Of Course: America is Ultimately at Fault for the New Zealand Massacre

new zealand mosque shooting massacre

(AP Photo/Mark Baker)

The McPaper had no trouble digging up a few learned academics to pronounce America and its global influence as the proximate cause of yesterday’s massacre in New Zealand perpetrated by an Australian eco-fascist.

Mass shootings are often called a uniquely American problem, but experts say violence here has global impact.

“There’s no doubt that previous mass shooters in the United States have been imitated by shooters in the U.S. and outside it,” said Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama who studies mass shootings, noting “the influence of America culturally and cross-culturally.”

The United States is ranked No. 1 in international influence, based on its economic and military power as well as its “cultural imprint,” according to U.S. News & World Report.

“America’s culture and actions are contagious, as the U.S. draws a lot of attention,” said Gary Slutkin, founder of Cure Violence, a nonprofit which treats gun violence like a disease.

Though the U.S. has long held a position of cultural dominance in the world, news of American mass shootings — and the motivations and ideologies behind them — spread faster and farther than ever. CNN International is seen in more than 200 countries and territories worldwide. And if it weren’t on TV, it would still be on Twitter.

– Alia E. Dastagir in New Zealand shows America’s mass shootings have global consequences

comments

  1. avatar Bob Jones says:

    When muslims killed 45 people by bombing two Coptic Christian churches in Egypt a year and a half ago, the MSM barely had a peep to say about it. Buried on page 9 in a tiny note.
    Why the double standard ?

    1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      ☝️Bingo!! Because to do otherwise destroys the narrative of an oppressed “people of color “.*

      *Even though mohammadisim is an ideology and not a race.

    2. avatar Dev says:

      Thirty two Christians were killed almost two weeks ago in Nigeria. There are several reasons why no one in the US heard about it on any national media.

      https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/2019/march/radical-muslims-murder-32-nigerian-christians-torch-church-in-brutal-attack

    3. avatar Miner49er says:

      Your claim of no coverage of the church bombings in Egypt is in accurate, main stream media did indeed extensively cover this attack and hear CNN coverage of the punishment for the perpetrators.

      “An Egyptian military court sentenced 17 people to death on Thursday over their involvement in the 2016 and 2017 bombings of three churches and a police checkpoint that killed more than 80 people, according to Ahram, an English language news site affiliated with state run daily Al-Ahram.
      Nineteen others were sentenced to life in prison for the attacks, Ahram reported.”

      1. avatar Bob Jones says:

        That’s barely a peep compared to the coverage of this shooting. YOUR post is inaccurate.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          This shooting killed a bunch of people in a first world country where it’s uncommon, and the killer was a white guy with keen media savvy. Man bites dog.

          Might as well complain about limited coverage of gang shootings in Chicago or Nuevo Laredo while you’re at it.

    4. avatar American Patriot says:

      Why do you think….With them it’s always “do as I say not as I do”.

    5. avatar DDay says:

      The terror attacks by muslims in France and Germany don’t get near the attention they should considering how large the death tolls were.

      If it doesn’t fit the agenda the left media has, they don’t want to cover it.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        “Approximately 23% of the world population identifies as Muslim. But, since September 11, Islamist groups have conducted about 20% of terrorist attacks worldwide. Thus, terrorist attacks are – historically and today – less likely to be conducted by a Muslim than by a non-Muslim group.”

        1. avatar Steve Day says:

          “Islamist Groups” ie: Individual Muslims who were inspired by ISIS are not counted as “Terrorism by Islamist Groups” in our survey.

          More statistical wizadry from the folks at CAIR no doubt. 🤔

  2. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    And attacks by Muslim around the world have nothing to do with it?? And if you tell me I’m Islamophobic you’re blind and couldn’t read if you could see.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      Muslims slaughtered 3000 Americans on Sept 11, 2001 and I’m supposed to be outraged?

      Muslims have slaughtered the majority of Christians in the middle east and I’m supposed to be outraged?

      Muslims are raping and slaughtering in every country they are in and I’m supposed to be outraged?

      Mohammed was a pedophile.

      Omar a Muslim is anti-Semitic the House of Hammer and Sickle can’t condemn her or rebuke her? Ok, now I’m outraged.

      1. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

        I agree with your analysis. Why should we pretend we care? Political correctness? You’d think that the shootings happened here in the US. I saw a video of the aftermath. Everyone with their phone out recording, no first aid being administered anywhere…SMH…

      2. avatar JW says:

        How about we care because those muslims killed in New Zealand should not be held responsible for the actions of other muslims, any more than you should be held responsible for the actions of the murderous jerk who shot them because you also are a gun owner.

        1. avatar Cory C. says:

          Bingo. There are awful Muslims just like there are awful gun owners, but both represent the exception rather than the rule.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “There are awful Muslims just like there are awful gun owners, but both represent the exception rather than the rule.”

          “the Rule” may not count for much, consider…
          ~1.8 billion mohamedans in the world.
          Pick a percentage of “awful”
          1% = 10.8 million “awful”

          ~100 million gun owners in the US
          1% = 1 million “awful”

          Are we comfortable with those numbers?

      3. avatar Miner49er says:

        “Approximately 23% of the world population identifies as Muslim. But, since September 11, Islamist groups have conducted about 20% of terrorist attacks worldwide. Thus, terrorist attacks are – historically and today – less likely to be conducted by a Muslim than by a non-Muslim group.”

  3. avatar James Banish says:

    Why blame the U.S. for another mass shooting. Mass shootings are the results of deeper under lying problems that are not being dealt with. There was a reason why England made them a penal colony. So in short remember tighter gun control is not the answer. Deal the real problems.

    1. avatar Rad Man says:

      Dealing with real problems takes real effort, time, and money. That’s like, hard, or something. It’s much easier to legislate with a ball point pen and be seen as a “voice of reason who’s trying to do something.”

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        The is exactly the reader’s digest version of NY lawmaking in Albany. Only addition would be screw business they are rich and can’t go anywhere……..

  4. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I suppose if terrorists fly jets into tall buildings in another country that will be America’s fault too then?

    1. avatar B says:

      Yeah, no kidding. Even though vehicle-ramming attacks have been happening for over 45 years (Brittain, Spain, France, Israel, Beirut, etc.) claiming hundreds of lives. They’ll still blame America and firearms.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Of course it’s better than taking an introspective look at yourself and working out solutions to your own shortcomings. ‘Hey, it’s not my fault, it’s America’s. Now give me money.’

        1. avatar B says:

          Precisely

        2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

          Gov, they will call it reparations, just like they claim America owes all sorts of groups. In truth they just want more power and see assigning guilt as a way of getting it.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Rusty, you’ve now got the Imbecilecrat Party openly supporting reparations (for the African Slave trade). Which I’m actually fine with on two conditions – 1) every descendant of every soldier who died fighting for the North gets an equal check and 2) every descendant of an African slave takes their money and relocates to their home continent (where they’ll never be able to vote in an American election again). IMHO.

    2. avatar HP says:

      Yes. Remember, these same types of people were the ones who blamed Republicans and the NRA for the Pulse Night Club massacre, which was carried out by a Hillary supporting Islamist who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State in a 911 call in the middle of the shooting. Then AG Loretta Lynch stated “We might never know his motivation.” Progressivism is a mental disease that afflicts people all over the world.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        It’s the gun culture. That dude obviously walked past a magazine rack at a convenience store and saw the cover of Guns and Ammo and just snapped.

        1. avatar Rad Man says:

          I react the same way to “Juggs” magazine.

        2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

          I laughed out loud.
          Guess I live a sheltered life, but an image of “Juggs” magazine made me wonder if there is such a thing.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        4. avatar Rad Man says:

          Was that from the legendary film “Golden Child”?

        5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yes, Golden Child.

    3. avatar Miner49er says:

      Yes, considering it was right wing American Christian military rest in our government who first proposed these sort of aircraft terrorist attacks 50 years ago.

      “An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.”

      For more information on how the military industrial complex attempted to start World War III research operation Northwoods, terrorism with no Muslims involved, just God-fearing Christians.

  5. avatar HP says:

    I remember reading somewhere that the school shooter in Crimea (I think it was last fall) was inspired by what he had seen on tv about the Columbine shooters. I’m sure there are other mass shooters that have been influenced by events here in America.

    That said, the blame for this lays on the vile, bottom-feeding “news” media that revels in glorifying mass shooters, especially mass shooters than can be used to push the narrative they desire. Some people will commit evil for ideology (Islamists) and others for infamy, which the news is delighted to give them. “If it bleeds, it leads”. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, when Trump made the claim that the “fake news media” is the enemy of the American people, he was right. Though it could be argued they are the enemy of all good, decent people across the world.

    1. avatar B says:

      Well said. The evil media creates the football, but ultimately, it’s still the extreme left politicians that run with it, and the sheep spectators that drink the koolaid.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      This guy is clearly imitating Brevik of Norway. I would guess his odd obsession/familiarity with American politics is due to his obvious chan forum connections, where the majority of members are American. Probably where he turned into a weaponized meme, too.

  6. avatar GlockMeAmadeus says:

    No bumpstocks were used! Trump should get credit for banning them!

    1. avatar DJ says:

      That’s funny.

  7. avatar Ark says:

    Literally as far from America as it is possible to get, in a country with laws that are a gun-grabber’s dream, and of course it’s still America/the NRA’s fault.

    Remember: The shooter explicitly said he wanted this.

  8. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Not only is the United States at fault for that mass-murder event in New Zealand, we can even point the finger at a specific person: Chelsea Clinton!

    Yes, you read that correctly and you can stop rubbing your eyes. According to demonstrators at New York University, it is Chelsea Clinton’s fault!!!

    No, this not a joke and today is not April 1st. You can see video of the accusation at this link:
    https://hillreporter.com/watch-as-chelsea-clinton-calmly-reacts-to-an-nyu-student-claiming-she-caused-the-new-zealand-massacre-27747

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I saw that earlier. It’s not just Chelsea, it’s calling out antisemitism that’s to blame. If we don’t start tolerating (accepting, celebrating, encouraging, etc) Muslim antisemitism this sort of thing is going to happen again.

      1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

        I saw the video where a girl was pointing her finger at Chelsea and saying it was her fault. Chelsea used the exact words her mother uses, when confronted. She always said something like “I’m sorry YOU took offence. I’m sorry YOU misunderstood. I’m sorry YOU heard it that way.” Never “I’m sorry I offended you”. We called it “The Hillary Apology” years ago.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          The difference is that Chelsea had nothing to apologize for. All she did was call out Rep. Omar over her antisemitism.

  9. avatar Gadsden says:

    It’s often talked about here and all over the web about another civil war here in the US, but I think most people who reference this fail to realize civil war here will likely become a world war rather quickly. The global players all have skin in the game regarding who ultimately wins. I see Europe and Mexico supporting the left while Russia supports the right. China will simply begin to absorb its neighbors with the US out of the picture. I think what’s interesting to watch will be the future of the Russia/China power dynamic. They both actually really don’t like eachother, but are allies of necessity. With the US fighting internal conflict they might take opposing sides seeing as how they each benefit more with opposite political forces taking control of the US.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Other than Israel and maybe some of the Arab countries that are threatened by Iran I don’t think anybody will be on the side of the right in that conflict.

      It would be guaranteed that with America out of the way China and Russia would go about expanding their territories. Taiwan would be the first to go and pretty much all of the former Soviet Union. Come to think of it, Europe might do a quick 180 on that once they realize what Russia is up to.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Gadsden,

      Do explain how you think Russia prefers right-leaning (over left-leaning) ideology controlling the U.S. government. I have heard a couple other people mention this and I never heard them explain their conclusion.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        You are correct. A weak America is in Putin’s self interest. Which is why it’s laughable to claim they interfered in our election to get Trump in. They had no idea what Trump would do, but they could count on Hillary’s incompetent ‘reset’.

      2. avatar Gadsden says:

        Alright, here’s my response to both you and Gov on to why I think Russia would support the right in the civil war. And it has really nothing to do with the liberal media’s Russia propaganda. I don’t hold this opinion through ignorant information provided by the MSM, but just my opinion from my readings in history.

        Russia is truly a Russia First Nation. It always has been and will be, a nation that puts its own benefit first, beyond any ideology. This was seen even during the communist era. Russia clearly wants to reclaim its status it had under the Soviet Union. To do this, Putin needs reclaim lost territory not just for national pride or global showmanship, but for resources, both raw and industrial, as well as for population. Russia also rightly sees Europe, United or not, as an existential threat. So their primary goal is to reclaim Eastern Europe and put Western Europe in its place. To accomplish this, all they really need to do is take the US out of the picture.

        They can’t do this through force, obviously. So They need the game to change, they need the US to return to a more isolationist stance of its past. Which political spectrum would favor this more? The liberal elite who are tied at the hip to left wing Europe? Or a conservative government who would pull America’s presence back in the world? Remember, isolationism is a conservative position. So although the left is weaker and always cuts military spending, they’re also far more committed to the European liberal order.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Or a conservative government who would pull America’s presence back in the world? Remember, isolationism is a conservative position. ”

          This is right where I lost the string of your though line. If “America first” is interchangeable with “isolationist”, and isolationism is a conservative principle, why are the Russians not considered “conservative”, and a natural ally of the US?

          Not seeing how refusing to bear the economic burden of the world is something to be avoided, in favor of what? Not seeing how disadvantageous trade deals benefit America. Not seeing how abandoning the role of international police harms the US. And if it does harm the US, then perhaps the “fix” is for the US to conquer and occupy every other nation, then drain their treasuries to pay for the police force.

          The Russians are more nearly “eastern” in their culture and thinking (Peter the Great forced the Europeanization of Moscow and the major cities in west Russis, but not the entire nation). And the Soviet Union was even more “eastern”. But, as you note, Russia will choose Russia over any other country (including those of the former, or reconstituted, Soviet Union. Therefore, if there is armed civil war in the US, Russia will side with whichever element would prosper Russia the most…even if all that would be gained is the US population laying utter waste to everything, reducing the survivors to nothing more than stone age conditions. Russia is likely to support all factions in such a civil war, so as to have the participants remove the US as a competitor forevermore.

          The only ideology in Russia is power, with Russia being the only real power in the world.

        2. avatar Gadsden says:

          Sam, I think I agree in your assertion that Russia could support all sides, to keep the war going. But I also think Russia would at some point want a favorable victor.

          Also I personally agree with America first or a more isolationist policy. I stated that it was a conservative policy because if you look at the spectrum, the truer conservative politicians like Rand Paul, take an old school conservative stance on foreign war. Even though recent history shows many hawkish republicans, to me it seems there’s been a shift on the right back to those older conservative ideals, in the wake of the mess of the past several wars.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “But I also think Russia would at some point want a favorable victor.”

          Total destruction would suit Russian purposes. Rather imagine they would be fine with either Canada, or Mexico claiming the wasteland; neither could be a threat to Russian interests.

    3. avatar David Bradford says:

      I’ve posted elsewhere on TTAG on the number potentially armed (at any given moment) US citizens being roughly 132 million with ready access to about 400+ million guns. Foreign fighting forces (even UN or NATO) on US soil would cause an inordinate amount of them(along with their unarmed friends and supporters) to take up those arms in opposition. With the US preoccupied internally and unable to keep the world at peace it might well be the cause of WWIII because the socialist/communist persist in attempts to destroy our constitution. The whole world will may just go up in flames over the destruction of the Federation. Islamist against everyone not Islamic, Jews against everyone not Jewish, Europeans(with clubs) against other Europeans(with knives), Left against Right. ARMAGEDDON! I need to go lay down, I suddenly don’t feel so good.

  10. avatar David Bradford says:

    Metzl said. “It’s impossible to see this crime and this mass murder just as a mass shooting. It took place in the context of the global spread of white nationalism.”

    White Nationalism? That’s a European issue, is it not? At least violent xenophobic attacks are a much greater problem there than in the US. Much of it created by the formation of the EU and dissolving of national borders.
    How can you blame the US for that?

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      David Bradford,

      If White Supremacist attacks were so prolific in the United States, actor Jussie Smollett would not have needed to fake a White Supremacist attack to advance the “White Supremacists are evil!” cause.

      Clarification: I hold the position that ALL supremacists are evil, including the variety that claim superiority status based on their alleged intellect (e.g. elitists).

    2. avatar Mark-in-Indy says:

      Words and phrases. Sometimes they aren’t used correctly. Does the writer mean nationalist who happen to be Caucasian or does he mean “White Nationalist”. One describes a person I probably agree with, the other, not so much.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Wait, you aren’t actually saying this shooter was not a white supremacist, are you? Because he very clearly was.

        1. avatar Mark-in-Indy says:

          No, I’m absolutely not commenting on the shooter. That’s all pretty clear.
          I’m commenting on the writer’s piece, “Metzl said. “It’s impossible to see this crime and this mass murder just as a mass shooting. It took place in the context of the global spread of white nationalism.””
          What I was pointing out is that nationalism and “White Nationalism” are not interchangeable phrases/words. And if you consider them the same, you are confused. Even worse, if you are a news writer and use the phrases incorrectly, you muddy the waters even more.

        2. avatar Ing says:

          I think the media is muddying the waters this way on purpose.

          White + Nationalist = White Nationalist = White Supremacist = White + Nationalist

          It’s circular reasoning from which there is no escape. I don’t hate anyone for their race, but it has become very clear that a LOT of people hate me for mine.

  11. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    If we are going to accept this sort of “logic”, then the United States also gets credit for the dozens of lives that the ARMED DEFENDER saved at the second mosque since the United States is responsible for that notion as well.

    Speaking of, I heard a report that a defender with a shotgun returned fire at the attacker at the second mosque. Of course reliable press reports which corroborate this are lacking since it undermines their narrative. So, did that really happen? Can someone who has watched that evil scumbag’s video of his attack confirm that someone was armed with a shotgun and returned fire, thus ending his murder-spree at the second mosque?

    1. avatar VicRattlehead says:

      I saw one video that had the first mosque but it did not have the second. Sorry.

      That video though was perhaps the most horrific thing I’ve ever watched. It did, however, show in graphic and disturbing detail the utter failure of the lefts method of dealing with these kinds of events. They were all huddled together in groups, unarmed and provided no resistance what so ever, save for one brave soul who attempted to tackle the shooter and was shot point-blank for his trouble. The shooter was literally just casually walking through killing the huddled groups with ease. He had time to stroll around and fire into the piles of bodies several times ‘just to be sure’, fumble with magazines, go pick up ones he had dropped and even go outside and fetch another gun. There were TONS of opportunities for armed confrontation (and given the amount of fumbling he did with stuff, a HIGH likelihood of success) except for the tragic fact that no one was armed.

      I would say that every gun control advocate should be forced to watch that unspeakable video to show EXACTLY what their policies on gun control, as well as their playbook on what to do in case of a active shooter, will accomplish except I have little faith it would change their minds. The only thing they’d see is that the bad guy had a scary gun.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Thanks for the feedback Vic Rattlehead.

        I sure hope someone can confirm that an armed defender cut the second attack far short of its potential.

        1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

          I haven’t seen the video of the events at the second mosque but it may be that the fellow in question, Abdul Azziz, armed himself with one of the empty dropped guns. Sounds like the shooter retreated from him none the less. It seems unlikely that a non-criminal non-police would be armed in public in NZ. Those assuming and saying that he was armed with his own firearm may have egg on their face if it turns out he wasn’t. Carelessly repeating rumor is a problematic.

        2. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

          Oops, the name I heard appended to the fellow was Aziz not Azziz. It does sound like the attacker fled like a punk from Aziz challenging him though. Perhaps he was willing to murder but not fight.

      2. avatar Kendahl says:

        The whack job who shot Gabby Giffords and others was stopped by an unarmed, middle aged woman. She grabby his magazine during a reload. That distraction gave others a couple of seconds to pile on and subdue him. It doesn’t take strength or skill. It does require the mind set to act decisively when an opportunity arises. We saw the same paralysis during the Pulse nightclub attack. With only one murderer surrounded by dozens to hundreds of healthy adults, their response was to hide in the bathroom rather than jump on him. Treat a mass murderer as a target of opportunity to be taken out hard if you get the chance.

  12. avatar former water walker says:

    Meanwhile Christians are slaughtered and persecuted daily in Africa & Asia. And Jews in Europe and obviously Israel. Barely a peep from any media other than FOX and minor media like CBN…salami linkin’!

  13. avatar MDH says:

    The fact is, Muslims have been waging a jihadist “holy war”on the West for decades, and apparently it is supposed to be our burden to absorb their insane criminal aggression by constantly turning the other cheek.

    When Muslims attacked the US on 911, and killed over 3000, they were silent. There was no outrage anywhere in the Muslim world.

    In the following years Islamist Muslims killed hundreds in attacks across Europe and the United states, and still they said said nothing.

    When Christians were massacred by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and by ISIS across the middle east, they said nothing.

    When their brethren were beheading innocents by the thousands across the “Caliphate” they remained mute.

    They wanted a holy war, and now that some Aussie nut job has taken up their challenge, using their own tactics, the world is shocked?

    Give me a break.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Yup, nothing shocking about that video. Not one bit of it. Par for the course, should surprise no one, in any way, at all. We’ve come to expect this sort of behavior from angry channers, they do it all the time. The Muslim community won’t even bother to talk about it anymore, so neither should we.

    2. avatar Eli2016 says:

      “The fact is, Muslims have been waging a jihadist “holy war”on the West for decades…”

      How dare you say that! Islam is a religion of peace! Obama said so and he was Muslim.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Islam is a religion of peace! ”

        As explained to me, it is a religion of peace because it brings peace when non-mohamedans are either dead, or converted to whichever branch of mohamedism is holding the sword at the moment.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          ‘Peace’ in Islam is complete and total submission to Islam and the Prophet.

          That should particularly terrify women, since ‘submission’ in Islam means their worst possible nightmare…

  14. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    So the media hates Christians. Do they think life would be better if atheists are the majority? How was life under Stalin? Under Mao? How’s life for them in Venezuela? The media and academics always think they will be on top after a cultural revolution. Never quite works out that way.

    1. avatar Idaho Bob says:

      I can’t speak for all atheists…If I were in charge, all I would do is leave you/everyone alone. I expect the same from all religions, but it never really works out that way. Never heard of atheists waging holy wars or conducting crusades.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Never heard of a atheists waging holy wars or conducting crusades.”

        Think you pulled the trigger before clearing the holster.

        Alexander
        Roman emperors
        Genghis Khan
        Darius
        Philip of Macedonia
        Ramesses (all 11)
        Abdel Hamid II
        Ante Pavelic
        Tito
        Pol Pot
        Leopold II
        Mao

        To name a few.

        1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

          Although I agree with your larger point, to my knowledge only a few of those you listed were likely atheists. Are you positing that all non-Christians are atheists?

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Are you positing that all non-Christians are atheists?”

          Nope. Just pointing out that the cause of rape, pillage and plunder is not restricted to believers in one or more religions. Just because the leader of a country visiting genocide on some group happens to be a member of a religion, that doesn’t mean the motivation for the genocide is based on a religion. Nor does being an atheist mean a person does not, will not, engage in genocide and wars of conquest. The original claim implied only atheists commit no mass crimes against humanity.

        3. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

          I suppose you weren’t positing that all non-Christians were atheist because included Leopold II – a well known Catholic.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Leopold II didn’t wage war in Congo because of religion, but because…he could, for personal reasons.

        5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          I’m pretty sure Kim Jong Whatshisname was an atheist.

        6. avatar David Bradford says:

          OK, now I get the difference between religion and atheism. Atheist kill their own people and religious people go to other countries to kill people.

        7. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I’m pretty sure Kim Jong Whatshisname was an atheist.”

          Selecting such a current and obvious example could be dismissed as “exception to the rule”. Wanted to cover a long period of human depravity.

        8. avatar Idaho Bob says:

          Ok, fine atheists wage war, but not in the name of atheism.

        9. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Ok, fine atheists wage war, but not in the name of atheism.”

          I would agree, except….

          Not being able to discern the motivations for all the slaughter by atheists, I must leave room for the possibility that some of the atheists responsible for genocide killed religious people because the religious people were a threat to the atheist’s power.

          This is fun, and all, but what was the original subject of this string?

        10. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Atheism is a religion Bob. It takes just as much faith to be convicted that there is no creator than it takes to believe that there is. And when they wage war against other religions it is in the name of atheism.

      2. avatar Gadsden says:

        The atheists in charge of the USSR, China, and North Korea all did some pretty terrible things to religious people in their countries. The big problem I see with atheism today is it’s unrelenting drive against Christianity, but it’s total submission to Islam. I’m not accusing you personally, but many atheists trash and belittle christans at an extreme pace. But wouldn’t dare utter a single anti Islamic sentiment. It won’t be funny anymore when you’ve killed off all the worlds religions except for Islam.

        1. avatar SecondAmendmentAtheist says:

          As an atheist myself and speaking only for myself(although I know others of the same opinion). My problem with people of any and all religions is basically the same as it is for the leftist gun-grabbers, They all seem to think think their “FEELINGS” rather than empirical evidence to the contrary outweigh my rights and that I should be under and follow their stupid rules. They all claim moral superiority by virtue of FEELINGS WITHOUT FACTS to back them up.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The all claim moral superiority by virtue of FEELINGS WITHOUT FACTS to back them up.”

          Atheists often remind me of leftist snowflakes. Both want to be free of the unpleasantness of speech they do not want to hear.

          One puzzlement about atheists I don’t quite understand is those who claim “There is no God”. Seems one would need to be all knowing, all the time, everywhere in the universe in order to substantiate that claim. Admittedly, I have never met an avowed atheist, never asked someone about it. Have heard and read statements, but no personal experience.

          Is there a difference between someone who decries belief in a supreme being without proof, and someone who believes computer models are settled science?

          Oh, can we admit that the number of random events, in the precise order and magnitude, necessary to create the planet and all that we see of nature, is so preposterous as to be the equivalent of belief without proof?

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yes, the Christianphobic bigotry among atheists is rampant.

          Just curious SAA, what empirical evidence is contrary to the teachings of Christ? Is society not better if we love our fellow man? Should we not care for widows and orphans? Do onto others… etc.?

        4. avatar Gadsden says:

          I have a problem with hyper religious people too, even though I’m not an atheist. The problem I have is athiests are brave enough to confront the relatively peaceful Christians but not brave enough to slander Islam, when Islam is a far bigger threat to atheism, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism.

        5. avatar SecondAmendmentAtheist says:

          I was raised in a Christian home and community and would consider my moral and ethical values to be basically Christian values and ethics. I do not believe in any all powerful entity controls my destiny and I don’t need the threat of eternal damnation to frighten me to do what is right. I am a moral person by choice, not as an obligation to a mythical being.
          As for the claim that Gov makes “the Christianphobic bigotry among atheists is rampant.”
          Atheist are persecuted by all religions, but in particular Christianity and Islam. In a recent survey here in the US, atheist where more hated by Christians than any other religion including Islam and Wicca. The hostility toward Christianity comes from fear of retaliation for speaking our beliefs. Most atheist in America keep quit about their belief in (real)fear of hostile actions against them. People fear anyone who doesn’t fear God, because, “well then, how will we control them otherwise?” It just comes back to who wants to control who?

        6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Hellfire isn’t Christian in origin. The ‘church’ adopted it from the Greeks a couple hundred years later. Our (classically) liberal sense of morality is a product of Judea-Christian ethics.

          I can understand agnostics but it seems to me that it takes every bit as much faith to believe in the impossibility of a creator as it does to believe in the assurance of one. Religious people (say Christians) look at other faiths and while they may consider their ideas about the nature of God to be wrong, they at least acknowledge a higher power that they believe they must answer to for their actions. Atheists believe in no higher power than themselves, or worse the collective. This explains the distaste for atheism over other religions, but you’re not following Christ if you hate people who don’t share your faith. Which to be fair, there is an abundance of Christians who don’t follow Christ.

          On the other hand, atheist who believe in the supremacy of the collective have had a long, well established history of persecuting and killing Christians and those of other faiths. They actively seek out Christians who don’t (for instance) share their beliefs on celebrating homosexuality or transgenderism and try to publicly shame them and force them to lose their jobs and businesses. They try to force them to pay for abortions and abortifacients and demonize them if they balk. It doesn’t seem to me that atheists have any reservations about speaking their faith, they do it quite forcefully all the time.

      3. avatar HP says:

        Atheism on a micro level works just fine. On a macro level, it’s disaster. Remove religion and the government becomes God, and when government becomes God, scores of millions of people die.

      4. avatar Idaho Bob says:

        I cannot recall a single conflict where an army of non-believers waged war against a people of faith simply because of their faith. The same cannot be said of Christians, Muslims, Catholics, Hindus, and even Buddhists.

        I will admit many American atheists are some arrogant aholes who throw it at anyone and everyone in their proximity. Zealots are gonna zealot…

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Uh… ever hear of a thing called ‘communism’?

  15. avatar Mark-in-Indy says:

    At “fault” no, not in any way. But…
    I have seen quite a bit of world first hand, and I cannot argue that the U.S. is the world’s No.1 cultural influencer. Yet, from my experience, those influences are often exhibited in a burlesque manner. So, when others look at us and ask themselves how they can be heard above the fray, we have at least one answer. But…
    Does their answer become our fault? No it does not.

    Thoughts and prayers.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Exactly. Of course America had “something” to do with this guy, he was obsessing over our politics to a greater degree than his own, and was obviously in close contact with Americans & our issues via some web forum or other. That’s not a reflection on anything broader than that, but it’s still a fact.

      1. avatar edward kenway's ghost says:

        “… was obviously in close contact with Americans & our issues via some web forum or other.”

        As was Dylan Roof, a known white supremacist.
        Breivik and Tarrant both wrote of meeting up with like-minded people and it’s a sure bet they used travel to do so. I can’t wait until the media picks up on the “international” white power conspiracy and makes a case for more Internet control and monitoring of extremist or suspected extremist message boards.

  16. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Looks like Captain Obvious is writing for USA Today. As I have written often, America (as in The United States) is responsible for all evil in the world, since humans were a thing. That is how powerful a force for evil this country is.

    Without the United States, all conflict and tragedy would not exist, anywhere. What can you expect from a nation built on a Ponzi scheme? Are you not aware that if not for knowing the U.S. would one day exist, and be the root of all evil, the continents would not have separated? The core of the planet would be solid rock? There would be no earthquakes, no magma threatening to eradicate all life forms? Earth would be one half water, and one half “land”?

    Evil, I tell you; evil. And if you need more proof, look around you…political parties. Twisted minds, all. Nothing good can come of political parties. We need to put an end to all this evil. We need a constitutional amendment banning political parties, and another banning evil !

    1. avatar Gadsden says:

      Precisely! I heard America was also responsible for the Late Bronze Age collapse! Likley due to Trump time traveling back to that time and espousing right wing rhetoric upon those poor, peaceful, innocent Bronze Age empires.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Precisely! I heard America was also responsible for the Late Bronze Age collapse! Likley due to Trump time traveling back to that time and espousing right wing rhetoric upon those poor, peaceful, innocent Bronze Age empires.”

        By George, I think you’ve got it !

        1. avatar HP says:

          My understanding is that in about 5 billion years, our sun will go supernova and destroy the planet. If only America had signed onto the Paris Climate Accord, this wouldn’t be an issue. One can easily visualize Trump and various NRA executives gathered together in the White House boiler room, congratulating themselves on avoiding that near miss and sealing the fate of the globe forever.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “One can easily visualize Trump and various NRA executives gathered together in the White House”

          You left out the Bilderbergers, the Rothchilds, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Masons, and the 1919 Chicago White Sox.

  17. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Maybe just ban the news & all other media’s from posting or reporting on these issues, including cell phone articles, then when this stuff happens they can’t call it a copy cat crime, which always gets put in the U. S. Lap… & another thing, if these people are caught, don’t waste taxpayers money on them, send them to trial, then execute them within 30 days,,,

  18. avatar WI Patriot says:

    But of course, it sure is funny how they want our $$$ though…

  19. avatar Marcia says:

    Initially there was the report that an armed worshiper at the second mosque helped stop the slaughter there at only 7 dead. Then all discussion about what happened there stopped and all you hear about is 49 dead total. In this blog someone mentioned that the worshiper had picked up one of the shooter’s guns and apparently? chased the shooter into the hands of police. I am assuming the MSM refuses to report how one good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun. That would be the new normal.

  20. avatar strych9 says:

    And… the media does exactly what that guy said they would do, playing right into his hands.

  21. avatar Bierce Ambrose says:

    Well, sadly, we haven’t convinced them that having armed congregations, or even just neighbors nearby, tends to keep the fatality count from reaching the 40s.

  22. avatar Wally1 says:

    So, I watched the video, His reloads were painfully slow to watch. I also located a copy of the manifesto, It was actually a very interesting read. Everyone should read it. Not supporting this action, However, he was not insane, he knew exactly what he was doing and implemented a plan. He had been planning this for over two years.

    Just like most people, his victims failed to take responsibility for their lives and arm themselves. Typical gun free zone mentality.

  23. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    The EU-NWO/Globalist on the move.

  24. avatar strych9 says:

    And going through some of the news today I had to laugh.

    NYU students blame Chelsea Clinton for the attack in Christchurch because she criticized Rep. Omar’s anti-Israel comments. You can’t make this shit up.

    1. avatar Grumpy Old Guy says:

      Another piece of buried news, Chelsea Clinton was defended by Donald Trump Junior after being blamed for the attack. He could have stayed quiet and let her get beat up or do as the media often does and dog pile.

  25. avatar GS650G says:

    The Palestinians handed out candy to the kids on 911. We don’t celebrate these events or relish the effects.

    That is a fundamental difference between us and the so called religion of peace followers.

  26. avatar StLPro2A says:

    Had it not been for America and its Gun Culture 70 years ago, New Zealand would be speaking Japanese today!!!!

  27. avatar Tristen Sinanju says:

    Terrorists win

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email