Jacinda hit the wall like a lone horse charging a well-prepared infantry line

You thought this cunt would disappear after she got voted out?

Not likely!

She is like a lingering disease!

Like all women, she will nag and nag and nag until her dying breath!

Reuters:

Former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern will help tackle violent extremism online and will also be on the board of an environmental prize set up by Prince William as she looks ahead to a life after politics.

Ardern stepped down as prime minister in January saying she had “no more in the tank” to lead the country and would also not seek re-election to parliament. She is due to give her final speech in parliament on Wednesday.

Ardern, who became the youngest female leader in the world when she won power in 2017 at the age of 37, will serve as an unpaid special envoy for the Christchurch Call, an initiative she co-founded in 2019 to bring together countries and technology companies to combat extremism, the government said.

That just means mass censorship of people who disagree with the government.

This is so ridiculous, that they just keep coming up with new euphemisms and apparently there is some group of people that is fooled by it.

Anything they say about “extremism” or “violence” or “hate speech” or any of these other buzzwords is always means silencing people who disagree with them. Period.

Attacks on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand’s second-largest city, in March 2019 killed 51 people dead and wounded 40. The white supremacist gunman who carried out the assault live-streamed part of it on Facebook.

“The Christchurch Call is a foreign policy priority for the government and Jacinda Ardern is uniquely placed to keep pushing forward with the goal of eliminating violent extremist content online,” her replacement as prime minister, Chris Hipkins, said in a statement.

“Terrorist and violent extremist content online is a global issue, but for many in New Zealand it is also very personal.”

With regards to Brenton Tarrant, they were never able to point to any “violent” or “extremist” content that caused him to do that shooting. Basically, he just decided that this would be the best way to deal with the race replacement issue. I obviously disagree, but it is what it is – he’s just a person who made a decision.

Anti-Social People Will Do Anti-Social Things

In order to stop that from happening, you would have to make it illegal for people to talk about the fact that whites are being replaced in their own countries – and that is in fact exactly what they’re saying: if the things the government is doing make people angry, no one should be legally allowed to talk about what the government is doing (unless they say it is good).

Aotearoa New Zealand is committed to working with others to raise ambition and maintain momentum on the Christchurch Call to eliminate terrorist and extremist violent content online. https://t.co/OkzmD6XVox

— New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade (@MFATNZ) April 4, 2023

Of course, an f-to-m just shot up a Christian school because she thought there was a “genocide” happening against trans. No one is going to say this shouldn’t be allowed, which proves that this is not actually about silencing any speech that could potentially lead to violence, but rather silencing criticism of the government.

Of course, “any speech that could lead to violence” would be meaningless, even if you included the tranny stuff. The guy who killed John Lennon was “radicalized” by the “extremism” in the Jew novel “Catcher in the Rye.” In fact, that book is linked to several other high profile shootings.

So what are you going to do? Ban novels?

People who do mass shootings have personal problems. They are anti-social. It has nothing to do with whatever content they are reading. If they take that as “inspiration,” they would have taken something else as inspiration instead. Yes, anti-social people are typically drawn to the far-right or the far-left, but again – Catcher in the Rye (an extremely anti-social Jewish novel) is out there if people don’t hit on some political thing.

Censorship Makes It Worse

With the right-wing shootings, you often do have real issues involved, however. It is still going to be down to personal problems that someone goes and does a mass shooting of strangers, but there are real social problems you could deal with to try and lessen these events.

Ironically, the vast majority of the right-wing shootings have happened after this program of mass censorship began. You could certainly argue that if someone is already unstable, and they start reading about problems happening in the world and then find that it is de facto illegal for them to speak publicly about their grievances, that this is going to drastically increase the likelihood of a violent outburst.

Certainly, less speech is not going to lead to less violence – the entire purpose of free speech is to give people and outlet to voice their concerns instead of resorting to violence. If people feel they can speak freely and have their voices heard, they are much less likely to feel there is no hope and the only way to be heard is by committing a large scale atrocity.

On some level, I’m sure that the people pushing for speech restrictions know that this will increase the likelihood of political violence. Then, more violence allows them to do more speech restriction.

And Another Thing…

The majority of these acts of large scale violence – against strangers – happen in America. At least the non-Islamic ones happen in America.

And many of them are very suspicious. Apparently, you have to pay the Jews billions of dollars if you question it, but the fact is, there are a lot of questions about Sandy Hook.

You can watch this documentary for a summary of some of those questions.

You can go on down the list. With the Stoneman-Douglas shooting, the FBI had been repeatedly warned that the kid had guns and was planning a shooting and they refused to act or even investigate, leading many to believe they wanted it to happen. You also had crisis actors at that school.

There are also a lot of suspicious things about many of the right-wing shooters. With the guy who shot up the black supermarket in Buffalo, it was more or less confirmed that the whole thing was arranged by the FBI. It came out that he had a federal agent in his Discord, and that the agent knew he was going to do the attack before it happened. In his “manifesto,” he also described someone grooming him for the shooting. Many people believe it to be likely that the federal agent and the groomer are the same person. Regardless, the story was dropped from the media like a hot potato as soon as it was revealed that there was a fed involved.

Conclusion

However you slice it, silencing freedom of speech does nothing to reduce violence, it in fact likely increases this kind of violence.

The people in power want to silence criticism of their agenda. That’s all that is really happening here. It’s pretty straightforward.

Why even make a movie about this?

Just show Brenton Tarrant’s livestream on the big screen.

DNYUZ:

A planned Hollywood film about the Christchurch mosque massacre has drawn a sharp backlash in New Zealand, with Muslims denouncing the director’s decision to focus not on the community’s pain and resilience, but instead on the response by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

More than 60,000 people have signed a petition calling for the movie to be shut down. Ms. Ardern released a statement distancing herself from the film, which she said she had not been consulted on. The mayor of Christchurch said that the movie’s crews would not be welcome in her city, and one New Zealand producer dropped out of the production on Monday.

Some Muslims said the film, as proposed, would exploit their trauma and engage in “white saviorism” by making Ms. Ardern the central character.

“It’s really intensely hurtful,” said Guled Mire, a Fulbright scholar at Cornell University who is a member of New Zealand’s Muslim community. He added that he and others had learned of the movie only through social media. “The grief is still very raw for a lot of the victims, their families and for the community as a whole.”

The film, announced on Thursday, is called “They Are Us,” taking its title from Ms. Ardern’s comments about the Muslim community after the 2019 shootings at two mosques, in which more than 50 people died. It would star the Australian actress Rose Byrne as a grieving Ms. Ardern.

She doesn’t really look like her.

Much less horse-like.

But I’m sure she’s good at crying.

The film’s director, the New Zealand screenwriter Andrew Niccol, told Deadline that “the film addresses our common humanity, which is why I think it will speak to people around the world.” He added, “It is an example of how we should respond when there’s an attack on our fellow human beings.”

While Ms. Ardern has been praised globally for her compassionate response to the massacre, Muslims in New Zealand said the movie’s focus on her was part of a long pattern in Hollywood of marginalizing minority populations.

“It was quite shocking to see that, in 2021, we are still making these films which you would probably see in the 1920s or ’30s in Hollywood, where white saviors go into the desert,” said Ghazaleh Golbakhsh, an Iranian-New Zealand writer, academic and filmmaker. “It all kind of harks back to this kind of colonialist and Orientalist fantasy.”

I actually like Niccol.

He has a shockingly okay filmography. He wrote the Truman Show, which is one of our favorites and one we always recommend for people trying to better understand modern society.

He wrote and directed Lord of War, which was awesome and had a lot of different underlying themes to consider (both left and right).

However, this movie he wants to make about Tarrant and Ardern is clearly intended to just be an anti-white jack-off. I can’t imagine he would have the nerve to include any nuance in it – and if he did have that nerve, it couldn’t possibly be made.

So, a good filmmaker making an anti-white emotional manipulation movie would obviously be good for the global anal-feminist agenda. But they’re shutting it down because… saying that white people help brown people is racist? I guess?

It’s hard to understand what is even being communicated here, frankly. What is “white savior”? What does it mean?

It is actually an amazing story, and one that could be told in a lot of different ways. It would be more or less impossible to portray Tarrant as totally evil, given that he was so driven by romantic vision. My thinking is that the movie was going to just start with the aftermath of the shooting, not deal with Tarrant at all, and just show Jacinda’s love mission.

Remember that she converted to Islam?

Then she told all the police to covert to Islam?

That part of the story is amazing in itself.

But yeah – white savior.

What is it?

If Moslems don’t need a white savior, then why do they come to white countries to live on welfare?

This is your mommy now, hobbit. 

Because someone did something, all New Zealanders cannot ever have a gun.

AP:

Dozens of Christchurch gun owners on Saturday handed over their weapons in exchange for money, in the first of more than 250 planned buyback events around New Zealand after the government outlawed many types of semi-automatics.

Police said they paid more than 430,000 New Zealand dollars ($288,000) to 169 gun owners during the event. The money was paid directly into the bank accounts of gun owners.

New Zealand lawmakers in April rushed through new legislation to ban so-called military-style weapons after a lone gunman killed 51 people at two Christchurch mosques in March.

The government has set aside more than NZ$200 million to buy back weapons such as AR-15 style rifles, although many gun owners remain unhappy with the compensation on offer.

Under an amnesty, gun owners have until December to turn over their now-banned weapons.

Police said at least 14,000 guns around the country are banned under the new legislation. There are an estimated 1 million to 1.5 million guns in New Zealand and 250,000 licensed gun owners.

Under the buyback scheme, gun owners are compensated between 25% and 95% of the pre-tax price of a new gun, depending on the condition of their weapon.

People who own guns that are not banned under the new laws can also turn over their weapons during the amnesty, although they won’t get any compensation. Police said a half-dozen such weapons were turned in during the Christchurch event.

Police are using hydraulic machines to crush the gun barrels and firing mechanisms of the weapons that are handed in, rendering them inoperable, before disposing of them.

Mike Johnson, an acting district police commander, said the Christchurch buyback had been a success and the attitude of gun owners “outstanding.”

Police Minister Stuart Nash said the results from the first collection were very encouraging.

“Many of those who handed over firearms commented how easy the process is, how the prices are fair, and how police made the whole event go smoothly,” Nash said in a statement.

But Nicole McKee, the secretary of the Council of Licensed Firearms Owners, said the government was shortchanging gun owners by trying to complete the buyback on the cheap.

Jeez.

Talk about adding insult to humiliation.

They should have at least given people the option to sell their guns to a free country.

We would have given them market value.