What’s to hide?
Martin Harris 28/11/20
Regular readers will be aware of two things: Firstly that the author is a resident of Christchurch (and thus this is a very personal subject). and secondly, that I have always taken a low key and cautious approach to comment and speculation. Respect for the victims takes precedence. Innocent people died here. They deserve answers, justice and closure.
I did, however, Some two months after the incident, compose a fairly detailed article based on the political manipulations in the aftermath, and who potentially stands to gain from this politicising. It can be read here:
The revelations in this article should raise a few eyebrows and may have relevance to the recent announcement of the suppression (ie censorship) of evidence presented to the Royal Commission in their inquiry into the Christchurch terror attack:
Christchurch mosques terror attack evidence suppressed by Royal Commission for 30 years
Evidence given by ministers and public sector bosses to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch terrorist attack will be suppressed for 30 years.
And an interview with the Australian-born terrorist will never be released out of concern it could inspire and assist further attacks.
The inquiry’s report was provided to Internal Affairs Minister Jan Tinetti yesterday and will be publicly released on December 8, after first being shared with victims’ families and political party leaders.Christchurch mosques terror attack evidence suppressed by Royal Commission for 30 years – NZ Herald
The excuse given (“it might inspire others..”) seems somewhat flimsy. Any person or organisation intent on committing acts of terror hardly require “inspiration” and doubtless do not find censorship any kind of deterrent.
As the Herald’s article mentions, the National Co-ordinator for the Islamic Women’s Council has raised concerns about accountability. I agree. Something very incriminating and condemning is likely being hidden here.
You think I’m being too “conspiratorial” in my thinking? Well, when evidence and facts are hidden, speculation thrives.
Censorship seems to have been a running theme for this whole horrific incident and its aftermath. Some of this censorship may have a reasonable rationale, but not all of it.
We don’t stamp out hatred and extremism by hiding it where it festers underground (where darkness thrives). The fictional example of Tolkein’s Lord of the Rings illustrates this well. These fantasy stories aren’t just light entertainment, they encapsulate important lessons!
We do tackle extremism, however, by exposing it in all its forms, so that we may know it for what it is: Evil.
Take another look at my old article, and ask yourself who might have something to hide and what they might lose if the inquiry’s evidence were made public. “Think For Yourself”
…Would the real Jacinda please stand up?
NOTE: the author wishes to repeat what I have expressed many times before: I support, encourage and celebrate religious, cultural and ideological diversity and the freedom to make informed choices. If one believes in a God, then God exists and such belief is a very personal and subjective matter. On the other hand, I oppose extremism, which is an attack on freedom and diversity, and I oppose Globalist genericism (the agenda to eradicate all religions and cultural variation, usually by underhanded “stealthy” means). I hope this is crystal clear?