New Zealand - Christchurch Mosque shooting, dead & injured reported, 15 March 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
Indian newlyweds came to Christchurch with a dream. On Friday, that dream died.

NW.jpg

Indian nationals Abdul Nazer, 34, and his wife, Ansi Alibava, 25, were both inside the Al Noor mosque on Friday -- men sat on the left, women on the right -- when the first shots were fired.

Originally from Kerala, the young couple had borrowed money to move to Christchurch last year, so she could do a master's degree there in agribusiness management. He'd taken a job stacking shelves at the local supermarket to help pay the bills. Alibava finished her master's degree three weeks ago after doing extra study last summer to finish earlier than her classmates. She hoped to get a high-paying job and they would live and work in New Zealand, before returning home to Kerala to settle down.

Friday’s shootings changed those plans forever. Tragically, Alibava was killed and now her husband is raising money to help repatriate her body back to India.

All these stories are heartbreaking, but I choose to remember the victims rather than think about the monster who destroyed the hopes and dreams of so many families.

New Zealand shooting live updates: Accused gunman will defend himself in court - CNN
 
Does anyone understand the NZ LE reason for not wanting the manifesto spread? There are obvious reasons like not wanting to spread his racist filth or encouraging copycat attacks. I don't know about their justice system but assume the manifesto will come out at trial anyway right? Just trying to understand their play.

IMO it's just another form of censorship. The whole internet will be censored soon, you'll only be able to read what someone forces you to read, as everything else will be removed.
 
It seems worth repeating

Schools and parents are trying to protect students and encourage responsible use of social media in the context of a horrific attack.

It is obviously hard for parents and schools to do that if the CHC Press and Stuff and the Herald and TVNZ were to post the manifesto and broadcast the murder video

This is but one example of why local media are not carrying this stuff and FB etc are deleting the content.

I was in CHC on friday and personally I did not want my young daughters watching the video and reading the manifesto via Whatsapp etc

Instead I explained to them carefully what had happened.

We even had to hide the front page of the Christchurch press from them on saturday because I did not want them to be terrified.

Maybe posters need to consider practical issues effecting the people of Christchurch right now and realise these things are more important than your god given right to read terrorist propaganda in your local newspaper
 
Last edited:
IMO it's just another form of censorship. The whole internet will be censored soon, you'll only be able to read what someone forces you to read, as everything else will be removed.
I have no issue with terroristic messages being removed from public consumption. A terrorist uses terror to spread a message and this course of action is appropriate in quashing that.

People are free to share ideas as lawful citizens. The NZ terrorist has lost this "right".
 
I have no issue with terroristic messages being removed from public consumption. A terrorist uses terror to spread a message and this course of action is appropriate in quashing that.

People are free to share ideas as lawful citizens. The NZ terrorist has lost this "right".

What has really been thrown into stark relief is that TVNZ /SKY etc are subject to strict standards as broadcasters and largely answered that challenge on Friday

Whereas Facebook was livestreaming a murder video for 17 mins

Why is one platform allowed to get away with this total lack of broadcast standards in NZ whereas the major broadcasters are subject to strict rules?

Frankly it is high time for NZ to regulate FB or kick them out of the country if they don't pull their socks up
 
Does anyone understand the NZ LE reason for not wanting the manifesto spread? There are obvious reasons like not wanting to spread his racist filth or encouraging copycat attacks. I don't know about their justice system but assume the manifesto will come out at trial anyway right? Just trying to understand their play.

It’s evidence. New Zealand also bans hate speech under law, the Human Rights Act of 1993.
 
What has really been thrown into stark relief is that TVNZ /SKY etc are subject to strict standards as broadcasters and largely answered that challenge on Friday

Whereas Facebook was livestreaming a murder video for 17 mins

Why is one platform allowed to get away with this total lack of broadcast standards in NZ whereas the major broadcasters are subject to strict rules?

Frankly it is high time for NZ to regulate FB or kick them out of the country if they don't pull their socks up


Broadcaster subject to strick standards?

That’s not Freedom of the press.

....

However, in March 2012 the parliament passed the controversial Search and Surveillance Act, which forces journalists to answer police questions, identify sources, and hand over notes and other documents. Breaches of the law carry penalties of up to one year in jail. While Justice Minister Judith Collins insisted that the law was necessary to bring “order, certainty, clarity, and consistency” to outdated laws, opponents derided it as a step toward a police state. The opposition Labor Party said it would seek to repeal provisions in the law that allowed the police’s Serious Fraud Office to raid media offices without a warrant.

New Zealand


There are no government restrictions on the internet, which was accessed by nearly 90 percent of the population in 2012.

Has the above changed? If still no gov restrictions then how can they decide who reads what.
 
I know NZ police asked social media users to stop sharing the shooting video but I didn't hear anything about not sharing the manifesto from NZ law enforcement.

New Zealand Police on Twitter

“Police are aware there is extremely distressing footage relating to the incident in Christchurch circulating online. We would strongly urge that the link not be shared. We are working to have any footage removed.”
 
Broadcaster subject to strick standards?

That’s not Freedom of the press.

NZ broadcast media has long been subject to standards oversight.

New Zealand is not the USA. We have different rules over here. Yet we remain a high functioning western democracy with low levels of corruption etc.

Broadcasting Standards Authority - Wikipedia

Intentionally sharing or broadcasting the video is likely a criminal offence in NZ
 
What has really been thrown into stark relief is that TVNZ /SKY etc are subject to strict standards as broadcasters and largely answered that challenge on Friday

Whereas Facebook was livestreaming a murder video for 17 mins

Why is one platform allowed to get away with this total lack of broadcast standards in NZ whereas the major broadcasters are subject to strict rules?

Frankly it is high time for NZ to regulate FB or kick them out of the country if they don't pull their socks up

I’d love for fb to shut down completely.
 
PM Jacinda Ardern says cabinet made in principle decisions about reforming gun laws, which means that within 10 days of the horrific attack, they will have reformed laws to make the country safer.

She “applauds” those who have surrendered their weapons voluntarily and encourages others to do so.

New Zealand mosque attack: Ardern says cabinet has agreed gun reform 'in principle' – live

RSBM, BBM.

People are voluntarily "surrendering" their weapons? Before they're even required to do so? :eek:
 
RSBM, BBM.

People are voluntarily "surrendering" their weapons? Before they're even required to do so? :eek:


If I were LE I would think the ones volunteering to turn them in has something to hide at home.


ETA That is what she says. I have not seen or heard who has done this.

You know... if billy bob turned his in maybe we should too. Make ppl feel good.
 
Last edited:
RSBM, BBM.

People are voluntarily "surrendering" their weapons? Before they're even required to do so? :eek:

“As per existing processes we are happy for people to surrender their firearms to Police.”

New Zealand Police on Twitter

“Today the Prime Minister announced an inquiry into the attack, a move we at Police welcome. It is important we learn any lessons we can from this tragedy. She also spoke about surrendering firearms.”

New Zealand Police on Twitter
 
"Former Crown prosecutor Ross Burns, who led the 'Operation 8 case' after the 2007 raids, said charging Tarrant with murder - but not terrorism - would curb his ability to grandstand."

"Using terror laws against him could fuel his ability to grandstand in court, according to the only lawyer to lead a case under New Zealand's anti-terrorism law."

"A document Tarrant purportedly published online before the shootings cited a desire to plead not guilty, and he reportedly plans to represent himself."



Why mosque killer could end up never answering terror charges
 
“Jacinda Ardern is showing the world what real leadership is: sympathy, love and integrity.“

Our Kiwi neighbours should read this article. I was going to post excerpts but the fact of the matter is, it’s brilliant and none of it should be omitted.

You should all feel so proud of your PM. She’s only been in office for 5 months but you couldn’t ask anyone to act with more compassion, empathy and strength than she has displayed over the last few days. If more leaders had some of her qualities the world would be a better place.

Jacinda Ardern is showing the world what real leadership is: sympathy, love and integrity | Suzanne Moore
 
RSBM, BBM.

People are voluntarily "surrendering" their weapons? Before they're even required to do so? :eek:

People surrender weapons to the NZ police all the time. There is an official process via which you can do this.

One common reason to do so is where the license holder dies, or no longer is active (e.g. age)

These kind of weapons cannot be passed to someone else unless they hold the required license and have the security storage required by the police and it has been vetted.

So either you sell the gun through a dealer, or more likely get rid of it.
 
"Former Crown prosecutor Ross Burns, who led the 'Operation 8 case' after the 2007 raids, said charging Tarrant with murder - but not terrorism - would curb his ability to grandstand."

"Using terror laws against him could fuel his ability to grandstand in court, according to the only lawyer to lead a case under New Zealand's anti-terrorism law."

"A document Tarrant purportedly published online before the shootings cited a desire to plead not guilty, and he reportedly plans to represent himself."



Why mosque killer could end up never answering terror charges


Hmmm I'm not understanding how the different charges would prevent him from grandstanding, can someone please explain, maybe @mrjitty ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
1,055
Total visitors
1,159

Forum statistics

Threads
589,162
Messages
17,915,043
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top