By Anthony L Hall
And you have every cause to worry that another one may be in your midst, mendacity in wait to do the identical.
I explained why in commentaries like “New Regular Comes to New York Metropolis…,” October 21, 2017, and “Norway’s Timothy McVeigh Perpetrates National Massacre,” July 23, 2011.
The latter consists of this excerpt:
What far too many people overlook is that long earlier than al-Qaeda terrorists struck the twin towers in New York and the Pentagon in DC, a superb ol’ American boy named Timothy McVeigh struck a government building in Oklahoma. This should have made it painfully clear that, in terms of terrorism, we’ve got as much to worry from home/Christian terrorists as from overseas/Muslim ones.
Properly, it seems this domestic type of terrorism has come to Norway. For preliminary studies are that a man as native to Norway as McVeigh was to the USA perpetrated what’s being described as that nation’s 9/11. …
But let this be a reminder that we don’t need al-Qaeda when certainly one of ‘our own’ can visit such devastating terror — the worst gun rampage by a single man in historical past — upon us.
In fact, the massacre in Las Vegas heads an inventory of the various other massacres non-Muslim terrorists have perpetrated since then. I duly commented in “Goal Las Vegas: One other Mass Capturing in Gun-Crazy USA,” October 2, 2017.
The point is that these massacres make a mockery of Western efforts to differentiate between hate crimes/mass shootings, which purportedly solely whites perpetrate, and terrorist attacks, which purportedly only Muslims perpetrate. This is self-deluding and deadly, and I have decried it in many commentaries — most notably in “Islamists Terrorizing London…Again,” Might 25, 2013.
[Fifty men, women, and children] have been killed and no less than  wounded in shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern described the incident as a terrorist assault and one among New Zealand’s ‘darkest days’.
A [white] man in his late twenties was charged.
(BBC, March 15, 2019)
Truthfully, I can consider no better commentary on or response to this massacre than these defiant and reassuring words Prime Minister Ardern provided:
We were not chosen for this act of violence as a result of we condone racism [or] as a result of we’re an enclave for extremism. We have been chosen for the actual fact that we’re none of this stuff: because we characterize variety, kindness, compassion, a home for many who share our values, refuge for many who need it. …
You’ll have chosen us, but we completely reject and condemn you.
(CNN, March 15, 2019)
As traditional, world leaders rushed to telephone in (or tweet) condolences and help.
But it is self-evident that, for the primary time in historical past, such a suggestion coming from the president of the USA rang hollow, and may need even appeared insulting. Not least as a result of President Trump has proven again and again that he’s solely concerned about violence and hate crimes when non-white immigrants perpetrate them towards whites.
My warmest sympathy and greatest needs goes out to the individuals of New Zealand after the horrible massacre within the Mosques. … The U.S. stands by New Zealand for anything we will do. God bless all!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 15, 2019
It might have been understandable, even becoming, if Ardern had made a public show of snubbing Trump. But I think she’s too polite.
The extra salient point, although, is that everyone would’ve anticipated each one among Trump’s predecessors to supply the defiant and reassuring phrases Ardern did. As an alternative, we must face the troubling proven fact that the motivation for this terrorist assault is an ideological and logical extension of so much of what motivates Trump to “HATE” — an acronym for
- hailing white nationalists (just like the terrorist who perpetrated this mass murder) as “very positive” men.
- advocating a journey ban to maintain Muslims out of this country
- talking a few border wall to keep Hispanics out of this country
- elevating anti-immigrant rhetoric that demonizes migrants and asylum seekers as diseased, murdering “invaders” to the purpose of frightening and justifying violence towards them.
This trademark hate is why the blood of the Muslim victims of this white-supremacist terrorist assault is on the palms of this president of the USA.
In any event, it’s solely a matter of time earlier than New Zealand begins the gun-control debate that invariably follows these massacres. Unfortunately, in America, they are all the time too partisan to be constructive — as I have decried in commentaries like “This Gun-Control Debate Is Insane,” April 5, 2013.
But New Zealand’s might be all of the more fascinating given this:
NZ has a firearm-related dying price of two.66 per 100,000 individuals, per yr[;] the US is nearly 5 occasions that. And in contrast to within the States, gun legislation not often turns into mired within the political fog, although the country has an analogous frontier mentality and outdoorsy tradition to the US [including pride in unfettered ownership of all kinds of guns].
[The application process for getting a gun is] an incredible ache within the ass. However it’s a ache within the ass that seems to be saving lives.
(The Seattle Globalist, August 6, 2016)
In other words, no country appeared as in a position and prepared to handle the rabid proliferation of guns without suffering the ravages of gun violence. But this bloodbath will surely trigger New Zealand to bear the type of nationwide soul looking sister country Australia underwent after an identical massacre in 1996.
Australia’s resulted in banning all types of weapons pursuant to the National Firearms Settlement — perhaps wittingly trolling the infamous National Rifle Affiliation (NRA) with its initials. Regardless of the case, the impact of the NFA remains indisputable:
Whereas 13 gun massacres (the killing of four or more individuals at one time) occurred in Australia within the 18 years before the NFA, resulting in multiple hundred deaths, within the 14 following years (and as much as the present), there have been no gun massacres.
(The Australian Gun Buyback, Harvard Bulletins, Spring 2011, Situation 4)
With that, I’ll only add two recurring laments, which I absolutely respect are becoming like timber falling within the woods …
The primary is from “Massacre in Omaha,” December 7, 2007:
I don’t know why the media all the time reward these psychopaths by giving them the fame they covet; that is, by plastering their pathetic mugs throughout tv and reporting pop psychology about why and how they did their dastardly deeds? Isn’t it clear to see, particularly on this age of immediate movie star, why some loser child would discover this route to infamy irresistible?
You’d assume that — given the document of these psychotic and vainglorious episodes since Columbine — we might have found out by now that one of the simplest ways to discourage them is by focusing our consideration on the victims and limiting what we are saying concerning the shooter to: Might God have mercy in your soul as you burn in Hell!
Nothing vindicates this lament quite like this Christian terrorist livestreaming his massacre of Muslims on social media, and the mainstream media recklessly propagating it — full with readings from his white-nationalist, anti-immigrant manifesto as if it have been the friggin’ Holy Bible.
Belief me, regardless of their feigned outrage, news anchors are all too joyful to stoke worry, which photographs, videos, and rantings related to these massacres invariably trigger. This, just because they know that nothing boosts revenue-generating scores quite like doing so. (Nothing is best for gun gross sales too — because the NRA touts unashamedly.)
And, in fact, boosting revenue-generating hits is the rationale social-media corporations achieve this little to block these photographs, videos, and rantings, despite their claims of doing all they will to take action.
However this vindication additionally extends to the best way New Zealand authorities are holding news conferences to do little greater than pat themselves on the again, in addition to to the best way news organizations there are featuring fortunate survivors regaling us with tales of their harrowing heroics.
The purpose is that the document is obvious: Wallowing, wall-to-wall media coverage does nothing to stop these assaults. It only incentivizes the subsequent loser to plot his day of infamy.
The second is from “London 7/7 Terrorist Assaults,” July eight, 2005):
It have to be understood that, regardless of their collective resolve, there’s absolutely nothing law-enforcement officers can do to stop such attacks.
God bless these in New Zealand who have been affected. However allow us to not overlook that there but for the grace of God go you and I.[Note: Beware the galvanizing effect this attack will have on Muslim jihadists. Because it is bound to continue the march of folly towards the Huntingtonian Clash of Civilizations, which I have written about in commentaries like “Avenging Jihadists Attack ‘Charlie Hebdo,’” January 8, 2015.]
New regular… New Zealand earthquake… Norway’s McVeigh… Las Vegas…
Islamists terrorizing… Charlottesville neo-Nazis… 7/7 terror assaults in London
Massacre in Charleston… Bloodbath in Pittsburgh… Bloodbath in Omaha…
Gun-crazy USA… Gun-control debate… Bloodbath at Virginia Tech… Avenging Jihadists…
* This commentary was initially revealed at The iPINIONS Journal on Friday, March 15.