SoundsRight wrote: » Their manifesto is directed at their people. We have little control over what is taught in mosques and madrasas. Tarrant's is aimed at us.
SoundsRight wrote: » Their manifesto is directed at their people. We have little control over what is taught in mosques and madrasas. Tarrant's is aimed at us. We can either look at what motivated him, and try and prevent future attacks, or do what Ardern does and play into his hands. He's probably laughing at her walking around in a headscarf.
KikiLaRue wrote: » When ISIS attacked that Ariana Grande concert, did you think we should address the issues they raise in their manifesto? If not, why do you treat the manifesto of this mass murderer differently to that mass murderer?
Nerdlingr wrote: » I'm sure the NZ authorities are taking care of that. I doubt we'll see him out walking the streets any time soon. As I've said before - lets not pander to him. And yes I would rather we wipe mass murderers from our collective memories. Blur his face, dont say his name, stick him in solidarity confinement and let him rot. The world will move on without him. People think we have something to learn from these radicals, that somehow if we understand why this guy did this we can stop others doing the same. I disagree with that. He is the ultimate troll and i'd wipe my @rse with his manifesto.
Wanderer78 wrote: » I understand the country is in shock and in a state of mourning, but I can't see not mentioning his name being of any benefit, the damage is done
o1s1n wrote: » So should we forget about all mass murderers then? Just wipe them from our collective memories? I really wish people would stop with this virtuous bull****. Whether you or anyone 'doesn't say the perpetrators name' is utterly irrelevant. The event has happened, the perpetrator has been named. The best we can do now is to ensure he faces the full strength of the law and doesn't harm anyone ever again. If you murder a load of people you are going to gain notoriety. It just the way things work.
Nerdlingr wrote: Where did i say that? Great strawman argument there. By not mentioning his name we can at least deprive him of what he wants - notoriety. And nothing will prevent such events in the future. That is the sad, cold reality of the matter. You can read as much as you want into his manifesto and try to work out why he did such things in some vain attempt it will prevent another killing. Truth is if someone gun toting maniac wants to walk into a McDonalds in the morning and shoot up the place he can.
Nerdlingr wrote: » I'm delighted with Ardens saying she'll not say his name. I said it on here before he should be forgotten about, wipe his name form the records. Make him irrelevant. What these narcissistic f*ckers want the most is their name in lights and their moment in the sun. He wants to represent himself in court. Same as Brevik. F*ck him and his Manifesto. The less we feed these idiots and pander to them the better. IMO there is nothing to be 'learned' from here. The guy is a child murdering coward - lets not big him up to anything more than that.
Wanderer78 wrote: » So not mentioning his name will prevent such events in the future?
SoundsRight wrote: » She's actually adding to his notoriety with her silly virtue signalling. She's making him out to be something like the Candyman, where you can't even speak his name. Until society address the issues Tarrant raised in his manifesto, then we'll have learned nothing from this attack. Gun reform and policing the internet are just distractions from the fundamental problem.
Nerdlingr wrote: I'm delighted with Ardens saying she'll not say his name. I said it on here before he should be forgotten about, wipe his name form the records. Make him irrelevant. What these narcissistic f*ckers want the most is their name in lights and their moment in the sun. He wants to represent himself in court. Same as Brevik. F*ck him and his Manifesto. The less we feed these idiots and pander to them the better. IMO there is nothing to be 'learned' from here. The guy is a child murdering coward - lets not big him up to anything more than that.
Wibbs wrote: » Given racist cowardly types that plan ahead, move countries to get better access to weapons and a a society not prepared for such an act and go ahead an commit mass murder are not exactly two a penny, he is unique to some degree and there was a complex set of circumstances that came together to enable this tragedy. Some of which might be flagged in others before similar happens elsewhere and again. Actually that's precisely what law enforcement agencies and psychologists do. It's how over time detection and catching these scumbags has improved. Calling such warped individuals "evil" is easy and comforting, but it does eff all to stop the next one. Then again the prick in the Netherlands was "known to police" had all sorts of beady eyes on him, yet was able to find a weapon and murder three people in broad daylight, so that's another issue; acting on information about pricks like this.
SoundsRight wrote: » Until society address the issues Tarrant raised in his manifesto, then we'll have learned nothing from this attack.
batgoat wrote: » You'll find plenty of serial killers had normal upbringings too. Shall we have a debate if their warped motivations are worth a discussion? You seem to have not a care in the slightest for the victims. Instead, you want to see if there's a rationalisation for killing a load of innocent people including children. That is based upon your own anti Muslim views. Edit:won't engage further with you at this point.
Boggles wrote: He is racist cowardly mass murdering scum bag. He is neither complex nor unique.
batgoat wrote: » You'll find plenty of serial killers had normal upbringings too. Shall we have a debate if their warped motivations are worth a discussion?
Jelle1880 wrote: » Society has to address the issues he raised ? What the actual ****.
SoundsRight wrote: » If certain issues drive a man who had a normal upbringing to commit mass murder, don't you think that should be looked at?
Hector Savage wrote: » That video too, I am surprised to see how popular it is, I checked a torrent site and saw (assuming it was the correct one I didn't download it) that it has a huge seeding. Watching it you are just doing what he'd want.
batgoat wrote: » New Zealand does not have a problem with Islamic fundamentalism. So it was a hateful person who committed a terror attack. It's pretty shameful that you're repeatedly implying he has a point.
SoundsRight wrote: » Until society address the issues Tarrant raised in his manifesto,
[Deleted User] wrote: » Does anyone else think the media covering Ardern saying she'll never say the suspects name, to such an extent that it's breaking news, a touch ironic? His name, while it matters a bit, is largely irrelevant. He's getting more exposure now from the media's coverage.
Muahahaha wrote: » Whatever about a NZ citizen getting a gun license you'd have to wonder about them giving them out to people who weren't born there. The Nazis appropriated the swastika from Hindu culture where it has existed for thousands of years. Buddhists use it too, it represents well being
Deleted User wrote: » Does anyone else think the media covering Ardern saying she'll never say the suspects name, to such an extent that it's breaking news, a touch ironic? His name, while it matters a bit, is largely irrelevant. He's getting more exposure now from the media's coverage.
Wibbs wrote: » The prick was able to kill eleven people and injure three more in a military base, about the hardest target to do something like that in. Consider that the largest mass murder on a US military base was "only" two more victims killed and that prick was using "military grade automatic weapons".
