New Zealand shooting

Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
bigpaul said:
isn't there something in the Quoran along the lines of " the only good Kaffir(non believer) is a dead Kaffir"?? and I have heard of Christians being told to " convert or die". I don't know, just what I heard somewhere, I have no personal knowledge.
Click to expand...
Where in the world are Christians beheading and killing non Christians? While muzlims do it every day.
 
TexasFreedom said:
Let me correct your grammar. In both cases remove the word 'were' and replace with either 'are' or 'remain'.

There are about a billion muslims worldwide, I would not say it was 'crushed'. And you might want to replace 'progressive' with 'aggressive' (along with replacing 'was' with 'remains').

And you did not respond to my note that the koran specifically calls out to behead infidels. And to support the stance that islam is incompatible with anyone else, look at how islam battles every race/religion around the world: Christians, atheists, Buddhist, jews… there is not a single other religion that can peacefully co-exist with muslims/islam.
Click to expand...
You're not wrong, but you are wrong to think that Islam wasn't a wonderful thing for its first seven hundred years. It was aggressive, but progressive. There's nothing wrong with stating that. Europe was an abscess on humanity, outside of Byzantium, until we began switching places around 1300. The crusaders, though the good guys, were savages. They even ate corpses at the battle of Maraat al-Numan. Despite this, now Islam is the abscess.

I'd like you to quote me the part of the Quran that says to behead people. It's there I've found it, but did you actually find it yourself? It also says to protect Christians and Jews, and also says to not kill non-believers, because like any Abrahamic Holy book, it's loaded with bipolar inconsistencies. Even the passage you're referring to is referring to people like me; atheists.

It's irrelevant anyway. Religion is stupid, war is a constant, and every Abrahamic Holy book allows for having sex with kids, killing innocents, keeping slaves, beheading, torture, war, leveling cities, and on, and on. Hell, the God of the old Testament is cruel, and the Talmud goes as far as to tell Jews they can, to this day, sacrifice kids to a Canaanite good named Moloch (Sanhedrin 64b). The Christian's bible is even worse, because it tells them to suck their enemies feet, and forgive them for the cruelest of sins. I'd rather have the deception of Judaism, and the sword of Islam, than the submission of Christianity.

Each one of these religions has, and is, an affront to history, and are nothing more than outdated bronze age religions. Christians destroyed two of the most important libraries in history; the library at Tripoli, and the library at Constantinople. They burned ancient relics, and writings by Roman and Greek philosophers, that we'll never get back, they even destroyed the basis for western Rome's stability, destroying the world's most amazing empire. Jews still destroy Palestine in order to make it more like old Israel, chomping at the bit to demolish the al-Aqsa mosque, to fulfill some lame prophecy. They also change the names on maps, while stealing surrounding land, in order to fulfill a four thousand year old biblical redrawing of maps that spans a terrifyingly unstable amount of other people's lands. Christian NGOs keep alive tens of millions of third worlders with food, and handouts, who then flood our nations, and other Christian NGOs let them right in, and give them more.

The best way I heard it put was, "Judaism the general, Islam the sword They command." So I amended it to make it more accurate, " Judaism the general, Islam the sword they command, Christianity their Trojan Horse." A trifecta of destructive regression.
 
Last edited:
personally I refuse to feel sorry,just being white,male and a meat eater,
the other side have been asking for something like this for a very long time and now they got it.
sure I will be watching my back and my surroundings more closely as some form of retaliation is on its way from that vermin.
 
Didn't take NZ long to completely buckle under.

All the women are wearing the hijab. Even police women, and they are broadcasting the call to prayer.

Now they have banned guns, but only 37 of the 13,000 have been turned in.

Talk about striking while the iron is hot. The libs saw the chance and jumped in.

This will come back to bite them in the buttocks.
 
NZ better start learning Chinese. I don't think they have squat for a military, and now they will have an unarmed population to boot. The liberals won't fight and the conservative's will be disarmed. They can kiss their Azz's goodbye.
 
Here is what happened in NZ.

Their first step was to redefine "Military Style Firearms" by executive order to include any semiautomatic with a removable magazine. This causes them to fall under the 1992 amendments of the Arms Act of 1983 which heavily regulate "Military Style Firearms." The actual executive order specified "capable of holding more than 5 rounds, but we all know that's a crock because if the magazine is removable, then you can remove it and put a magazine with a higher capacity in. So in effect any semiautomatic firearm with a removable magazine. I suppose a Browning BAR with a hinged floorplate would be legal since I don't know of any way to put a high capacity magazine in it.

And why section (b)? It's totally redundant. In section (a), "a semi-automatic firearm" would include rifles, pistols and shotguns. Whoever wrote this didn't know jack squat about firearms.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0055/latest/096be8ed8185276a.pdf
Certain semi-automatic firearms declared to be military style semiautomatic firearms
For the purposes of the Arms Act 1983, the following firearms are declared to
be military style semi-automatic firearms:
(a) a semi-automatic firearm that is capable of being used in combination
with a detachable magazine (other than one designed to hold 0.22-inch
or less rimfire cartridges) that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges:
(b) a semi-automatic firearm that is a shotgun and that is capable of being
used in combination with a detachable magazine that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges.
Click to expand...
 
Karloshi said:
Newspapers are now reporting that the Austrian government are going to ban a "far-right" organisation because the New Zealand shooter had donated money to them. I wonder if he had also donated to Greenpeace or the World wildlife fund would they be band too?
Click to expand...

Ladies and Gentlemen, and there lies our future or the future of our children. Once the liberals get into power, they will not be happy until everybody is disarmed and converted into sheep, waiting for the slaughter. Bite by bite they will consume all out freedoms.
 
let me get this right, you think the NZ shooting were false? really?
the shooter is facing 89 charges and you still think its false? I've heard everything now.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Rellgar, I had not heard the 'fake video' reference. Can you link a video, and give some time-stamps in it where windows are 'shot' but not breaking? This could be interesting...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top