are others I'm missing). At one point do we start holding the people, particularly politicians, who stoke the flames of extremism with dog-whistling and rhetoric, accountable?

It's not so much about tying good conservatives with the bad ones through association. It's about asking conservatives to take an honest appraisal of what their politicians are saying and why it seems to attract the violent, fringe elements, and maybe changing or toning down the rhetoric, especially on topics such as immigration. We have ample social media activity, literature, electoral, and real-world evidence now that the beliefs these shooters share aren't as fringe as we'd like to believe they are, even if most people who share similar beliefs wouldn't act upon them.

Historically the left has had violent anarchists and revolutionaries in its ranks, but there just really isn't a modern day left-wing equivalent to the racialized, conspiracy-driven rhetoric and violence coming from the far-right. Even if you want to bring Antifa into the equation, their numbers and the scale of violence completely pales in comparison to the full-scale rage and lunacy at the other end of the spectrum.

Well, it’s hard to argue this. School shooters, and spree killers are predominantly white males. As a society, we need to find a way to circumvent this ####. It will take some out side of the box thinking I suppose.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Thor

Is this legit?

Yes.

And now there are reports of a shooting at the University of Michigan at an event commemorating the NZ attacks:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1107024496240791552

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by 8 Ball

Well, it’s hard to argue this. School shooters, and spree killers are predominantly white males. As a society, we need to find a way to circumvent this ####. It will take some out side of the box thinking I suppose.

But why is that? Whites are what 60 percent (USA) of the population so that accounts for some of it.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

Sources?

it's the old correlation doesn't equal causation. I'd rather focus on the the solutions and not the bi partisan political rhetoric some do. The source is decades of research and not click baitie partisan digital media outlets.

But if we want to stop mass shootings before they happen, it isn't extreme beliefs or motives we should be focusing on — it's the antisocial, violent and threatening behavior, ideological or not, of those around us.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...917-story.html

The source for my second point - history