March 19, 2019

"He is a terrorist. He is a criminal. He is an extremist. But he will, when I speak, be nameless. And to others, I implore you..."

"... speak the names of those who were lost, rather than name of the man who took them. He may have sought notoriety, but we in New Zealand will give him nothing. Not even his name."

Said New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, quote in "New Zealand Is Loath to Use Suspect’s Name to Avoid Amplifying His Cause" (NYT).

69 comments:

wendybar said...

Good. They want Notoriety. Don't give them any at all.

Lucid-Ideas said...

"He may have sought notoriety..."

I have read the manifesto from start to finish, and I am leery of this statement as being the 100% motivator behind his actions. No doubt there's a piece of that, but there is a definite political aspect to this massacre, one to which over 50% of the 'manifesto' is dedicated. There is clearly and overwhelmingly repeated overtures to 'revenge' for numerous similar acts of violence on the parts of Muslims.

Whether you like it or not, that also takes center stage. This guy planned this for 24 months or more. That takes a level of dedication that 'personal notoriety' rarely provides.

This was a political massacre as well as a statement, just like Breivik. This was Breivik 2.0

PJ said...

A more effective deterrence measure than seizing everyone’s guns.

Heartless Aztec said...

Always deny notoriety to criminals.

Kevin said...

Makes it even easier for people to fill in “Trump”.

PhilaGuy said...

Exactly. Less notoriety, fewer mass shootings. The media benefits from these shootings. Are they complicit?

Kevin said...

Makes it even easier for people to fill in “Trump”.

rhhardin said...

He's getting plenty of publicity. Starting with the prime minister.

Jessica said...

This is long overdue. I think it may be one of the best things we can do to combat mass shootings. I hope the media (or whatever tatters of it are left) will choose this path despite their incentives.

Dave Begley said...

About time!!

This loser explicitly wrote that he wanted to create an issue in America. From New Zealand!

I hope his trial get minimal coverage. I also hope the trial judge doesn't let it turn into a circus. No OJ trial. And no cameras in the courtroom.

Geoff Matthews said...

He who must not be named.

Chuck said...

Yes, I noticed this in multiple NPR interviews with New Zealand public officials and journalists. No one seems to be using the guy’s name. The BBC didn’t seem to be using it either.

I actually did not know the guy’s name until last night when I was purposely looking at multiple stories to try to appraise Trump’s claim that the media was working overtime to blame him for the shooting.

But I think it is hard to keep up the no-naming when we get to a trial, and sentencing.

MikeR said...

Yes.

chuck said...

"He who must not be named." J. K. Rowling was a prophet.

Wilbur said...

New Zealand is absolutely right to deny the murderer what he most craves: fame.

tim maguire said...

It's unlikely to work, but I support the effort.

Birkel said...

I promise not to use his name (which I do not know) if my comment gets published.
I can wait.

Craig said...

I agree with Prime Minister Ardern on this. If there is even a small chance that the notoriety of these terrorists inspires copycats (which seems plausible), the media should do the right thing and keep these scumbags anonymous.

It seems unconscionable to do otherwise.

robother said...

Nice try. Unfortunately, in a post-OJ world, where coverage of the pre-trial, trial and incarceration is driven by desperation for ratings and related ad revenues, I've concluded the only way to achieve her goal would be a standing order for police to kill these bastards before capture. While it worked for bin Laden, it wouldn't work in a domestic terror incident in any civilized Western country for reasons we all understand.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I agree, for the most part. These crazy people who commit these horrific acts, killing easy target innocents, in cold blood, do so for their 15 minutes of fame.
Don't give them that. The victims should be re-called and named and remembered with dignity. They died at the hands of a total coward who should be forgotten.

Wince said...

Speaking his name is not as bad as politicians and the media doing exactly what the mass killer predicted in his manifesto they would do.

Kind of like the FBI turning off the electricity to Nakatomi Plaza.

Paul said...

Fine with me. Make him one of the Wendol.

dustbunny said...

She is now the Greatest Leader on Earth

Ralph L said...

Victim privilege is tricky for politicians and media alike. They can only be half awoke.

narayanan said...

Nice approach - he could be channeling Miles Vorkosigan from the-mountains-of-mourning

https://www.cse.ucdavis.edu/uc3003u7d80r/05-nathanael-lueilwitz/9781612421858-the-mountains-of-mourning-a-miles-vorkosigan-hug-th.pdf

tcrosse said...

This could be a problem for his book deal.

Ben Lange said...

But we will give him gun confiscation, which is immortality. Every time you look at the hole in your life where your freedoms used to be, you will know it was because of Him. And so will he.

William said...

Good for her! For years I've said (and written numerous letters to various editors to the effect) that a number of these lunatics—and that is indeed what these mass murderers are—are looking for notoriety. They know they've done wrong, but in their warped minds, the price they pay for murdering these people is worth it. Their names and evil faces are plastered all over the media. Can you spell Dylan Roof?

The media is hugely complicit in these mass murderers. I decry the word "shooter," because the term came from a quite legitimate source, the military, and is overly used and always misused.

Shooter sounds so much cooler than mass murderer, lunatic, maniac, crazed killer, whackjob, psychopath, madman, etc., etc. By sensationalizing these lunatics and lionizing them with the shooter label, the media is giving them exactly what they want: fame.

Right now, at this very moment in this country, there's a dysfunctional whackjob somewhere planning a mass murder. And a lot of that crazy person's behavior is being fueled by the quest for fame and for the opportunity to be lumped in with the Dylan Roofs and the Stephen Paddocks of the world.

I say report the story, but call these maniacs what they are—maniacs, not "shooters." And never show their pictures or mention their names. This might not be a huge deterrent, but if it is any deterrent at all, then it would be worth it.

narciso said...

like with manson, who wanted to start a race war, like some of the figures like della chiae and rauti, who were behind the strategy of tension, against the left,

sburch79 said...

I agree with the sentiment, but this isn't a polite ask. Her government is imprisoning people and threatening to imprison people over the possession of the video and manifesto from the shooter. It's one thing to allow free and open dialog, but ask that people use their discretion in discussing the shooter. It's another thing entirely to say that if you don't use enough discretion we'll throw you in jail. I don't think her position on this is anything to be praised.

sodal_ye said...

"This guy planned this for 24 months or more. That takes a level of dedication that 'personal notoriety' rarely provides. This was a political massacre as well as a statement, just like Breivik. This was Breivik 2.0"

I read the manifesto too. Over at 8chan they're calling it "accelerationism". He's whipped them into a frenzy, both for and against. This probably isn't the end of it unfortunately.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

While amplifying the killer himself is not helpful, ignoring the ideology that drove him won’t do a thing to stop future terrorism attacks. I like that the PM described him an extremist, it’s very apt.

From the NYTs article:

“New Zealand, like many countries, has often struggled with how seriously to take white supremacy, offline and online.

Anjum Rahman, the head of the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand, reported that her organization had tried to warn the government for years about growing vitriol toward Muslims and the rise of the so-called alt-right in New Zealand. In an op-ed for The Spinoff, a news website, she said her organization had asked for help from New Zealand’s security agencies and had written a “comprehensive report” for the government five years ago, outlining the group’s concerns.

“As far as we know, nothing concrete was done with that report,” she wrote.

In fact, one of the two mosques attacked Friday had pigs’ heads delivered to it in 2016 by men who gave Nazi salutes.

Jarrod Gilbert, a University of Canterbury sociologist who studies gangs in New Zealand, said that when Christchurch had a problem in the 1980s and 1990s with white supremacist skinheads, the authorities tended to dismiss them as a fringe group “because people never really wanted them here.”

Michael K said...

Every time you look at the hole in your life where your freedoms used to be, you will know it was because of Him. And so will he.

That was his purpose in using guns. Specifically the AR 15,.

sodal_ye said...

"New Zealand is absolutely right to deny the murderer what he most craves: fame."

After reading the manifesto, I wouldn't put narcissism at the top of his list.

narciso said...

whoever his handler is he studied Hungerford, dunblane, port Arthur, and arouana, that's the relevant new Zealand case,

My name goes here. said...

Might this be counter productive?

Without a name does it create the situation were people that learn about this instead of being able to condemn a man for an overt evil act that they are then forced to acknowledge that there is a political movement afoot?

"Jerry Brown cowardly detonated an IED inside a car today in Belfast killing 8 including 3 children on their way to school..."

vs.

"Elements of the IRA detonated an IED inside a car today in Belfast killing 8 including 3 children on their way to school..."

Seems like the second one would invite the like minded to defend the purpose but condemn the actions, which would ironically give voice to the purpose.

Maybe I am thinking about this wrong.

"Racist xenophone Firstname Lastname murdered 49 people in an attack on..."

That answers the why question, it tells us his motivation.

"A man murdered 49 people in an attack on..."

Does not answer the why question. Someone would ask why, and then the answer would be "because he was protesting blah blah blah..."

I am actually for not naming these people, but it seems like it needs to be done the right way - the not naming part that is.

buwaya said...

A crackdown on dissidents, other than on an exterminating Stalinist scale, will create more dissidents.
This was the entire point of this terrorist act, as with most of them.

DougWeber said...

Not spreading the culprit's name around seems reasonable. But suppressing his manifesto looks wrong. It is permitting NPR, for example, to refer to him as a "White supremacist", when from what I can gather(since I cannot read the manifesto myself), the superiority of the white race is a minor component of his ideology. It sounds to me that much of what he espouses has strong US left components and not allowing the content of the manifesto to be discussed is allowing people to define for their own benefit the components of it that are salient.

I will also note that in the long run, suppressing the names of accused is dangerous. This leads to Star Chambers where people are tried and convicted without anyone knowing that the activity is occurring. It sanctions the government accusing someone of a crime and withholding information that would let the general public assess the action.

tcrosse said...

We won't name this guy, but that won't stop us from mentioning Trump.

sodal_ye said...

"Speaking his name is not as bad as politicians and the media doing exactly what the mass killer predicted in his manifesto they would do"

As well as predictably branding him as far-right. He's an eco-fascist, anti-capitalist, and most admires China.

narciso said...

now how miss ardem, became prime minister, having lived in the uk under blair, and ties to Hillary, are instructed,

Lucid-Ideas said...

@sodal_ye

One of the things that's been really bugging me about this event and others is specifically this desire to 'shut it down' on any and all discussion of the motivation. Even shutting it down with criminal ramifications if necessary for those that discuss it or those that distribute the manifesto.

It is literally there as clear as day. The killer just told us why he did it, but the 'why' he did it is taboo and rather than address any points the killer might have had regarding his motivation for this horrific act the response is to bury it, bury it deep, and stop talking about it....

...which will inevitably lead to further political acts of violence like this by both sides in the future. The manifesto and Breivik were quite clear that these actions were taken in response to a perceived total failure of any political discussion to solve some of the problems at hand, thus the appeal to violence.

All this does is prove some of their points, that the mainstream does not wish to have a discussion about why there is a 20:1 disparity between muslim political/religious based hate crimes around the world and those committed by everyone else.

It proves to them and to many willing to listen that the system is deliberately unfair and the 'tolerance dividend' is in fact only working in one direction.

'Shutting it down' is helping no one, least of all the victims.

Ray - SoCal said...

The nz killers persons goal seems to have been political, not for fame.

The left seems to be working on overdrive to use this to tar Trump as a White Supremacist.

And to tar the shooter as a White Supremacist.

With the shooters callout of Candace Owens for inspiration, the White Supremacist label does not make sense. This causes huge cognitive dissonance due to this fact, with the msm narrative.

And the banning of the manifesto is creating a Streisand effect. I’m even tempted to take a look, because it’s seems it’s being gas lighted by the media for a political agenda. I read he was basically more of an eco fascist. The left seems to be using this as a casus belli to increase gun control and right think. Or is it just nz politics, that I have no idea about. I assume the nz leadership is pretty to the left.

I think the guy was just a nut job, like the unibomber who also had a manifesto.

Ken B said...

“We won't name this guy, but that won't stop us from mentioning Trump.”

Exactly. Not using his name is small potatoes compared to using his crime.

I wonder if it's really productive too. Constantly referring to his cause or his ideas is exactly what he really wants isn’t it?

Big Mike said...

How many people commenting here know the name Abdul Aziz? He is the courageous young man who chased away the (nameless) shooter from the second mosque using only a credit card machine that he could, and did, throw at the shooter to distract him, plus an empty gun that the shooter had dropped. Wonderful courage, under terrible circumstances.

holdfast said...

An interesting analysis here. The shitstain murderer clearly hated Muslims, but his “ideology” is not nearly so clear as the MSM would have it. An “eco-fascist” who admires the ChiCom Government? Really?


https://quodverum.com/2019/03/75/a-new-form-of-atrocity-.html

William said...

They don't mention his name, but how can you avoid mentioning his crime? It was truly horrendous. For like minded individuals, that was the glamour, not his name and not even his ideology.

Drago said...

Inga: ,While amplifying the killer himself is not helpful, ignoring the ideology that drove him won’t do a thing to stop future terrorism attacks."

Leftists and leftist/LLR media continue to ignore muslim attacks on Christians and Christian churches across the globe.

Discuss.

cubanbob said...

The President of Turkey used the video to incite and a Turk in Holland shoots up a tram full of passengers.
This guy is an Australian of British background who went to New Zealand to commit a massacre to influence the America people and somehow Trump and his deplorables are held in account after a fashion? Not naming him doesn't really change anything. Hanging him just might.

Fernandinande said...

He's getting plenty of publicity. Starting with the prime minister.

In the interests of not giving left-wing extremist politicians unnecessary publicity, we should refer to her as "a 38 Year Old Left-Wing Extremist Prime Minister".

Beside not naming Tarrent, which is virtue signalling and probably a bad idea, (misspelling his name is better), NZ is being rather secretive in trying to restrict access to the "manifesto", which was really a perverse joke, I think, as per the link posted by JohnHenry, so they can lie about the content. And Daniel Burrough, who has become a nameless "second man, 18", and is facing "up to" 14 years in prison for posting a video.
(I thought I saw somewhere the other day that a court ordered his name withheld, and that some of his hearings are secret, but can't verify that, so perhaps fake news).

Maybe the 38 Year Old Left-Wing Extremist Prime Minister is trying to create conflict over the US Constitution's 1st Amendment.

Big Mike said...

@DougWeber, the purpose of “White” as a preface is to signal the true believers that it’s okay to hate this person. Thus It was okay for the FBI and ATF to kill Randy Weaver’s wife and son because he was a “White Separatist” — separatist because he and his wife wanted to live way off the grid. And okay to hate George Zimmerman because he was a “White Hispanic” (Zimmerman is actually part black).

And, besides, eco-terrorists are gooooodddd guys, you know.

NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...

End the international media coverage, too. If there was no media feeding frenzy at every mass shooting, there would be no mass shootings.

Yancey Ward said...

The Prime Minister is a dolt- there, I wrote it.

She is giving him exactly what he said he wanted in the manifesto itself. She is proving herself exactly what terrorist claimed the elite are- feckless and stupid.

DavidUW said...

Ol’ Scratch

Amexpat said...

Couldn't agree more. I live a short walk from where a pathetic loser blew up a building, killing an ex student of mine, before committing a massacre at a political youth camp. I found that I was angrier at the media than him for the amount of coverage they gave him. That's what he wanted. And just like he was inspired by the blowing up of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, a subsequent asshole was inspired by him to carry out the recent atrocity in New Zealand.

Charlie said...

The prime minister's statement at first reminded me of the ancient practice of shunning, which was intended to use the pain of social isolation and shame to stimulate repentance, or failing that, to at least remove a person from the community who was being destructive to it. But restoration isn't the intent here. Not saying this name is more like trying to send this person down the memory hole. As others have pointed out, he seemed more interested in making a political point than gaining fame. Flushing his identity down the memory hole isn't going to persuade others who might share his political aims to reconsider and repent. If anything, I think it might harden them.

narciso said...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/44800/dutch-terror-suspect-apprehended-had-long-record-emily-zanotti

buster said...

I can't imagine how to report a mass shooting taking 47 lives without naming the shooter. What would the stories say? Just refer to him as a white man and nothing else? What if the shooter is Muslim and the victims Christians and Jews? Surely that fact must be reported. That might be enough publicity for the shooter.

Bruce Hayden said...

“Anjum Rahman, the head of the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand, reported that her organization had tried to warn the government for years about growing vitriol toward Muslims and the rise of the so-called alt-right in New Zealand.”

Agree here with Drego. I was reading an article a couple days ago about 130 (Black) Christians having been butchered in the last week or so in Nigeria. Muslims around the world routinely butcher Christians and Jews in large numbers, and crickets from the left, while we are, somehow, supposed to feel extra sympathy because these were Muslims killed in NZ. Wake up! They are using violence to intimidate us. You see it in the no-go zones across so much of Western Europe, or even in places here. And the left here is complacent and complicit, with their assigning significant victimhood intersectionality points to a billion or so Muslims. Why? Because they are commanded by their Prophet to butcher Christians and Jews who refuse to convert?

bagoh20 said...

I have not yet heard his name spoken even once, but I watch mostly FOX News and Fox Business - mostly.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

I vote for "In other news, trial date has now been set for the asshole who .... [video shows perp-walk with puckered anus superimposed over face]."

Bilwick said...

Since all statism is based on terror (i.e., terrorizing the sheeple into submission), and often violence, maybe we should avoid mentioning the names of statists, too. That would make for a pretty quiet discussion of the presidential race, which may be a good thing.

Kirk Parker said...

Robert Lange,

"But we will give him gun confiscation [emphasis added]"

Are you from NZ or Australia? If so, I'm sorry but yes that is likely to be your fate. But if you're American... please don't say that. Outside of a few socialist/wannabe hellholes (like my own WA) the country is moving in the right direction on this issue.

Matt said...

Oh, hey! Are you guys talking about Brenton Tarrant? You know, that one guy who did that one thing at that one place? Yeah, I think that was his name, Brenton Tarrant.

Or maybe it was Tarrant Brenton. Anyway, dude seemed like kind of a dick.

Lydia said...

The killer just told us why he did it, but the 'why' he did it is taboo and rather than address any points the killer might have had regarding his motivation for this horrific act the response is to bury it, bury it deep, and stop talking about it....The manifesto and Breivik were quite clear that these actions were taken in response to a perceived total failure of any political discussion to solve some of the problems at hand, thus the appeal to violence.

Utter BS. The killer was motivated by hatred, full stop. Have you not noticed that 5 of his 7 "points" have nothing to do with Muslims? Namely, widespread drug use, loss of worker rights and stability because of globalist capitalism, environmental degradation, the collapse of Christianity, and rampant hedonism.

Leland said...

I appreciate and support the idea of reducing notoriety. However, it seems weak as if afraid to speak the name.

I'd be more in favor of public humiliation, but the best methods of doing so have mostly been ruled cruel and unusual. Caning is still acceptable in certain areas. A few whacks every Tuesday and Thursday in the town square for 20 years might deter others from following the same path. I guess reserving such treatment for obvious heinous crimes, with a clear and admitted shooter, would make the punishment too unusual. I think unusual would be a feature in this case.

svlc said...

Can anyone name the 9-11 mass murderers? I doubt anyone can remember more than 1 or 2 of them. Of course, I bet most remember their deeds. Tarrant will suffer the same fate. And, he stated as much in his manifesto.

JackWayne said...

But yet, John Brown gets respect. So, when judging killing, reasons matter. Some small genocides are OK under this standard. “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” has always struck me as wrong.

DougWeber said...

I found an access to the manifesto: https://katana17.wordpress.com/2019/03/15/the-great-replacement-manifesto-of-new-zealand-mosque-shooter-mar-2019/

It is interesting reading. Mostly because it is not what it has been presented as. Not that it has dangerous ideas that need to be countered. Is this man a racist. Yes. But not the way we think of a racist. That is he does not consider any race superior to another. He does, however, consider correct to defend the culture and existence of his own race. Is he a "White Supremacist". Only in that he is white. He does not consider the white race(his def is European genes and culture) to be superior to other genomes and cultures. He does fear that his genome and culture will be eliminated.

I find his ideas containing a very small gram of issue but mostly garbage. And his tactics are horrible. But some of the ideas presented need to be rebutted, not just rejected, if one is intellectually honest.