Mass shooting in NZ mosque
Discussion
Thesprucegoose said:
GT6M said:
I never ever said a false flag,
GT6M can't even remember what he wrote said:
Still think its a FF,
This type of stuff never attracts the best and brightest, does it?
I know I joke about it, but I then remember there are actually morons out there who harassed the parents of the dead children at Sandy Hook!
La Liga said:
laugh:
This type of stuff never attracts the best and brightest, does it?
I know I joke about it, but I then remember there are actually morons out there who harassed the parents of the dead children at Sandy Hook!
We have a group that camps on a bridge here and its always been Q-anon and something about 1080 poison. But since last week its been 'beware false flags'. This type of stuff never attracts the best and brightest, does it?
I know I joke about it, but I then remember there are actually morons out there who harassed the parents of the dead children at Sandy Hook!
I suppose we all need something to believe in, its just some of us are a bit more logical and practical than others.
The thing I don't get though, is what is it a false flag for??? Obviously Sept 11th was for oil, but for a country as insignificant as NZ I cant work it out.
Salmonofdoubt said:
If this is a false flag does that mean all the dead people aren't dead and that their funerals were all fake?
Quite, and it is important we never forget that fact: a whole load of people set out on a normal day and never returned home. Others returned home but were injured and traumatised and the families of all of those caught up in it - not only the victims, but also those passers by who helped, and the emergency services that dealt with the aftermath - were all impacted. All because of one, small-minded grub with a few guns.Tony Starks said:
The thing I don't get though, is what is it a false flag for??? Obviously Sept 11th was for oil, but for a country as insignificant as NZ I cant work it out.
Obviously so that the New World Order can disarm white people and continue The Great Replacement TM unopposed, that way they can achieve their ultimate end goal of making everyone look a little bit more tan and reduce sausage sales. They also need a pretext to remove Trump so there’ll be a new 9-11 to take out Trump tower (obviously carried out by Mossad agents) that can then be blamed on Iran and give Israel a reason so annex them.Wake up sheeple!
j_4m said:
Obviously so that the New World Order can disarm white people and continue The Great Replacement TM unopposed, that way they can achieve their ultimate end goal of making everyone look a little bit more tan and reduce sausage sales. They also need a pretext to remove Trump so there’ll be a new 9-11 to take out Trump tower (obviously carried out by Mossad agents) that can then be blamed on Iran and give Israel a reason so annex them.
Wake up sheeple!
Baaaaaa !Wake up sheeple!
Salmonofdoubt said:
j_4m said:
there’ll be a new 9-11
Will the next one be November 9th? We really should refuse to speak to America until they use dates correctly. 
Lentilist said:
GT6M said:
I never ever said a false flag, that came up by one of the residents here,
All I said was it dont seem to be as it was newsed.
like alot of things that have been put up by the MSM
What are your thoughts on the Metabunk thread detailing how such a discrepancy can occur? All I said was it dont seem to be as it was newsed.
like alot of things that have been put up by the MSM
Do you accept or reject the technical answer regarding poor date tag hygiene in the source of a web page?
If not, what is your reasoning for rejecting it, based on the technical information provided?
Have you attempted to recreate the behaviour using a mundane news story with an incontrovertible date (e.g. sports event)?
Have you checked whether other search engines exhibit the same behaviour for the same search term?
If you're sticking with the "pre-dated" conspiracy narrative, how do you explain examples of that same behaviour on conspiracy site search returns?
Given that behaviour is for the Charleston shooting in the example provided, do you believe that was staged?
Are there any mass shooting / terror events you don't consider of dubious provenance?
Have you checked to see whether the same search behaviour is exhibited for them?
There's a great deal of personal research you could do to explore the point you've raised, and I'm genuinely curious to know whether you've done it, or would be prepared to and share your methods and results? That would seem to be the most open minded approach to determining the truth.
More generally, who do you consider a reasonable media outlet and how do you arrive at that conclusion? What steps do you go through to determine whether you trust or don't trust a news outlet, mainstream or otherwise?
“Yeah well, you can prove anything with facts can’t ya”
f
king loony tunes the lot of them E34-3.2 said:
Brads67 said:
What do you mean ? Pretty simple to me. Armed people shoot bad people before bad people shoot more unarmed people.
Surely if one person had been armed and had shot him early then gunlaws would be lauded not derided.
99% of cases, Bad people shoot good people first, and generally good people don't carry guns. Surely if one person had been armed and had shot him early then gunlaws would be lauded not derided.
Simplest solution, ban any sort of fire arm to any citizens.
Weapons that are not legally available to buy to civilians in either Australia or NZ.
Even if there were civilians in the area with a pistol in their sock, they'd have been super brave/stupid to engage.
The shooter didn't get equipped through legit channels. What should be the main focus here is how military grade hardware got into their hands. Are there people in the military diverting arms to white supremacist terror cells? Because no amount of gun control laws aimed at the general public, will stop people with criminal intent, if they have sources inside the military, police or other organisations that are authorised to have guns.
Up to this point neither NZ or Australia have been known to suffer from gun violence. Even the drug gangs tend to keep a lid on that kind of thing as it's bad for business. No doubt there's a few unlicensed arms in circulation, but again, the general public doesn't feel the need to arm itself to the teeth to protect their homes and businesses against acquisitive crime, of course there will be many rifles and shotguns in circulation - NZ is an agricultural country, there are big problems with invasive non-native fauna which makes hunting said fauna a very popular pastime. There is really no genuine need to remove said guns from said people.
My view on gun control - either every adult who is considered mentally healthy and can prove basic proficiency and the correct storage for their weapon should be allowed to have one. Or, NOBODY should have them at all - this includes police first and foremost, and eventually, the military.
It seems to me to be far more logical to keep a list of known law-abiding gun owners and their registered weapons, than it does just to suddenly ban all guns meaning criminals - who care nothing for abiding by the law, or righteous behaviour - will keep their clandestine, unregistered arms anyway and all of a sudden have a major advantage over all regular citizens. And fewer criminals would feel the need to carry lethal weaponry if law enforcement followed a strict 'incapacitate-only' policy and only carried non-lethal ordnance.
vsonix said:
The mosque shooter brought military+ grade weapons to the party.
Weapons that are not legally available to buy to civilians in either Australia or NZ.
Even if there were civilians in the area with a pistol in their sock, they'd have been super brave/stupid to engage.
The shooter didn't get equipped through legit channels. What should be the main focus here is how military grade hardware got into their hands. Are there people in the military diverting arms to white supremacist terror cells? Because no amount of gun control laws aimed at the general public, will stop people with criminal intent, if they have sources inside the military, police or other organisations that are authorised to have guns.
Up to this point neither NZ or Australia have been known to suffer from gun violence. Even the drug gangs tend to keep a lid on that kind of thing as it's bad for business. No doubt there's a few unlicensed arms in circulation, but again, the general public doesn't feel the need to arm itself to the teeth to protect their homes and businesses against acquisitive crime, of course there will be many rifles and shotguns in circulation - NZ is an agricultural country, there are big problems with invasive non-native fauna which makes hunting said fauna a very popular pastime. There is really no genuine need to remove said guns from said people.
Did you make all that up or did you actually read that some where?Weapons that are not legally available to buy to civilians in either Australia or NZ.
Even if there were civilians in the area with a pistol in their sock, they'd have been super brave/stupid to engage.
The shooter didn't get equipped through legit channels. What should be the main focus here is how military grade hardware got into their hands. Are there people in the military diverting arms to white supremacist terror cells? Because no amount of gun control laws aimed at the general public, will stop people with criminal intent, if they have sources inside the military, police or other organisations that are authorised to have guns.
Up to this point neither NZ or Australia have been known to suffer from gun violence. Even the drug gangs tend to keep a lid on that kind of thing as it's bad for business. No doubt there's a few unlicensed arms in circulation, but again, the general public doesn't feel the need to arm itself to the teeth to protect their homes and businesses against acquisitive crime, of course there will be many rifles and shotguns in circulation - NZ is an agricultural country, there are big problems with invasive non-native fauna which makes hunting said fauna a very popular pastime. There is really no genuine need to remove said guns from said people.
The guns were all bought legally, and are classed as Military Style. The illegal bit was the modifications, like the extended magazines.
And the gangs here do use guns https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_i...
A few years ago a Policeman was injured by a modified air rifle and about once or twice a year are shot at by gang members. And we have the odd armed stand off too.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff