Copies of the Islamic supremacist video posted on the Dunedin mosque facebook page are still widely available, yet Kiwis are convicted and in some cases jailed or bailed for less.
The below screenshot, allegedly of sections from Tarrant’s manifesto, was downloaded from a facebook post the night of the attack.
This from news.com.au:
If his manifesto is true, Tarrant was eyeing off Al Huda as a target.
The manifesto says, “Originally the mosque in Dunedin was the main target, particularly after watching the video on their Facebook page.”
The purported sin of the Al Huda mosque had been to post a video saying it was “only for Muslims”.
That, apparently, to the gunman, “proved their knowledge of their actions, and their guilt”.
The manifesto goes on to say Christchurch became the next focus after a trip there from Dunedin revealed Al Noor mosque was located inside a former Christian church.
It is alleged a further mosque mentioned in the manifesto at Ashburton, which lies between Dunedin and Christchurch, was also a target.
Dunedin is the farthest city from London and yet has strong historical and demographical ties with the UK, in particular Scotland.
—–
Let’s not forget the long history of the many radicals amongst Christchurch Muslims that have been supporting Kireka-Whaanga in his creation of a halal funded Islamic State here in New Zealand:
2018: Kiwi teenager radicalised planned mass killing in Christchurch ‘for Allah’.
2015: A foreign assessment of NZ’s contribution to the Islamic State
2014: Aotearoa Muslim is proud to support Isis < – a dozen more radicals id’s right there!
2014: A Kiwi lad’s death by drone – Daryl Jones
2014: The Deans Ave facility was partly funded by a $460,000 gift from the Saudi kingdom.
2009: Mark Anthony Taylor visits Daryl Jones in Yamen.
2002: THE ROCKING OF THE DOME.
1979: FIANZ introduces terror networks to NZ
So this man isn’t entirely incorrect is his statements that day!!
While the Dunedin mosque video has now been taken down from their own facebook page, it was never censured by governments, and many who viewed it before it was taken down by the mosque claim these examples are the same video:
See also: Alex Jones Breaks Down NZ Killer’s Manifesto
See also: NZ PM to fulfil Islamic State leaders request.
Where is this “Islamic supremacist” video still available? I have been unable to find it on Al Huda’s Facebook page.
If you think that any such video “sparked the Christchurch shooting”, you haven’t understood anything about how and why these “terrorist attacks” are staged. In reality, they are perpetrated by the “powers that be” to provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties. In the case of Christchurch, they used Muslims as (rather clumsy) crisis actors, and a bogus “shooter” high on drugs and armed with a replica airgun that fired blanks.
The link from Tarrants manifesto to the video that was on the Dunedin mosque fb page was removed by the mosque the next day, but it is the video showing on the links in this article.
We have been sent a screenshot which provides some of the details you were missing. they removed the video the day of the attack.
Thanks. I read most of the “manifesto” as soon as it became available, and still have access to it. I would have studied it more closely if it had appeared to be Tarrant’s work. But it seemed, to me, to be largely, perhaps entirely, the work of others. After all, how likely is it that a member of the “PewDiePie generation” would begin his opus by quoting a poem by Dylan Thomas?
The attempt to “sanitize” Christchurch Mosque is interesting. I was well aware of its “history”, and knew something of the split between the Salafists and those of a more liberal disposition. So when my wife came home and said, “There’s been a shooting at Christchurch Mosque”, I initially thought they must have started shooting each other!
Then, like everyone else, I believed it was a genuine terrorist attack. I even made a donation to the “injured” and “bereaved”. But after many years in journalism, I knew that, before I came to a firm conclusion, I should scout around for a counter-narrative. I soon found it – and was reasonably sure, after about a week of research, that the attacks were a psyop, and that, as in the case of the “Boston Marathon bombing”, there probably weren’t any real victims. Today, I think all the Muslims involved in the event are either lying or keeping quiet about what they know. In one prominent case, I can prove that the person concerned is lying.
What induced the Muslims to desecrate their own mosque? Were they coerced in some way, or were they simply promised the tremendous rewards that they have since received for their cooperation? I don’t know, and I suspect that persuading someone to talk, even with the assurance of anonymity, won’t be easy.