Do you think there will be revenge attacks following the Mosque shootings in New Zealand?

I was shocked when I heard the news. Usually it Muslim terrorists who carry out these attacks, so I was very surprised when I heard it was not the case this time and infact it was a white group who were the terrorists. Just goes to show there are good and bad people from every ethnic group.

On to the topic of revenge attacks. A revenge attack doesn't have to happen in New Zealand, there are terrorist volunteers everywhere in the world and I just don't think they will take this lying down. What about you? Do you think terrorists will let this go, or is it inevitable that there will be revenge attacks?

I don't think it's worth worrying about. I mean, it's not like there were no terrorists attacks before, right? Now instead of "kill the infidel" attacks it will be "revenge Christchurch" attacks.

Also you should not be surprised it was a white person that did this, a lot of terrorism is conducted by white people. It's generally the bulk of domestic terrorism.

That would not be the way to solve it. I seriously hope not.

I doubt it.

So... are you implying that the people who were worshiping at the mosque had ties to terrorist organizations around the world and those connections are going to make "revenge" attacks?

People who leave their home countries, especially when they are places in the Middle East or South Asia, are trying to escape from violence, corruption and poverty. All they want to do is end up somewhere where they can live and worship in peace.

What a bunch of ........ Try to say that to people in Manchester who went to a concert in peace and we all know how that ended out. Or say that to the gay scene in Orlando or the dozen or so other terrorist attacks around the world.

Or you could read the many news reports http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/13/bryant.neal.vinas.part1/index.html And that story is not unique.

And how many home grown terrorist attacks has the US had recently?

Beside the San Bernadino, Orlando, the Military base, and the Boston Marathon? Also, you didn´t specify the US, you said everyone who "flees" from Africa and the Middle-east.

You generalising and saying everyone is clearly misguided and it´s a known fact that some mosques are places where likeminded meet. Which does not mean that everyone is like that, but considering that individuals who are radical in their religious worship, will be more likely to go participate in religious services, well it´s not a surprise they go to their religious places.

Why do you think that Europe has banned radical Islamic imans from entering Europe and the same goes for the US? If mosques were all filled with peaceful people who just wanted to worship in peace, there would be no one to invite these radical people who spread their hate and no need for a ban.

There might be, but most likely in some Muslim majority country instead of the West.

That's not what I was implying, far from it. But to some terrorist groups, this might seem like an attack on Islam, which is why I asked the question. I have many Muslims friends, and while some are peaceful, kind and caring, sadly others are not and will view this event as an attack against Islam. My friend and a small group at his Mosque considered going to Iraq & Afganistan to fight against the west, yet they had no ties with either country, only that they are of the same religion. I haven't spoken to him in years so I don't know if he did. It wouldn't be out of the question for like minded people like him to plan out attacks in light of these events. The word to look for is Jihad, and this type of thing is promoted in some Mosques.

There are also incidents of westerners killing Muslims in what they called revenge attacks also. There are good and bad from both sides but is revenge attacks really not a possibility?

False. Majority of Terrorism, both domestic and international, is done by Islamic terrorists, and by a wide margin.

The vast majority of terrorists in the US are right-wing extremists:

Right-wing terrorists killed three times more people in US than Islamists in past decade with attacks soaring in 2018, report says

With the fall of ISIS, the prevalence of Islamist terrorism has declined significantly since its 2015 peak. Whereas right-wing terrorism is rapidly on the rise.

It is also a widely accepted fact among terrorism experts that most radicalization happens through the internet, not through any actual physical locations in the real world. Both ISIS and right-wing extremists have relied heavily on online radicalization.

And for the record, many right-wing hate preachers have also been banned from the UK and other European countries. Whereas the US is generally more lenient with hate preachers (both right-wing and Islamist), due to the first amendment.

Wrong. The vast majority of domestic terrorism is done by right-wing terrorists, by a huge margin:

Right-wing terrorists killed three times more people in US than Islamists in past decade with attacks soaring in 2018, report says

Nice wordplay buddy. I see you're either ignorant, or pushing your agenda. That is domestic terrorism classified in the US. Domestic terrorism can exist in different nations. So yes, Domestic terrorism WITHIN the US is done by right-wing terrorists, and will continue to rise. Until shariah law takes over, in which case, submit or die.

Domestic and international terrorism on a GLOBAL analysis, is once again severely committed by Islamists.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-07-14/more-75-percent-terrorist-attacks-2016-took-place-just-10-countries

oh hey look what happened the other day the media so conveniently swept under the rug!

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/03/nigeria-muslims-murder-85-people-torch-100-homes-villagers-living-in-palpable-fear

Radicle muslims always be doing attacks like this so id say sure I think they will attack, do I think its going to be a direct response to the new zealand attack, no most likely they were already planning on it before new zealand

Like Jeezers says, they will attack regardless. But probably try claim it was a revenge attack in a shitty attempt to make it sound virtuous and try act as a recruitment method.

@nattydaddy604:

You must have poor reading comprehension. mrbojangles was clearly referring to domestic US terrorism, before you decided to go off on a tangent about international terrorism.

As for international terrorism, the fall of ISIS has led to a significant decline in the number of Islamist terror attacks. After peaking in 2015, there has been a year-on-year decline in the number of Islamist terror attacks since then. Whereas right-wing terrorism is on the rise. If current trends continue, then it's possible that right-wing terrorism may surpass Islamist terrorism in future.

Poor reading comprehension? Please demonstrate where mrbojangles referred to domestic US terrorism. I'll wait.

How hilarious. Right wing terrorism, which has not reached over 100 incidents on a per year basis, is a greater threat than islamic terrorism, which has been in the thousands on a per year basis.

Keep living in a disillusioned reality you poor poor sheepling. The cognitive dissonance in you is painful.

I was referring to domestic US terrorism. My mistake, I can understand how that might be confusing, especially in the context of an international attack such as this one.

But yeah I think if we were talking Europe the stats might be a bit different.

like terrorist needs an excuse?...when they act, they will use any stupid excuse....like this scum.

@nattydaddy604: Like I thought, you do have poor reading comprehension. Because I clearly stated, "If current trends continue, then it's possible that right-wing terrorism may surpass Islamist terrorism in future." In other words, a future prediction, not what's happening at present. Nowhere did I claim that right-wing terrorism is a "greater threat than islamic terrorism" at present.

The fall of ISIS has coincided with a significant loss in support for Islamist/Wahhabi ideology across the world (including even most of the Muslim world), with the exception of several warzones (such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan). And in Western countries in particular, the number of Islamist terror incidents has declined significantly in the last two years. With that said, Islamist terrorism is still undoubtedly the top terror threat. But it's on a downward trajectory, compared to right-wing terrorism which is on a rapid upward trajectory.

There has to be.

Societies around the world are about to slaughter each other over identity politics and religion, and it will be WW3.

White people are about to rise up and accelerate things. The rhetoric coming from non-whites will fuel their wrath and something unprecedented will happen. They will get fundings by other governments too.

Time to stoke up on the baked beans.

& spam

Is that some sort of street speak for doing drugs? lol.

@foxhound_fox: think he meant stock up on baked beans

Clearly. I was trying to be funny.

@foxhound_fox: clearly. You don't seem to be very good at it.

Just days after the New Zealand massacre, there has been another far-right terror attack in the UK:

Counter Terrorism Investigation in Stanwell after man is stabbed

There are no fatalities, but there has been an injury. The terrorist used a knife, rather than a gun, due to strict UK gun laws. If he had a gun, it could've been a lot worse.

There has also been another far-right knife attack in London:

Witness speaks out on Islamophobic attack in London

It looks like the New Zealand massacre has emboldened far-right extremists to carry out copycat terror attacks, after seeing the graphic barbaric video spreading around the internet, especially on sites like 8chan where many extremists are still celebrating the massacre as we speak... Counter-terrorism police should be investigating sites like 8chan, and tracking-down and arresting the hate-preachers inciting violence and terrorism, in order to prevent copycat terror attacks.

@Jag85: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47615231

Has anyone here actually watched the video of this attack?

The New Zealand one?

Nope and neither do I want to watch something that sick.

I think we're more likely to see copycat terrorist attacks against muslims, rather than counter-attacks by muslims.

A revenge attack wouldn't make much sense, since everyone is condemning the shooting as a heinous act of international terrorism. The only people celebrating this attack are the far-right morons like Fraser Manning (whose islamophobic hate speech inspires anti-muslim attacks like this one), and everyone hates those guys.

@Jag85: Or, they can focus on terror plots in general as there was a mass shooting just today in the Netherlands by a Turkish man.

@Jacanuk: yea, me neither. But I can’t help but feel a bit curious. I’ll never watch it solely out of respect for the victims and to not give the killer the attention he wants, but the curiousity remains. I feel bad for even feeling curious to see such things.

While the threat of white supremacy is real, I don’t think taking any attention away from Islamic extremists should be any less of a concern as attacks from that group are still disproportionately extremely high.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/multiple-injuries-reported-after-shooting-on-tram-in-netherlands-police-say

Same here, I am of course curious to see what it is and I have had a few options to watch it but I have been fortunate to not click it and watch it, having it described is enough

It´s also pretty crazy to think that he managed to live-stream this for 17min but I guess people probably went this can´t be real.

The funny thing though is listening to all the experts blame Facebook and also demand that they have it removed, it´s like they don´t get once it´s on the internet it will never go away.

The main target of Islamic radicals is moderate Muslims. If anything, they will emulate it.

The purpose of the crackdown is to prevent mainstream exposure to the video, which has the risk of inciting future mass-killings. While you can't make it go away, you can at least drive it underground, to the darkest corners of the web.

It's still there, and relatively easy to get to. The chans aren't exactly exclusive websites. If people want to see it, they will. We're just making the darkest corners of the web more popular.

This whole hear-see-speak no evil thing doesn't work. At all.

For something like that there are no "darkest corners of the web" People have it and will continue to share it and it will be relatively easy to get a hold of.

So while you can try to prevent it somewhat on Facebook, it will be there forever.

That's not how reality works. There has been plenty of research, both from academics and counter-terrorism exports, concluding that previous exposure to mass-shootings inspires future mass-shootings.

It makes no difference if it's still available on some dark corner of the web. The purpose of a crackdown is to keep it out of mainstream exposure, to reduce the potential for future mass-shootings. There is a huge difference in scale between a mainstream site like Facebook (2 billion+ users) and an extremely niche "dark web" site like 8chan (30,000+ users).

@Jag85: 8chan isn't darkweb. As far as I know, you can get onto 8chan with any browser on any device. Just because it's banned from search engines doesn't make it dark web.

I could be wrong about this.

or not

"The fall of ISIS has coincided with a significant loss in support for Islamist/Wahhabi ideology across the world (including even most of the Muslim world), with the exception of several warzones"

Pure speculation. Provide evidence or its invalid. Last time I checked, I linked you an attack Muslims did that resulted in 80 people dead. Happened just last week. This happens quite often as well.

Where's your condemnation of that? Seems to me you are a product of the msm.

A hypocrite and sheep

This. A lot of people on this forum seem to forget how humans are tribalistic by nature, just like every other species on this planet.

Other cultures are invading (yes, invading) Europe and North America through immigration. The cultures created by Europeans is drastically going to change. People want to preserve their culture, and have every right to do so.

At this point in time, Violence is going to be very common, as much as I hate saying it. This will only continue to rise to the point of when Europeans become fed up with it and begin fighting back for their homelands.

I was browsing a site last night that hosted the video to read through the comments of it, and man. It was disgusting. People glad, cheering it on, disappointed it wasn't ten times the amount. I don't understand people.

Nope, people can be disturbing sometimes.

I read an article about the guy who runs 8chan and what a sad story and I guess someone who was beaten down by society like he was and is, it has to come out as anger.

It's a fact. And you would've realized it if you bothered to Google it. But if you want sources, then sure, here you go:

• Terrorism In Decline: Number Of Deaths By Terrorist Groups Falls For Third Year In A Row
• Terrorist attacks are quietly declining around the world

As for the recent Nigeria incident, the casualty numbers are all over the place, ranging from nine to a hundred, so we don't know for certain how many were killed. You're also ignoring the wider context, that it's part of an ongoing ethnic conflict between tribes who have been launching revenge attacks against each other over a land dispute since last year, including an incident last month where over a hundred Muslims were killed.

I condemn all murders against civilians, regardless of who the perpetrators or victims are. What about you, do you condemn all murders against civilians, or at least condemn the Christchurch terror attack? Or could it be that you are sympathetic to the Christchurch terrorist's hateful political agenda?

Terrorism itself has no set definition, it is very arbitrary. Because the definition is free flowing, its subject to such massive manipulation in regards to collected data. Is there a possibility the stats you have mentioned are correct? Yes, but its heavily misrepresented. Unless the article can give me it's own set definition, I don't know what it considers to be terrorism. That begs to ask what is the agenda behind such an arbitrary term as terrorism? I believe it is to create public discourse and war.

Have not seen any articles confirming less than 80 killed. Nor that it is an ongoing conflict. Is it an ethnic or religions conflict? Two completely different things. Again, I would like to see this attack that occurred over a month ago.

"Hateful Political Agenda" What a joke. Have you read his manifesto and NOT what the media told you to think about the manifesto? Yes he has right wing views. He mentioned how muslims are invading European countries and replacing the demographics. Is he not speaking the truth there? Last time I checked, Islam and Christianity do NOT have very good relationships throughout history... As for demographics, it is as blatant as far as the eye can see. The cultures of Europe is quickly going to change at this pace of immigration.

The only issue I have with him is the actions he took. He killed innocent people. I'm glad he got sentenced to jail and is going to serve time.

This is why all these "right wing terrorists" attacks are on the rise. Europeans that are worried about their cultures and their people are immediately censored and labelled a racist/bigot/etc if they are against immigration or demonstrate nationalistic views. Which is absolutely ridiculous.

And people wonder why violence is on the rise. When you censor public discourse and allow one side NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS.

right wing "terrorism" will continue to rise because right wingers are constantly being silenced and have no opportunity for representation. Its pretty simple to understand.

@nattydaddy604:

The term "terrorism" typically refers to politically-motivated violence. While the most common usage of "terrorism" refers to political violence by non-state actors, a less-common usage is "state terrorism" referring to political violence by governments. But if you just mean all murders, regardless of the motives, then it's Christian countries that come out on top, by a wide margin. Christian countries have the highest homicide rates in the world, much higher than Muslim countries and other non-Christian countries.

While various right-wing and Christian sources are reporting higher numbers ranging from eighty to over a hundred, various non-right-wing and local Nigerian sources are reporting lower numbers ranging from nine to dozens, so it's difficult to put an exact number on it. The incident where over a hundred Muslims were killed is the Kaduna State massacre last month. The conflict is mainly a pastoral land conflict between tribes of herders and farmers. It just so happens that that most of the herders are Muslims and most of the farmers are Christians. For more details on the Nigeria conflict, here is an article debunking some of the claims, misinformation and whataboutism made regarding the issue from right-wing media:

Nigerian Christians are pawns in US right-wing media’s response to the New Zealand attack

As for the rest of your post... Looks my guess was right, you are indeed sympathetic to the Christchurch terrorist's hateful political agenda. I'm not even going to bother responding to any of that. I'm only interested in the facts, not your feelings.