The exploitation of slaughter is a new low

I confess to exiting from social media in the last few days, mainly because of the mindless stupidity I am seeing there. Please don’t misunderstand me. I condemn and abhor the murders of the Muslims in Christchurch on Friday, as we all do. What I struggle with is the anti-white rhetoric that has emanated as a result. And guess what? This rhetoric is not from Muslims. It is not from Asians or Africans. It is from white New Zealanders. Yes. You heard me right.

People who have white parents, children, brothers, aunts and friends are all denigrating white people and saying it is all their fault, and that we must all do better.

I stand up and say this now. I condemn the attacks on the Christchurch Muslims. But I accept absolutely no responsibility for them. I did not cause them.quote.

The Western media class has reached a new low. The blame game they?ve been playing in the aftermath of the racist mass murder in New Zealand has been ghoulish and deeply disturbing. The bodies of the 50 murdered Muslims were barely cold before various observers, activists and leftists were naming and shaming those people who they think ?laid the ground? for this atrocity. And it apparently includes everyone from alt-right agitators to any mainstream newspaper columnist who has raised so much as a peep of criticism about radical Islam.

What we have here is one of the most cynical exploitations of mass murder in recent years: the callous and censorious use of a barbaric assault to settle political and in some cases personal scores. Using the recently dead to underscore your own petty political agenda is the behaviour of the amoral and authoritarian. end quote.

We should be deeply ashamed of the way the dead are being politicised, particularly as, whenever you saw Christchurch Muslims on TV, they always spoke of how they are Kiwis, and how they liked that the locals said that we are all the same. Some of them smiled at that. I felt proud.

I am not proud of the political exploitation of their tragedy. quote.

What has been extraordinary in the aftermath of the deranged racist slaughter in two mosques in New Zealand has been the way the chattering classes in Western countries have instructed us to do the kind of thing they tell us not to do in the wake of acts of Islamist terror.

Following Islamist barbarism in Europe and the US in recent years ? whether it was the murder of 86 people with a 10-tonne truck in Nice, or the gunning to death of 90 rock fans in the Bataclan in Paris, or the bombing of young girls and their parents at the Manchester Arena ? the instruction from our betters has been the same every time. Don?t get angry, they say. Don?t exaggerate the threat of terrorism, they counsel. 

Our role after Islamist terror is to manage our anger, put politics on hold, lay a flower or two, and then go back to our everyday lives. 

After Islamist terror the key instruction from the self-styled guardians of correct moral thought is that we should forget politics and just grieve. Now we?re told to get political, take terrorism seriously, physically protest against the new hatefulness: there has already been a protest in London against Islamophobia

Just as that old breed of tyrant would respond to difficult or horrific events by searching for some piece of literature or idea to blame them on, so the new exploiters of mass murder are holding up certain newspaper columnists and right-wing shock jocks as ?facilitators? of the new hate and the new barbarism. They are even drawing up lists of names. Actual lists.  end quote.

I have seen Mike Hosking named as someone who should be fired. Mike Hosking? He caused the murders, did he? quote.

The second striking thing about the response to the attack in New Zealand is the double standards it has exposed. Not all terror is treated equally. We know that for sure now. The right-on are far angrier about this than they ever were about any act of Islamist slaughter of the past few years.

This is fascism, apparently, but the destruction of 86 people who were celebrating the birth of democracy in France is not. Or certainly the Nice slaughter was not widely referred to as fascism and was not physically organised against. Why is this fascism, but that wasn?t?

The NZ attack is proof of a rising tide of hatred, they say, and yet they never said that about the more than 500 people killed in Europe by supporters of a 7th-century religious death cult over the past five years.

Certainly there was no attempt among the liberal elite to rally people against that violent, backward hatred. On the contrary, anyone who protested against Islamist terror ? whether it was the Football Lads? Alliance or ordinary people who wondered out loud about the wisdom of mass-immigration policies ? was instantly denounced as the real propagator of hatred.

And so the PC set actively depoliticises Islamist attacks, discourages analysis, and frowns upon angry responses. Their double standard on terror is driven by a narrow urge to protect at all costs their political narrative and to shun and ideally silence anyone who deviates from that narrative, whether it?s those alt-right blowhards who drone on about Muslim immigration or the newspaper columnists who question over-use of the term Islamaphobia.

SPiked. end quote.

I am so glad that someone else has said it. We should not be politicising the deaths of so many innocent Muslims. This is not part of a terrible agenda by all white people. Most white people are horrified by these events. This is the deaths of innocent people, at the hands of a demonic terrorist, and we need to see it for what it is. No more. No less. But those with an agenda simply cannot help themselves. The rest of us watch with horror as a terrible attack is politicised for all to see. They are the ones with blood on their hands. No one else. Apart from the actual perpetrator, of course. Remember him?