This NZ Story Stinks

I first learned of this incident today, Friday, at 9:40 am GMT, which was 10:40 pm on Friday in New Zealand, where the incident took place at 1:40 pm.

So a mere 9 hours had elapsed.

Instant politics from the BBC:

Forty-nine people have been killed and at least 20 wounded in shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described one alleged gunman, who had Australian citizenship, as an “extremist, right-wing” terrorist.

Instant politics from the Guardian:

Rightwing extremist wrote manifesto before livestreaming shooting.

Instant politics from the Sun:

A WHITE-supremacist who filmed himself slaughtering Muslims in a New Zealand mosque wrote a chilling 74-page manifesto after he was inspired by Anders Breivik.

So it seems that not only has the killer been identified as a white supremacist, extremist, right-wing terrorist, but also his 74-page manifesto has been found, and read, and summarised.

All inside less than nine hours.

The Sun report is dated 3:36 am, 15 March 2019, which is 4:36 pm NZ time, three hours after the event.

Make that all inside six hours

This story stinks. It’s all far too quick. I’m not sure if I could read and summarise a 74-page manifesto inside six hours, particularly if I’d been woken up in the middle of the night to do so.

It reminds me of how the UK Daily Telegraph, the day after the Kennedy assassination on 22 November 1963, carried a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle. How did the Telegraph manage to get hold of such a photo inside half a day?

Something terrible happens somewhere, and instead of there being a period of confusion before the facts gradually emerge, there’s almost instant universal certainty about not only who did it and but also exactly why they did it. And in this case the finger of blame is being pointed at a “white supremacist, extremist, right-wing terrorist”.

All sorts of people are being accused of being “white supremacists” these days. Back on 22 February

Trump denies his ‘very nice’ language encouraged white supremacist Coast Guard officer

And just yesterday, 14 March:

Samantha Bee: ‘I’m not saying Tucker Carlson’s a white supremacist. No, sorry, yes I am’

How interesting that. just days after Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson are accused of being white supremacists, a self-identified white supremacist appears with his very own 74-page manifesto in which, guess what, he praised Donald Trump:

New Zealand mosques’ attack suspect praised Trump in manifesto

A suspected gunman behind the Christchurch attacks has dubbed the US president as ‘a symbol of renewed white identity’..

What a wonderfully convenient stick with which to beat Donald Trump, and white males in general.

It all looks to me like a carefully planned, coordinated campaign. This story was probably written days or weeks ago.

About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to This NZ Story Stinks

  1. Twisted Root says:

    Terrible incident. Now I am going to move on and never refer to it again and completely ignore finger-waggers who think it is some sort of stick to use in arguing a political point or tar anyone they find disagreeable. Fuck them. These events have become a turgid danse macabre with willing participants on all sides performing their steps to the music of click-bait media.

  2. Thaddeus Buttmunch MD says:

    Well, it COULD have been Shiite vs. Sunni, or maybe just a Mashugina (Crazy Person.) The Marchers in Charleston certainly WERE White Supremacists (as was the guy that ran over the antifa) as was the Fool who shot up the Synagogue in Pittsburgh.

    • waltc says:

      Will this never die? The Charlottsville day began with a protest by “decent people” who didn’t want the statue of (someone like ) Robert E Lee that had been in their park or square for a century torn down and another group of “decent people” who did. Since I at least casually know some “decent” non white supremicists who don’t want statues smashed, I can’t say everyone against statue-smashing is indecent or bigoted.
      . While both these groups were, and remained, there, enter the Nazis, who were not decent, but Trump whose prose is often imprecise was referring to the pro-statue crowd, not the Nazis, as he tried to clarify.

      • waltc says:

        Note, too, that the violent (as opposed to the “decent”) anti-Nazi anti-statue protesters were Antifa, which has pretty much been shown to be as thuggish as the Nazis. In any case, Here’s what Trump said:

        “You had a group on one side that was bad. You had a group on the other side that was also very violent. [Antifa.] Nobody wants to say that. I’ll say it right now. I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups,” he said. “Not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. So this week, it is Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?”

      • Joe L. says:

        Don’t waste your time on this troll, Walt.

  3. Frank Davis says:

    Steve Turley

    Here’s Why the Media is Actually Blaming TRUMP for the NZ SHOOTING!!!

  4. Frank Davis says:

    Limbaugh Floats “False Flag” Theory NZ Shooter Is “Leftist” Who Staged Attack To Frame Conservatives

    And there is an ongoing theory — Mr. Snerdley, correct me if I’m wrong about this — there’s an ongoing theory that the shooter himself may in fact be a leftist who writes the manifesto and then goes out and performs the deed purposely to smear his political enemies, knowing he’s gonna get shot in the process. You can’t immediately discount this.

    The left is this insane. They are this crazy. And if that’s exactly what the guy’s trying to do now then he’s hit a home run because right there on Fox News: “The shooter is an admitted white nationalist to hates immigrants.” You try to absorb all of this to try to keep some sort of an even keel about it. And then from the manifesto again itself, the shooter says he’s not a conservative, not a Christian and that he identifies as an eco-fascist, which would make him a supporter of the Green New Deal. He adds that he disagrees with Trump on politics. And here’s more from the manifesto.

  5. Lepercolonist says:

    Plenty of fake news floating around. To the radical Islamists: What goes around, comes around.
    Muslims have been killing Christians every week around the world.

  6. RdM says:

    “It’s all far too quick. I’m not sure if I could read and summarise a 74-page manifesto inside six hours, particularly if I’d been woken up in the middle of the night to do so.”

    I could read a 74 page manifesto in 15 minutes and still summer rise, I think, heading autumn, maybe a fall, maybe 30 mins. Maybe seconds to summarize, but how long to express, write!?
    It may have needed only one summary to start to go out. Then it’s around the world.

    I was in the country at the time, early afternoon, Radio NZ & TV1 & TV3 were all over it within minutes, all other programming dropped, live views on TV after initial radio reports, accurately.
    For hours after that. And in to the next day today and tomorrow.

    I’d rather leave it alone, focus on tobacco, but to save you the searches, and if Frank passes the more than two links, we have, for instance:

    [Actually there are timelines over NZ UK EUR and other websites, factually informed.]

    I’m not bothering to post links, the browser is overloaded with tabs and sluggish, so …

    Until later!

    “I feel as though we should move right into the religious material…”

    ~ RdM.

    • RdM says:

      Forgot to close italics on first quoted paragraph…

    • Frank Davis says:

      I could read a 74 page manifesto in 15 minutes

      You must be in the top 1% of readers.

      Average readers are the majority and only reach around 200 wpm with a typical comprehension of 60%.

      Assuming 600 words per page, it would take most people 3 minutes to read a single page, and 222 minutes or 3.7 hours to read 74 pages. And since they would only understand 60% of it, they probably wouldn’t be able to summarise it at all well.

      I suppose that people who work in newspapers, and spend all day reading and writing, might be able to get through 44,400 words in about 45 minutes. But I suspect that their comprehension might suffer considerably, and they’d only understand 30% of what they read.

      Perhaps this is the problem with journalists: they read and write very quickly, but understand next to nothing.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.