One of the emails waiting for me when the Internet came back on today was from the government of New Zealand:
Dear Gates of Vienna
Re: Notice 2022/10 Gates of Vienna — The Great Replacement Manifesto
Te Tari Taiwhenua (The Department of Internal Affairs New Zealand) is responsible for online content regulation under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act (1993). We have identified content on your platform that is classified as objectionable under this Act.
Attached is a formal take-down notice outlining your responsibility as a platform providing content to New Zealanders. Non-compliance may result in enforcement proceedings, outlined under Section 119H of the Act.
To provide you with clarification of your legal duties and further understanding, please find a link to the Department’s Take-Down Notice guidance.
This publication has previously been classified as objectionable by the Classification Office. A copy of this email has been sent to the Chief Censor at the Classification Office.
Please contact us if you:
- Require any additional information or if you reasonably believe you will not be able to comply within the required period;
- Have removed or prevented New Zealand public access to the objectionable online publication from your platform;
- Would like to provide us with additional or updated contact information, such as group emails, for your company.
Regards.
Inspector of Publications
Warrant Card [redacted]
Digital Violent Extremism, Digital Safety
Toi Hiranga | Regulation & Policy
Te Tari Taiwhenua | The Department of Internal Affairs
They also attached a PDF document, which is essentially the same as their email message from the summer of 2021.
Today’s email is a resumption of the demands they made in August of 2021. In case you’ve forgotten, the Kiwi apparatchik is talking about Brenton Tarrant’s manifesto.
My post about the earlier demand is here.
When a government is that intent on forbidding people from seeing a document, it brings out the Scot in me, and makes me really, really want to make sure people can see it. However, New Zealand residents are advised not to click that link, because you may be arrested and imprisoned if you do.
I began my reply to Te Tari Taiwhenua with this:
To whom it may concern,
Your office contacted me about this issue almost two years ago. I am not sure whether it was you who wrote me back then, since you have neglected to include your name this time.
In any case, I will repeat what I said back in August of 2021:…
I then appended the full text from my August 2021 email; it’s reprised in the post below.
I’ll repeat what I said in my 2021 post: “I must respectfully request that you refrain from contacting the department [Te Tari Taiwhenua] to complain. There’s no need to intervene on my behalf. I have nothing to fear from the New Zealand government, but there’s no sense in poking the beast excessively in his lair.”
And also this note to commenters: “I will treat remarks about Brenton Tarrant the same way I have treated those about Anders Behring Breivik, and summarily delete any expressions of support or approval for his vile actions. I don’t care how you justify it; you might as well save yourself the trouble if your sentiments happen to run in that direction.”
Below the jump is my complete post from August of 2021. The only real difference is that Tarrant’s massacre is now four and a half years ago rather than two and a half years ago.
Well, there goes my planned vacation in New Zealand!
A lot has happened in the nearly two and half years since the Christchurch massacre. Cast your mind back through the Corona fog, if you will, to March 15, 2019, when a young man named Brenton Tarrant massacred fifty-one people in two different mosques in Christchurch, the largest city on South Island in New Zealand.
Mr. Tarrant’s evil actions prompted a renewed push against “Islamophobia” all over the world, but especially in New Zealand.
The killer left behind a manifesto, copies of which immediately began disappearing from the Internet. As is my usual practice, I made it available [pdf] to those who wished to download it and read it.
When New Zealand cracked down on anyone who possessed a copy of the manifesto, making it a jailable offense, I warned our Kiwi readers that they should not avail themselves of that link if they wanted to stay out of prison.
Dymphna posted her own inimitable take on what happened in “Pigs and Monkeys and Mossad, Oh My!” (It was one of the last major posts she wrote before her death).
A couple of days ago, just before my phone and Internet went out, I received an email from a fellow in the Department of Internal Affairs in New Zealand. Before you read the text, I must respectfully request that you refrain from contacting the department to complain. There’s no need to intervene on my behalf. I have nothing to fear from the New Zealand government, but there’s no sense in poking the beast excessively in his lair.
Here’s what the email said:
Dear Gates of Vienna
Good afternoon,
I am an investigator within the Digital Safety, Digital Violent Extremism Team at the Department of Internal Affairs in New Zealand. The Digital Violent Extremism Team is dedicated to preventing the spread of unlawful online content that promotes, supports or encourages violent extremism. We strive to keep New Zealanders safe from online harm, such as content relating to the Christchurch attacks which deeply affected NZ communities.
Recently, we received information regarding a PDF document hosted by your website: https://gatesofvienna.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/tarrant-manifesto.pdf The PDF is the Christchurch terrorist’s manifesto.
The Christchurch terrorist published a manifesto containing his beliefs and plans online, the same day he livestreamed the Christchurch mass shooting attacks that took place on March 15th 2019. Tragically 51 people were killed and 50 were injured that day.
Following the tragic events, various Heads of State, Government and Leaders from the tech sector around the world have committed to what is known as ‘The Christchurch Call’.(1) The ‘call’ rests on the conviction that a free, open and secure internet offers extraordinary benefits to society and that respect for freedom of expression is fundamental, however no one has the right to create and share terrorist and violent extremism content online.
The Christchurch terrorist’s manifesto has been classified as ‘objectionable’ (banned) under New Zealand legislation.(2)
We have confirmed that the PDF document hosted at the aforementioned link is the manifesto, which is objectionable in New Zealand.
Could you please advise me of whether you can assist with having this file taken down from your site or alternatively blocking visibility of the PDF from New Zealand in order to comply with our law?
We would greatly appreciate the assistance you can provide in reducing the harm to the New Zealand public, the victims and their families.
I hope you are willing to assist us and look forward to hearing from you in due course.
With best regards,
(1) — https://www.christchurchcall.com
(2) — NZ Films, Videos and Classifications Act 1993Ngā mihi nui
[Name redacted]
Inspector of Publications
Warrant Card [redacted]
Manager: Digital Violent Extremism, Digital Safety
Toi Hiranga | Policy, Regulation and Communities
Phone Work [redacted]
Te Tari Taiwhenua | The Department of Internal Affairs
This was the text of my reply:
Thank you for getting in touch with Gates of Vienna.
I am an American citizen who resides in the United States, and, as such, am not under the jurisdiction of New Zealand Law. The company that provides web hosting for my site is located in the United States, and therefore lies outside the jurisdiction of New Zealand Law.
I believe strongly in the free flow of information, whether good or bad. Mr. Tarrant is an abhorrent person who committed an atrocity; nevertheless, it is useful for all interested citizens to understand the way the mind of a homicidal psychopath works. In addition, with the passage of time, his manifesto will gain historical relevance, just as Mein Kampf and the Koran have historical relevance today. Despite their violent, psychopathic content, the last two works may still be legally published in New Zealand, if I am not mistaken. In any case, the publication of all three is legal in the United States.
I intend to continue to make Mr. Tarrant’s manifesto available to anyone who wishes to download it. My doing so does not mean I support or agree with its sentiments; quite the opposite, in fact.
You say you work for the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs. The key word there is “Internal”: I am external to New Zealand; therefore my actions and activity are of no concern to you.
Cordially,
Ned May
a.k.a. “Baron Bodissey”
https://gatesofvienna.net
Once again, if you want to read the killer’s manifesto, it’s available here.
The extreme totalitarian actions of the New Zealand government are bizarre. Does Te Tari Taiwhenua really think that their citizens are unable to tell right from wrong? Or do they assume that Mr. Tarrant’s sentiments would have such broad appeal that those who read them might be inspired to cast aside their moral upbringing and imitate the murderer’s example?
In either case, they must have a low opinion of their own citizenry.
Note to commenters: I will treat remarks about Brenton Tarrant the same way I have treated those about Anders Behring Breivik, and summarily delete any expressions of support or approval for his vile actions. I don’t care how you justify it; you might as well save yourself the trouble if your sentiments happen to run in that direction.
Its an interesting thing with manifestos and attempts to make them unavailable to the general public.
Usually such efforts are couched in terms of not making the writer more notorious, or in this case, reducing the harm to (insert country here) population.
Recently Ted Kaczynski (aka The Unibomber) passed away in prison, apparently from natural causes. I remember when he was in the news prior to his capture decades ago, and the original publishing of his manifesto in return for a promise to not send any more letterbombs. At the time I had no interest in reading his manifesto, and the mainstream news description of him and his eccentricities after his capture made any serious investigation of his writings only of interest to freaks and weirdos.
Anyway I was able to find a saved copy of his manifesto and read it, and I understood instantly why there was such an effort to cast him as some kind of nutter and disparage his tome with no discussion of what it actually contained. Granted, he was something of a nutter, but other than the conclusions that he reached in his manifesto, his writings contained more sanity and insight into the dehumanizing nature of the modern world than the vast hordes of sheeple that uncomprehendingly accept their imprisonment as cogs in modern industrial society.
Also, the motive for the letterbombing campaign was spelled out, which I had never once heard discussed anywhere. The whole purpose of the bombings were to ensure that his manifesto would receive the widest distribution possible through notoriety, since it was impossible for them to receive distribution in any other way with a realistic chance of being read. Of course, he didn’t count on the effectiveness of ridicule and disparagement of his appearance or his living conditions and thus discrediting anything he wrote before anyone might read it.
I have not read the manifesto of Mr Tarrant but I am glad that you have nevertheless kept a copy for its historical and anti-censorship value. Perhaps mass digital mailing campaigns can one day be waged against these tyrants, or someone more clever and skilled can insert the manifesto onto a computer owned by one of these NZ tyrants to be “found” by the opposition in a political campaign.
I read it (New Zealand Official Censor please note: not while in New Zealand. Oh, and stay in your lane / on your island, while you’re at it).
Here’s what they’re hiding: he describes himself as an “eco-fascist” and an admirer of the People’s Republic of China. He’s *also* a white nationalist, that is true. But he could have been just as fairly presented as an ecological terrorist. Or a pro-China nutjob. And they certainly wouldn’t want *that*. So… they censor.
It sounds to me that the NZ gov’t needs a reminder about the First Amendment.
thery don’t have a First Amendment, let alone a Constitution that if the people, by the people and for the people.
Fat lot of good it does for us ‘muricans.
The 1st Amendment doesn’t prevent the feds from using their social media oligarchs to muzzle those who stray too far from the plantation. And certain topics are completely verboten and can result in de-personing and loss of one’s job, assets, and any kinds of financial services.
The jury is still out on the utility of the 2nd Amendment. At least ‘muricans have the means to fight back and remove these swamp monsters if they ever find the will.
Indeed, but they’re trying to interfere with a web site based in the country that *does* have a First Amendment, so they should rightly he told to choke on their Internet connection – as the Baron is doing.
“Or do they assume that Mr. Tarrant’s sentiments would have such broad appeal that those who read them might be inspired to cast aside their moral upbringing and imitate the murderer’s example?”
The (not so) funny thing is, it works this way for the Koranians, which the same officials are hysterically denying. Mohammed’s “Mein Kampf” is the most effective of all the manifestos in this vein produced by damaged brains throughout history. And it maintains a powerful support infrastructure throughout the world, no matter how many get killed, raped, humiliated right before our eyes.
I wonder if any leading politicians or top bureaucrats in New Zealand would honour a similar request if it came from China, Iran, Russia etc. ? Would they remove content that said countries deemed to be “objectionable“?
Objectionable material is of course a nonsensical term. I would have had more respect for this Kiwi “department of truth” if they actually had the [manly wherewithal] to admit that they are in the business of censoring speech that they personally don’t like.
I also wonder if they found the treatment that the British feminist who visited their country not that long ago had to endure “objectionable”, when the “neo-red guards” of Auckland violently attacked her for having the “temerity” to assert that there are only two genders?
Probably not.
No freedom of speech in politically correct New Zealand.
To have in one’s possession a copy of Tarrant’s manifesto is a criminal offence here in New Zealand, as is having a copy of the shooting video he made. I had both up until I found out to do so was illegal, whereupon I, of course, destroyed them. A pity as it seems to me to stop this happening again the public really need to be aware of his motivations. As far as I understand the law, reading his manifesto is not illegal, only holding a copy of it. I did ask a Policeman if I could legally hold a copy for academic interest as I was giving public talks on Islam at the time, but he could not answer this question. To be on the safe side I got rid of my copy.
One of the several upsetting and indeed ludicrous results of these shootings was that all semi-automatic centre-fire rifles and shotguns had to be handed in to Police if they held a magazine of more than 5 (I think) cartridges. That resulted in 1/3 of all eligible semi-autos being handed to Police (including one of mine). What happened to the other two-thirds? Why they disappeared. It’s not too hard to imagine that gang members approached people with such guns and offered them twice what they would get from the Police buy-back. It’s not hard to imagine that many people took them up on the offer and that perhaps thousands of these guns found their way into the hands of the very last people anyone would wish to have them. Now I don’t know any of this as fact of course, it’s pure speculation on my part. But it’s not hard to imagine.
We should also note that New Zealand is a small country and lots of us know lots of other people. I offer three examples.
Two weeks after the shooting I met and talked with one of the Armed Offenders Squad (like your SWAT) that went into one of the mosques. I spent much of the day chatting with him – a lovely chap, probably ex-SAS – discussing the events of that day.
Also in our small country I have discussed with an acquaintance an initial media story, which quickly disappeared, that those in the second mosque drove off Tarrant by returning fire with their own gun. What on earth were worshippers doing with a rifle in a place of worship in our quiet little country I thought? My acquaintance said they knew one of the Police who responded to that mosque and he confirmed the memory-holed story was true.
Lastly, a couple of years before the shooting the son of the previous Imam of the main mosque was led to Christ by a friend of mine (perhaps this was why that Imam left the mosque soon after). His older brother was not happy about this and threatened my friend with death. He also said “one day all the Muslims will rise up and kill all the Christians!”. My friend learnt from her young convert that the Mosque conducted martial arts classes for all the kids. Funny, we don’t do that at church, I wonder why they felt the need for this?
Life in a small country eh?
Fascinating too that the main mosque was chosen by Tarrant specifically because it had produced local converts who had gone on to fight for al Qaeda and be killed in Yemen (if memory serves me right). I have to wonder if that mosque was ever scrutinised by the Ministry of Internal Affairs or their colleagues about this. Perhaps that would have been Islamophobic. Yes, I’m sure there was absolutely nothing to be concerned about. We can trust our scrupulous and diligent authorities absolutely.
Tarrant himself is a foreigner, an Australian. It would seem to some of us to make more sense to ban Australians than semi-autos but there you go. Thanks to an official information act request we know that in the decade leading up to the shooting there was an average of one gun murder every 18 months by those holding gun licenses. Hardly a major problem until Mr Tarrant turned up. But we all had to turn in our guns nonetheless.
Over here the Police have to vet each person applying for a gun license. This includes a lengthy firearms safety course. Each applicant also requires two referees to say he is mentally stable and safe to own a gun. Mr Tarrant’s two referees both cautioned the Police not to give him a gun license as they thought he was a danger. The Police apparently disagreed, gave him a his license and the rest is history. The Police do not seem open to discussing this error for some reason.
The paranoid among us might think that the whole thing was conveniently set up so that some could argue that even in a sleepy little country like ours, online hate speech led to heinous murders and so free speech should be curbed. The paranoid may also think that the Police did not make an error with Tarrant when it came for his gun license, but rather somewhere up there The Powers That Be decided that he might be useful in order to confiscate the public’s guns and to clamp down on “hate speech”. But thank goodness I’m not paranoid!
What a hideous world we would live in if such things were true. Indeed what a complete lie every authority and every institution might be. Fortunately need not rely on hearsay and speculation – the government and Police of course surely have all the hard facts and can be trusted to do the right thing.
We can all rest secure, can’t we.
And yet throughout all the chaos in Kiwiland, you like a good compliant serf, turned in your gun? This, amongst many other reasons, I have changed my mind on WWI and WWII, the wrong side lost, for say what you like about the Germans, they would never under the Kaiser nor that bastard Hitler, ever in a million years have allowed the 3rd world into our western countries, to cause the chaos and ruin we now face,. The fact that you just as a matter of fact complied with whatever so called authority told you to turn in your weapon like the good sheep you in Kiwiland Australia and Britain now have become, makes the case for me. The Lion has become the donkey leading the bloody sheep.
Perhaps owning a firearm in my country doesn’t mean quite the same as owning one in yours (America?). I am a Christian. I follow the law even if I don’t agree with it all the time. I have a responsibility before God to do so. But only up to a point. I also lost my income, house and church because I refused to follow the government’s coercive vaccine mandate. I did this because the government had moved from its proper place of writing proper laws to interposing itself between my conscience and my God. At that point the government can go take a flying leap and I don’t care what it costs me.
Years ago I smuggled Bibles into China and was tempted to change money with locals for a better rate than the banks offered. Even though, hypothetically, I might justify this as ripping off an evil oppressive Communist regime. But I also declined this because the law itself about the exchange rate was not oppressive or Communist, it was just the law. So I followed the law. All the while I was flouting the law about smuggling Bibles because I believe that no government has the right to stop people reading the Bible.
Some laws – most laws – I obey as a good Christian. Other laws I would rather lose my life than obey. I hope this softens your judgment of me somewhat.
I think the day will soon arrive when the Bible is banned, possibly worldwide.
I have read that at least one school in the US has banned the Bible from its library because it contains offensive words that might upset the students.
That’s the start of the purge of the Bible right there.
NZ appear to have been infected with the virus of totalitarianism. And their queen tyrant has been given her reward by Chuckles, our new King. She’s now a dame. Straight from the world of pantomime, haha.
To bad the Kaiser of Prussia and Emperor of The Austro-Hungarian Empire didn’t win.
Incredible. New Zealand is drifting steadily to complete state censorship. You couldn’t spell out your disgust at the murders more clearly. The selective nature of the censorship means NZ must be approving of the abhorr violence in some in banned publications, notably the Koran and less so in the Old Testament. Funny old world.
I sent a letter to the editor asking of NZ, will they ban the quran “manifesto” that demands muslims kill kaffirs, infidels, Jews and non-believers and such as not all things called a “religion” are to be believed as such.
A “dirt age” religion based upon a rock that fell out of the sky, requires the lowest form of humanity to give themselves to such.
“One of the emails waiting for me when the Internet came back on today was from the government of New Zealand: ”
This could be more complicated. Maybe the Kiwis themselves have something to do with the internet shutdown itself?
The world is globalizing, and distances no longer matter (especially for the Long arm).
It was a phone outage that occurred in the middle of a thunderstorm (albeit a minor one), and a number of residences besides mine were affected. I’m not sure how many, probably just a few dozen.
It doesn’t seem likely that international spooks would have caused that outage just to take down this blog for three days.
It would make more sense to terminate the site permanently by leaning on my service provider — make it an offer it can’t refuse. That’s what I expect to happen someday, when the New Normal Great Reset totalitarian system is fully in place.
And that is why good ole Musk developed Starlink, so no bloody government can control it. Hint hint good Baron.
Starlink is a means of delivery, like a telephone wire. I’m talking about the hosting service for my site. Using Starlink wouldn’t change that.
I’d need to own my own dedicated web server to be able to avoid the need for a hosting service. That’s not going to happen, so the vulnerability will remain.
Canada, NZ and Australia all were happy being under the King and Queen. Didn’t work out well. Too late now and the UK is the worst.