# Mass shootings at mosques in New Zealand **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 15, 2019, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169 "2019-03-15T04:15:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/301 "2019-03-24T01:48:00Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > Why? …because they are. > [@](#): > > If you use public pressure to get me banned from every online platform, every TV channel, every radio station, every venue, and every publication, you will have silenced me every bit as effectively as any government could ever do. Bullshit. There is nothing stopping you starting your own website, standing on a street corner, self-publishing your manifesto. You haven’t been silenced. You literally haven’t been banned. > [@](#): > > So what, in _practical_ terms, is the difference between the two? What, in practical terms, is the difference between “banning free speech” and every online platform, every TV channel, every radio station, every venue, and every publication, not broadcasting “Freddy Got Fingered?” Do I not have the constitutional right to watch Tom Green? > [@](#): > > And why would you shy away from using the same tactics to “deplatform” religious texts as much as you’re able to do so? Because I don’t fucking want too? > [@](#): > > After all, they all contain massive amounts of hate speech Do you know what a strawman is? Who the fuck are you arguing with? > [@](#): > > I did no such thing. Of course you fucking did you disingenuous snot. > [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Obvious troll is obvious. > > Piss off now. Indeed. Fuck off Unreconstructed Man. We are going to deplatform you now. But we aren’t going to ban you. Only the mods can do that. Do you understand the practical difference now? ---
**Author:** ![Unreconstructed\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/76d3ee/32.png) [@Unreconstructed\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unreconstructed_Man)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/302 "2019-03-24T02:00:08Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > Bullshit. > > There is nothing stopping you starting your own website, standing on a street corner, self-publishing your manifesto. You haven’t been silenced. You literally haven’t been banned. Apart from the mob going after my service providers, my publishers, or shouting me down in the street so no-one can hear what I’m saying. All of which are things which have happen to real people. > [@](#): > > What, in practical terms, is the difference between “banning free speech” and every online platform, every TV channel, every radio station, every venue, and every publication, not broadcasting “Freddy Got Fingered?” Do I not have the constitutional right to watch Tom Green? If those stations make that decision under duress from a mob then, at least from Tom Green’s point of view there’s no practical difference. > [@](#): > > Because I don’t fucking want too? Why not? If I could demonstrate a plausible “pipeline” from the Bible to the alt-right, or from the Koran & Hadith to ISIS (both of which are trivially easy to do), would that change your mind? If not, why not? > [@](#): > > Do you know what a strawman is? Who the fuck are you arguing with? Currently, I’m arguing with a very, very angry little man. > [@](#): > > Of course you fucking did you disingenuous snot. No I didn’t. > [@](#): > > Indeed. Fuck off Unreconstructed Man. We are going to deplatform you now. But we aren’t going to ban you. Only the mods can do that. Do you understand the practical difference now? Probably for the best that you do. I’m starting to worry about the effect this conversation is having on your blood pressure. But do you understand that there’s a difference between deplatforming someone and ignoring them? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/303 "2019-03-24T02:03:36Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > If you use public pressure to get me banned from every online platform, every TV channel, every radio station, every venue, and every publication, you will have silenced me every bit as effectively as any government could ever do. So what, in _practical_ terms, is the difference between the two? Ah, I think I see your problem now: you are laboring under the delusion that society somehow owes you a mass-communications conduit for the public expression of your opinions, no matter what those opinions may be. But this is not the model on which our civic life is ultimately based. Gather round, children, and let your Aunt **Kimstu** tell you what things were like back in the days not just before social media and the internet, but before network proliferation and cable TV and talk radio. Almost **nobody** had a mass-communications conduit for the public expression of any opinions at all! If you wanted to express your opinions publicly, you could write a letter to the editor of a newspaper or magazine; but they might not publish it. Or if you had the money you could publish your opinions in your own paper or magazine; but maybe nobody would carry it or buy it. Or you could stand on a street corner and exhort people, as long as you weren’t disturbing the peace or obstructing traffic; but maybe nobody would listen to you. Or you could put up a big sign on your house; but everybody might ignore it. Or you could offer to give an address at a local civic-group meeting; but they might decline your offer. Or you could try to purchase a billboard ad; but if the billboard company didn’t like your ad they didn’t have to sell you the billboard space. Or you could write and send chain letters to everybody you knew; but they might ignore them and break the chain **even though you specifically mentioned in your letter that that would bring very bad luck.** :eek: And guess what, kids: **none of our civil liberties were being infringed at all in that situation**. Just because we couldn’t be jailed for expressing our opinions or forced to publicly recant them didn’t mean that any entity, governmental or private, was in the least obligated to provide us with a channel of mass communication for disseminating them. **We were not being in any way silenced; we just weren’t being amplified.** That remains true to this day. You young’uns are so used to taking it for granted that you can advertise everything from your deepest thoughts to pictures of your sandwich all over the world at the speed of light day in and day out, on your Facetubes and your Instatwit channels, that you have fallen into the habit of thinking that that kind of amplification is somehow yours by right, and that if someone kicks you off their broadcasting platform then they are illegitimately “silencing” you. But you’re wrong, pets, you’re wrong. If you want to see the very real practical differences between being merely “de-amplified” and being silenced, just try going out there and publicly saying something inflammatory that the government is **not** required to tolerate on constitutional free-speech grounds. You’ll soon notice a distinct change in the circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![Unreconstructed\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/76d3ee/32.png) [@Unreconstructed\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unreconstructed_Man)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/304 "2019-03-24T02:09:55Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > But you’re wrong, pets, you’re wrong. If you want to see the very real practical differences between being merely “de-amplified” and being silenced, just try going out there and publicly saying something inflammatory that the government is not required to tolerate on constitutional free-speech grounds. You’ll soon notice a distinct change in the circumstances. Was about to turn in for the evening but just quickly wanted to ask, would _“Kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done”_ count? Like, if one literally just stood on a soapbox and just read that line from the Hadith over and over (or its Biblical equivalent), would the government be compelled to act? If so, for what _moral_ reason can one who supports deplatforming not ask them to act against the book itself? I know this is a bit of a tangent but I’m curious what you think. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/305 "2019-03-24T02:20:09Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > […] the government isn’t likely to send me death threats, burn my house down, or attack me in the street. All of which, btw, are highly illegal actions, no matter how unpleasant your opinions may be, and I don’t see anybody here condoning them at all. > [@Unreconstructed Man](#): > > […] would “Kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done” count? Like, if one literally just stood on a soapbox and just read that line from the Hadith over and over (or its Biblical equivalent), would the government be compelled to act? Er, “compelled to act” how, exactly? I mean, the words “kill” and “die” obviously occur in lots of religious texts, if not all of them. Does that mean that you can get away with standing on a soapbox and shouting _“Kill! Kill! Kill!”_ or _“Die! Die! Die!”_ at passersby, on the grounds that you’re just quoting Scripture? I wouldn’t count on it. Similarly, I wouldn’t count on being able to get away with cherrypicking somewhat longer scriptural excerpts for your rants, if they’re delivered in a similarly inflammatory way. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/306 "2019-03-24T02:56:18Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > Has Canadian hate speech legislation ever been used against people who go around saying “God hates gay people and they should be killed?” No, but close enough for the purposes of your idiotic argument: > **[Albertan who handed out anti-gay pamphlets at Toronto Pride charged with...](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/william-whatcott-anti-gay-1.4721243)** > > William Whatcott has been charged with wilful promotion of hatred by Toronto police. > [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > If so, why shouldn’t it also act against the Bible (“Thou shall not lie with man as with woman. It is an abomination”) or the Hadith (“Kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done”). > > And if there’s a _legal_ reason why not, what possible _moral_ reason could there be, from the perspective of posters advocating the de facto banning of conservative commentators online on the grounds that they’re a “pipeline to the alt-right”, for not insisting the Canadian government expand the reach of their hate speech laws to cover religious texts? See, this is why it’s a waste of time to argue with a troll like you. People can read what they want, believe what they want, worship how they want, and talk about what they want. In a Supreme Court test of the case above, the SCC even ruled that parts of the law under which the individual above was charged that made it illegal to engage in any act that “ridicules, belittles or otherwise affronts the dignity of any person or class of persons on the basis of a prohibited ground” was in fact unconstitutional. You can do that. It’s immoral and reprehensible, but it cannot be made illegal. What CAN be made illegal is the public advocacy of hate against a protected group, because the long and painful lesson of history is that hate promotes bigotry, discrimination, and ultimately, violence. It doesn’t matter whether the hate comes from a literal interpretation of ancient Biblical scripture and the ignorant failure to understand its historical context, or whether it comes from _Mein Kampf_ or the writings of Joseph Goebbels or his latter-day equivalents like Richard Spencer, Ernst Zündel, or David Duke. It only matters that it fosters hate and violence which is counter to the objectives of a peaceful and just society. There are discussions to be had about the historical prejudicial influences of religion to those objectives, but those discussions are not to be had with trolls like you. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/307 "2019-03-24T07:56:39Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > In a Supreme Court test of the case above, the SCC even ruled that parts of the law under which the individual above was charged that made it illegal to engage in any act that “ridicules, belittles or otherwise affronts the dignity of any person or class of persons on the basis of a prohibited ground” was in fact unconstitutional. Minor correction: in the SCC case you’re referring to, the individual was not charged with an offence. It was a civil complaint, brought under a provincial human rights code, and all that was in issue was money and an order that he stop distributing the documents in issue. This may seem a minor point of vocabulary, but “charged” means a penal offence, sometimes carrying a criminal record, and also often with a possibility of incarceration. That wasn’t in issue in that case, which was civil in nature. ---
**Author:** ![Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boo_Boo_Foo)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/308 "2019-03-24T23:02:18Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …LOL. > > You are outraged? > > I don’t fucking care. > > Don’t accuse me of “hypocrisy” when your argument immediately pivots from “banning” to “deplatforming.” Do you seriously think you are the first person to try that on? You don’t care? Truly? Are you so incapable of self-insight? The word “denial” was used earlier to describe your claim that you’re not trying to change people through a sustained pattern of insults and conflict. And now, after responding to “Unconstructed Man” no less than 19 times, you’re claiming you “don’t care?” Again, none of your rants have anything to do with a mass shooting in New Zealand anymore. Indeed, it’s the height of distastefulness. In the context of this thread and this messageboard, the Christchurch massacre has become little more than a cynical vehicle in which you can satisfy your relentless need to engage in conflict. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/309 "2019-03-24T23:47:54Z")
> [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > You don’t care? Truly? Are you so incapable of self-insight? The word “denial” was used earlier to describe your claim that you’re not trying to change people through a sustained pattern of insults and conflict. And now, after responding to “Unconstructed Man” no less than 19 times, you’re claiming you “don’t care?” …LOL. I know you’ve demonstrated throughout this thread that you have a tenuous relationship to the truth, but now we have descended into the world of “fake news.” Only a fucking idiot would re-contextualise 4 multi-quoted posts into “19 replies.” You’ve been here since 2002 and you don’t know how a fucking messageboard works? And you are being deceptive about “I don’t care” as well. I don’t fucking care if somebody is outraged by a strawman. Because its a fucking strawman. You clearly can’t be bothered reading what I wrote. > [@](#): > > Again, none of your rants have anything to do with a mass shooting in New Zealand anymore. LOL. How many of your posts in this thread have been about the mass shooting? I think this was your only actual post about the shooting: “All of us, every single day, are statistically more likely to die in a car crash than a mass shooting.” Well thanks for that. Aren’t you a peach? Glad to see where your priorities lie. > [@](#): > > Indeed, it’s the height of distastefulness. In the context of this thread and this messageboard, the Christchurch massacre has become little more than a cynical vehicle in which you can satisfy your relentless need to engage in conflict. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > After all these years Guin, I note your gigantic ego still has you thinking you’re a self appointed arbiter of taste on behalf of everyone else. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > All of us, every single day, are statistically more likely to die in a car crash than a mass shooting. That’s still true, despite your rhetoric. > In what way is it life or death for you? > You can’t change people, you can only change your reactions. Block him and move on. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > Oh puh-leeze… you’re dancing on the graves of 50 dead countrymen so that you can portray yourself as a victim too. If that mass-shooting didn’t happen none of your woe-is-me-too rhetoric would have a voice right now. I can’t stop you lying to yourself but I’m not buying it. > > You’re in denial. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > This is true, up until the point where opponents of your view (whatever your view might be) start to falsely label your rhetoric as hate speech even when it isn’t. And that’s becoming an extremely pervasive tactic. Here’s why… > > The major social media carriers… YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc etc… they are becoming increasingly sensitive to the many claims which argue they allow hate speech to foster on their platforms. This is why user accounts are being deleted left right and centre nowadays. If you’re a minority of some sort, it doesn’t matter who or what or where, it’s becoming the default “go to” tactic to describe EVERYTHING that you don’t approve of as hate speech, even when it’s not even remotely close to being the case. It’s the new wonder tactic because if enough allegations of “hate speech” are made, even if it isn’t hate speech, action is usually taken against the person/group/mouthpiece who you’re in opposition to. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > Well you know what they say… denial isn’t just a river in Egypt. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > That’s bullshit logic. Take “Six Degrees of Separation” and apply that concept to a Mass Shooting and what you’ve done is found a way to make every person on the planet responsible, in some way or another. > [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](#): > > Blah Blah Blah… > > You’re a conflict junkie. Worse yet you’re a conflict junkie in denial. Time after time you’re hijacking a thread which is about a mass shooting to make it all about you. Every post you write always ends up entirely about YOU and the conflict you’re constantly finding yourself embroiled in. That’s what conflict junkies do. LOL. Its hilarious to see you accuse me of the “height of distastefulness” when every single post you’ve made in this thread has either been an attack on somebody else, a defense of the racist misognistic hater of muslims, or peddling some alt-right conspiracy about how “the minorities” are really the people with all the power. You are in no position to lecture me on what is “distasteful.” But hey, I look forward to you popping back into the thread in a couple of days to continue to lie and misrepresent my posts, to continue to attack me, and to continue to completely ignore the people of New Zealand, the innocent Muslims that died, and the clear and present danger presented by the alt-right and white supremacy. You keep showing us who you really are. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/310 "2019-03-25T06:56:07Z")
Turns out that apparently the real villain here is Chelsea Clinton. :smack: > **[Chelsea Clinton berated by students blaming her 'rhetoric' for causing New...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/16/new-zealand-shooting-chelsea-clinton-blamed-attack/3184870002/)** > > Video of Chelsea Clinton being confronted by several students who blamed her "rhetoric" for helping cause the New Zealand mosque attacks went viral. Gathering round a liberal (and pregnant!) woman and “snapping” at her, accusing her of literally being responsible for this massacre (let’s see if Kimstu has some way to spin that away)…FFS. If we needed a perfect illustration of how unhinged the campus/Twitter left is, there it is. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/311 "2019-03-25T07:02:59Z")
Missed the edit window. It’s distressing enough that there are people in this world this horrible (not just the woman talking, but all her friends “snapping” in support), who style themselves as the good, noble, “progressive” ones. But what bothers me most of all is that “normal” liberals like Chelsea Clinton feel the need to apologize to such despicable antagonists. Same thing when Gabby Gifford’s husband, a military veteran and former astronaut, apologized for daring to praise Winston fucking \*Churchill \*on Twitter. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/312 "2019-03-25T07:53:29Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Turns out that apparently the real villain here is Chelsea Clinton. :smack: > > [Chelsea Clinton blamed by students for causing New Zealand shootings](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/16/new-zealand-shooting-chelsea-clinton-blamed-attack/3184870002/) > > Gathering round a liberal (and pregnant!) woman and “snapping” at her, accusing her of literally being responsible for this massacre (let’s see if Kimstu has some way to spin that away)…FFS. If we needed a perfect illustration of how unhinged the campus/Twitter left is, there it is. …fuck off Slacker. Look at the date of the story. The 16th of March. Over a week ago. Your outrage is long fucking overdue and the rest of the world has moved on. Only you would bump this thread to attack attack a muslim student expressing her opinion on the other side of the fucking world. Showing your priorities as always. Find a muslim to attack. You just can’t help yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Unreconstructed\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/76d3ee/32.png) [@Unreconstructed\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unreconstructed_Man)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/313 "2019-03-25T07:57:37Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …fuck off Slacker. Look at the date of the story. The 16th of March. Over a week ago. Your outrage is long fucking overdue and the rest of the world has moved on. > > Only you would bump this thread to attack attack a muslim student expressing her opinion on the other side of the fucking world. Showing your priorities as always. Find a muslim to attack. You just can’t help yourself. Wow…you really _are_ a conflict junkie. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/314 "2019-03-25T08:07:51Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > Wow…you really _are_ a conflict junkie. …wow. You really are a troll. I’ve made my intentions clear in regards to Slacker. He is a self-declared racist, misogynist, and he hates Muslims. He has stated for the record that he is happy for immigrants to come to America unless those immigrants happen to be Muslim. If you aren’t in conflict with people like that then there is something fucking wrong with you. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/315 "2019-03-25T08:12:59Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > campus/Twitter left Glad we took the time to go after your favorite bugbear, “people who basically by definition have exactly zero real power with an opinion you find tasteless”. In a thread about a mass shooting. You disgusting sack of human excrement. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/316 "2019-03-25T10:03:26Z")
What BS, to say these leftist groups have “zero real power”. Tell that to the Democratic politicians who bow and scrape and apologize to these Maoists, these Jacobins, and in so doing tarnish the Democratic brand with middle of the road voters. Tell it to college administrators and professors forced out of their jobs. Tell it to successful TV auteurs whose planned next project gets thrown onto the back burner (at best) because of a ridiculous Twitter backlash. > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > He is a self-declared racist, misogynist, and he hates Muslims. Lies. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/317 "2019-03-25T10:36:51Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Lies. …LOL. Actions speak louder than words. Here you are again, in a thread about the slaughter of Muslims, attacking a Muslim. We can see what is in your heart. This is who you are. You aren’t one of the good guys. Accept that. ---
**Author:** ![Unreconstructed\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/76d3ee/32.png) [@Unreconstructed\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unreconstructed_Man)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/318 "2019-03-25T12:31:25Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …wow. You really are a troll. I’ve made my intentions clear in regards to Slacker. He is a self-declared racist, misogynist, and he hates Muslims. He has stated for the record that he is happy for immigrants to come to America unless those immigrants happen to be Muslim. If you aren’t in conflict with people like that then there is something fucking wrong with you. It’s not the conflict _per se_ that marks you out as a junkie. It’s the fact that you so obviously enjoy it. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/319 "2019-03-25T18:57:26Z")
Oh, I see. A “good guy” would be on the side of the gang surrounding the innocent and apologetic pregnant woman, hurling accusations that she is responsible for mass murder. Got it. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169/320 "2019-03-25T22:22:55Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Oh, I see. A “good guy” would be on the side of the gang surrounding the innocent and apologetic pregnant woman, hurling accusations that she is responsible for mass murder. Got it. …typical Slacker. The white woman is “innocent and apologetic.” But the grieving black Muslim woman is “part of an angry mob.” No nuance. Literally black and white. You are a “free speech absolutist” except when that free speech is being delivered by a black woman. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-at-mosques-in-new-zealand/831169.md?page=17)