How New Zealand is not accepting reality regarding their recent terrorist attack.
New Zealand’s security to mass shootings and terrorist attacks was believed to be inviolable, but it was proven wrong on the 15th of March. So far, this tragic event has resulted in the death of 50 people, with approximately as many wounded from an attack that lasted ~36 minutes. The government has reacted similarly to a lockdown by restricting access to information regarding the massacre, the terrorist, and his online posts. This has enabled the New Zealand government to drive its own narrative about the mass murder.
The media has always acted closely to a puppet to the NZ government and some of its political parties, however, this was exacerbated subsequent to the attack on Friday. On the day of the attack, NZ media generally provided more limited information than foreign media outlets. Later that day these were blocked in New Zealand unless a VPN was utilized. This action was made under the claim to protect its citizens from watching the 17-minute-long live-stream by the shooter where he committed all of his atrocities as it was often shown in some foreign media outlets. However, the video reveals a very dark truth that NZ wants to avoid, how well it was all planned.
It is clear that the intelligence agencies failed us when they needed it the most. The perpetrator made numerous online posts regarding what he was going to do. This included pictures of ammunition magazines and his vest, which was filled with Islamophobic texts drawn on them, this was posted three days before the attack. Additionally, 10 days before his slaughter, he posted his ~74-page manifesto (News outlets fluctuate on the number of claimed pages from 73, to 75 and even as low as 23, thank you NZ for doing this) where he expressed who he was, ideology and what he was planning. He also used the public forum of 8chan to discuss issues he was interested in. This was all public content, yet he was never placed on a watchlist as a potential threat to the nation and of committing a hate crime, despite them also having access to his private information. In addition, the shooter sent documents detailing his motivation and actions to the Prime Minister, other politicians and media outlets with a total of 70 recipients “less than 10 minutes before the attack” (once more, news media and government being vague), and they claimed that “nothing could have been done”. However, that is not true as the central police station in Christchurch is 5 minutes away from the mosque of the first shooting in civilian transit, they could have gotten there in 1–2 minutes with their sirens, but they were too conservative and did not act quick enough.
The live-stream reflects on their incompetence, the intelligence agencies failed at detecting a national threat, and therefore it was banned under the claim that it is “objectionable material” and that it promotes violence. It hasn’t just been banned, if you share it or images of it, or have possession of the file you can face up to 14 years imprisonment, all under the statement that it promotes such behavior and condones it. However, it is unacceptable to ban the video under these claims, another claim is that its distribution would have been what the shooter wanted, however the ban and criminalization of it has erupted fear of imprisonment upon those who saw it due to the moment, out of curiosity or seeking footage of the event compared to just claims. That is what the shooter wanted, to create division and fear. And if they desire to dug their stubborn heels they should search into the person’s intentions. The only acceptable reason to ban this video is by the request of the victims, which has not happened. Since that is the case you can argue that as a victim you would want to people to see it, so they understand the horrors of the event and how unacceptable it is, to put it simply, to have a reality check. “A picture says a thousand words”, and it is important to understand the levels of hate of this atrocity and how someone was able to do it, in order to prevent it in the future. The video showcases how the individual knew what he was doing, was experienced and had extensive training, demonstrated by how methodical he was at massacring the tragic victims. This, alongside their careful planning to carry out the atrocities during the protests regarding climate change so the police force would be distracted and experience difficulties to respond to this situation. You cannot stop hate just by closing our eyes, the public must know this, and the intelligence should’ve been aware that despite ideology, intelligent people driven by hate are the most dangerous. Regardless of skin color and religion the intelligence department should perform their duties to ensure the safety of New Zealanders. Such threats, especially from Christchurch with a precedent of neo-Nazi groups should not have been taken lightly, he claimed it would be easy and he was right… This isn’t something that just came to fruition out of thin air and the defense departments are indeed, part to blame.
It took them three days to acknowledge their ineptitude and it revealed the sad truth, that you are only a threat to these agencies if you are of native descent, involved with gangs, or come from an Islamic background. They claim, “they were looking under the wrong rocks”, yet they just simply brushed this individual off despite him being a resident of a region known for having neo-Nazi groups and white nationalist views. They have also revealed that they will do more work to cover their negligence, the defense force is willing to track down people that have possession of this video but could not track the terrorist’s/ shooter’s posts on social media.
The video being categorized as “objectionable material” and that it promotes violence is fundamentally flawed as well. There is media equally, if not more violent which is available in abundance, the claim that it can lead to normal people to be inspired by this is false, and those who align with the shooter to become “copycats” is also false as they have much more material to get inspired from, alongside themselves just like the shooter did in this occasion. It is optional to watch this video, no one is forcing you to do so. If the live-stream promotes such values why is the manifesto not classified equally? Why is the music the individual used during his attack not banned as it has a negative connotation and association now? They are all equally a symbol of the attack, yet they are treated differently because well… it does not reveal the flaws in NZ’s systems. Their true motives are further revealed with the controversy surrounding Turkey’s president transmitting it in the public. Apart from the president’s comments it is clear, implied and even stated to some extent that the main reason for the censorship overseas is to avoid painting a “wrong image” of New Zealanders simply because they do not want to accept that xenophobia is part of NZ’s culture, and always has been. The video puts us into perspective, through reports the victims are generally reduced to numbers, just a statistic, but through the video they become a tragedy, and thankfully a few individualized reports on some of the victims helps this. It is extremely irresponsible and unprofessional to encourage a lack of awareness and education as a result of pretending something doesn’t exist because “we don’t like it”. This is especially relevant to the manifesto as the best way to tackle such intolerance is to engage and show how flimsy their arguments are, the shooter was a believer of “nativism” as he considered immigrants to be invaders, which comes from a basis of NZ and Australia being a white man’s original land which demonstrates its ignorance.
It is also time for NZ to accept that this is our problem. It is disappointing to see the government make an already strict arms ownership system its scapegoat since everything linking the killer to to what he was about to unfold was online. Additionally, a member of the gun club the shooter was part of, reported several cases of white nationalist sentiments within it to the police, despite this, no actions were made. The Prime Minister claims the shooter was not a resident of Christchurch and that he “was based in Dunedin”. It is time to accept the fact that he is part of the community and indeed a resident since 2017, ethno-nationalism in the island is a threat and once more it is dismissed as a local threat.
In the end, we are sadly left with a tragedy, a preventable tragedy. It is important to reflect on the terrorist in order to avoid the re-occurrence of such a horrific event. He wants us to remain ignorant, will we enable his wish to come true, or will we just turn a blind eyed? Learn from this, go on, and remember the unfortunate victims of this hate crime.
Kia Kaha.
