This article first appeared on June 28th 2021

Over the course of 15 and 16 June, the first ‘hui’ on ‘Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism’ was supposed to bring together in single accord a gaggle of ‘experts’ and ethnic representatives. The idea of an annual ‘hui’ to discuss terrorism was mooted in recommendations to Government by the commission of inquiry into the Tarrant shootings. It is self-serving, and justifies perpetuating bureaucracy and the extension of surveillance. The primary focus was intended to be on what ‘experts’ are calling ‘white identity terrorism’.

A boogeyman has been created out of the spectre of Tarrant. Yet despite the extensive police and SIS investigations in the aftermath of the Tarrant mosque shootings, such ‘white terrorism’ could not be found, despite the spin.

The actual danger is that by demonising any and all White dissent, and denigrating any and all traces of our Settler heritage, some individuals might be pushed into a position that violence is indeed the only remaining option. If they act on their desperation that in turn will feed further state repression. The consequences of a deliberate policy of White youth alienation are not discussed or studied. Any grass-roots initiative to address this alienation is itself condemned as ‘white identity extremism’. The Euro-New Zealander, and particularly White youth, have been pushed into a no-win situation. The State is aggravating the ‘Lone Wolf’ scenario and deflecting from its own responsibility. The ‘white extremist’ is actually a red herring.

No Far Right Terrorist Network – Only Far Left

Regardless of the reams of banality produced by the Commission, the annoying fact for these parasitic milkers of the public purse is that the only terrorist network that has ever been found in recent decades is a bizarre assortment of Maori and anarchists in the Ureweras, commanded by Tame Iti. Eighteen were arrested in 2007 but only four came to trial (one having died in the interim), and were found guilty on firearms charges, because of the inadequacy of the Terrorism Act. Some of these psychotics are still at the forefront of the far Left, and advocate state repression against the dissident Right. Those tried became a cause celebre of the Left; ‘The Urewera Four’, while in contrast Tarrant was repudiated by all Rightist groups in NZ. In 2014 police apologised for ‘unnecessarily frightening’ people during the raids, the police conduct report commenting: ‘The road block at Ruatoki was intimidating to innocent members of that community, particularly in view of the use of armed Police officers in full operational uniform’. [1]

No such enquiry was ever contemplated in regard to the dozens of individuals visited by armed police ‘in full operational uniform’, asking half-witted questions in pursuit of the willow-the-wisp of ‘white terrorism’. No seminars were inaugurated, media features produced, government enquiries established to investigate the alliance between Maori separatists and Leftist extremists; while the Left and Maori still squawk about the ‘injustice’ of police raids in regard to guerrilla warfare training. No apologies were ever received from the blundering plods who invaded the homes of many New Zealanders in the aftermath of Tarrant, not on the basis of any terrorist threat, but on the basis of their views that dissent from Government policy.

However, the counter-terrorism hui was not intended as anything other than a façade to examine ways in which the barely discernible expressions of White dissent might be thwarted. Dr Paul Hunt, chief Human Rights Commissioner, can be relied on to produce voluminous annual reports showing that ‘white supremacist’ ‘hate speech, and ipso facto potential terrorism exists, by the simple expedient of banal nonsense as per his less than impressive tome called It happened here (dramatically named after a 1960s low budget movie in which Germany invades Britain with the help of a fifth column of indigenous Fascists, Mosley-style). [2]

The quality of research from such leeching entities might be discerned by Dr Hunt’s inclusion in his report of the most violent of New Zealand’s supposedly ‘white supremacist’ groups, The Fourth Reich (also a Paul Spoonley favourite) whose membership comprised Maori, Asians, and Pasifika – surely more an example of yet another violent multicultural gang than ‘white identity extremism’? [3]

Moses Off Script

The Europhobic hui started with utopian hopes that did not last the day. When one puts a cat among pigeons, what can be expected? However, it is simply not possible to organise such an event without a Zionist presence. A lack thereof would be implicit anti-Semitism. Hence the presence of Juliet Moses, representing the NZ Jewish Council. Had Ms Moses kept to the Europhobic script about ‘nazis’ and ‘white identity terrorism’ everything would have proceeded swimmingly. Yet it seems that Ms Moses could not resist referring to Muslim terrorism, which is not what the hui was about. Keep to the script: white extremists, white terrorists. It would have seemed to the delegates from the Islamic Federation that Ms Moses was raising precisely those matters that we are told had radicalised Tarrant, and the Muslims walked out, claiming ‘racism’. A media report stated:

The walkout happened today during a panel addressing the causes of terrorism after a comment from NZ Jewish Council spokesperson Juliet Moses about the Israel-Palestine conflict sparked a commotion. Moses had told the crowd that leaders should be consistent in condemning terrorism.

“We need to hear leaders condemn all support for terrorism and all terrorism equally whatever the source, target, and circumstances, and even when it is not politically expedient to do so. Hezbollah and Hamas, their military wings are proscribed terror organisations in New Zealand but we saw a rally in support of Hezbollah on Queen St in 2018.”

Her remarks caused a strong response from members of the Muslim community including victims of the Christchurch mosque attacks, as people shouted: ‘Free Palestine.’ Federation of the Islamic Associations of New Zealand (FIANZ) chair Abdur Razzaq said the hui was about “discussing social cohesion … we came here to discuss ways to peace’…

Moses said she was only ‘stating fact’ and did not believe her comments were controversial and that she was referring to the 2018 march, not the one that happened in Auckland this year. [4]

The Islamic Federation had placed itself in such a predicament when it jumped aboard the ‘antiracist’ bandwagon, participating in so-called aroha rallies organised in the aftermath of Tarrant by sundry militant atheists, Trotskyites and other Communists, using anti-racism as a front for their own agendas. The Islamic Federation, after Tarrant, started spouting the most arrant liberal nonsense that does not do service to the Islamic tradition in trying to co-opt the most debased elements of the modern West, and attempting to appear as liberals in Muslim garb. They seem to have departed far from the roots of the Albanian Muslim migrants, anti-Communists as one should expect from such a traditionalist religion, who established the NZ Islamic Federation, under the patronage of Mazhar Shukri Krasniqi, of whom Abdullah Drury, former PR man for the Federation, writes: ‘He was opposed to Communism and was arrested by either the Albanian and Yugoslav security agencies at one point or another between 1945 and 1950, especially when he tried to escape the Socialist utopia’. [5]

A further media report states:

Moses told RNZ she had been correct to use her speech on Tuesday to reference a ‘Hezbollah rally’ in Auckland’s Queen St in 2018, when she cautioned it had not been condemned and that leaders should be consistent when confronting terrorism. She said Jews in New Zealand faced a number of threats, including that from Lebanese group, Hezbollah. … [6]

White Identity Bad; Jewish Identity Good

Apparently there are a ‘large number of threats’ to NZ Jews. Such impending ‘threats’ are the lifeblood and raison d’etre of Zionism. Any less of an image means the loss of the Zionist grip over Jewish communities, and a threat to Jewish existence, not by way of pogroms but through out-marriage.

Of the latter, Jewish dating sites aim to match Jew-to-Jew. In New Zealand JSingles, listed as a resource on One Community Chronicle, online successor to the NZ Jewish Chronicle, states: ‘JSingles NZ has been set up as a service for the NZ Jewish community to allow Jewish singles to easily meet other like minded people who share the same faith, background and values’. [7]Replace ‘Jewish’ with ‘White’ and imagine the reaction from Stuff media, Patrick Gower, Newshub, Human Rights Commission… NZ Jewish Council…

Further, the by-line of the NZJC is that of supporting ‘Jewish awareness and identity’. [8] That is to say, the NZJC is an ‘identitarian’ movement, as is Zionism per se. Identitarianism is only a ‘problem’ when it is European. Then it becomes ‘white identity terrorism’. As for the roots of Jewish identitarianism in Palestine, Stern, Irgun, Palmach, the King David Hotel, Count Bernadotte, and Deir Yasin, become part of a ‘liberation struggle’.

Rise in anti-Semitism’ Preludes Hui

Ms Moses just a week prior to the Europhobe hui laid the foundation for her comments by claiming that the month previously had seen a significant increase in ‘anti-Semitic incidents’ in NZ, relating this to what she was going to say at the hui a week later:

While we haven’t experienced the violent Jew-hatred seen recently in the United States and Europe, New Zealand has also had a significant rise in antisemitic incidents relating to the war between Hamas and Israel[Emphasis added].

Last year, 2020, saw 33 antisemitic incidents recorded in New Zealand – the highest number since records began in 1990. Last month alone, we recorded 16 incidents. They ranged from targeted, private antisemitic abuse of Jewish students online to a man giving the Nazi salute outside a synagogue.

Moses said those 16 incidents don’t include public antisemitic social media posts from New Zealanders or on Kiwi forums, and the NZJC also noticed an increase of those. [9]

Ms Moses quotes Green Party MP Ricardo Menéndez tweeting in March, ‘from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’. She states that this intrinsically means the destruction of Israel. (Ibid). But surely it could mean no more than that Menéndez supports the premise of the Balfour Declaration: a Jewish homeland in Palestine, without the intrusion of the Arab indigenes? However, Zionist apologia, including that of Ms Moses in her a ‘glossary’ for ‘leftie’ critics of Israel, claims that Jews are the indigenes, ‘returning home’ after centuries of exile, writing in the right-wing (?) Australian Spectator‘Colonisation:… In relation to Israel, it means indigenous people regaining sovereignty over part of their ancestral homeland…’ [10]

Hence Zionists can claim ‘solidarity’ with indigenes in other states where it suits them, but obviously not extending to indigenous Europeans; that’s ‘white identity extremism’.

The extent to which the alleged upsurge in ‘antisemitism’ in New Zealand is attributable to the ‘far right’ is obscure. Much seems to emanate from the Left. Ms Moses, on behalf of the NZJC, chastised histrionic Irish Bolshevik import Joe Carolan for chanting, ‘; “Intifada, Intifada, globalise the Intifada” through a megaphone, [with] the crowd repeating the chant’, at an anti-Israel rally in Auckland in MayMs Moses continued: … ‘It is even more alarming that Carolan, the co-founder of “Love Aotearoa Hate Racism”, should be the person inciting such violence’. [11] Love Aotearoa Hate Racism is one of the far Left fronts formed after the Tarrant shootings, Imam jumping aboard the bandwagons set up by those with a hatred towards Islam and all other religions.Carolan is an organiser of the Unite union, which has always been full of Trotskyites. Ms Moses called on Unite to repudiate Carolan. He is also head of Socialist Aotearoa, a Trotskyite faction. The Carolan antics helped set the stage for Ms Moses at the Europhobe hui a week later, about which she commented:

It is worth noting that it is less than two days before this country’s inaugural hui on Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism. The Jewish Council calls on all leaders who are committed to ensuring that Aotearoa New Zealand never again falls prey to terrorism or violent extremism to condemn this brazen incitement to violence, which particularly threatens the Jewish community. [12]

Could it be that the Zionists did not wish to be upstaged in the persecution stakes by Muslims even at an event that was supposed to be focused on the Tarrant mosque shootings?

Zionists seemed to be placing Muslims in the same category as dissident Whites as a common ‘threat’ to New Zealand Jews. The Herald report quoted the Islamic Federation spokesman:

Razzaq said the remarks and the politicisation of the hui by Moses had been inappropriate, divisive and hurtful. He said Moses had used the Hezbollah ‘bogie’ to promote fear and the ‘securitisation of Islam’. Razzaq had told RNZ he felt sad for people who brought baggage from overseas and dumped it in New Zealand. He said Moses’ comments had been a calculated attempt to denigrate Muslims present, including Palestinians, and ‘wipe out the memory’ of those killed in the Christchurch mosque massacres.

Moses rejected the claims and said she was there to raise concerns of her community. … [13]

So here we have Ms Moses stating that she was there representing ‘her community’, New Zealand Jews who, it would seem, at least according to the position of the NZ Jewish Council, consider certain Muslims a potential danger to their ‘community’, as Tarrant considered Muslims a danger to European communities. Is the comparison unfair or exaggerated? Might one perceive a commonality of outlook between Tarrant and Zionists? Mr Razzaq seems to have thought so when he said of Ms Moses’ comments, that they ‘had been a calculated attempt to denigrate Muslims present, including Palestinians, and ‘wipe out the memory’ of those killed in the Christchurch mosque massacres’. [14]

Origins of Islamophobia Obscured by ‘Far Right’ Red Herring

Zionist and Israel-First neocon organisations in the USA and Europe have been the primary elements behind Islamophobic propaganda, to the extent of giving financial backing to so-called ‘far right extremists’ such as Tommy Robinson in Britain and Geert Wilders in The Netherlands. Yet the origins of Islamophobic propaganda are deflected away from these well-funded and influential pro-Israel organisations and on to powerless ‘far right’ groups. [15]

The spectre of a ‘far right’ terrorist threat, equated with ‘white identity’, serves as a red herring to obscure the actual origins of Islamophobic propaganda, and as a rationalisation for suppressing dissent across a range of issues, including globalisation, and what the United Nations calls ‘replacement migration’.

Baggage from overseas dumped in New Zealand’

Mr Razzaq is quoted as stating that he ‘felt sad for people who brought baggage from overseas and dumped it in New Zealand’. [16] While he was referring to Ms Moses, she had been prompted to make her statements regarding perceived support for Hezbollah among New Zealand Muslims. From an outsiders viewpoint, both had ‘brought baggage from overseas and dumped it in New Zealand’, and this is precisely the character of multi-culturalism, and a premise as to why it is rejected by the Dissident Right. Each non-assimilable group that constitutes its own ‘community’, also constitutes a micro-nation, and ethnos and a culture. Migrants from the Middle East and indeed Asia no less, and even the Pacific island states, can be expected to bring their own ‘baggage from overseas and dump it in New Zealand’. Yet is the melting-pot a better option than multiculturalism? Both involve ethnocide, ultimately at the behest of globalisation.

Societies such as New Zealand, products of late Western capitalism, are founded on the premise that a nation can be formed around liberal social contract theory, where individuals contract to form a society on the basis of security of property and commerce. Rightist philosopher and historian Thomas Carlyle critiqued the superficial, inorganic character of such a state as based on the ‘money nexus’. [17] We should expect Muslims to be cognisant of such factors, and refrain from jumping aboard bandwagons with liberals and Marxists. It seems that our globalist immigration policies have altered the political and cultural dynamics of our Muslim community to the extent that Imam can share platforms with Communists, and regurgitate Western liberal notions for T.V. audiences.

Ms Moses attended the Europhobic hui to represent her community, New Zealand Jews. She seems to have felt obliged to make a criticism of New Zealand Muslims a theme of her talk on a panel discussion about ‘terrorism’, whereas the state apparatus that sponsored the hui did so for the purposes of establishing premises for the criminalisation and suppression of White dissent against Government policies. Yet because the hui was supposed to represent multicultural Aotearoa (as New Zealand is increasingly called) and that this could not be undertaken without including both Muslims and Jews, the actual character of multiculturalism was going to be inexorably outed. Simple Europhobia was not sufficient to unite such disparate interests. The first lesson of the first annual Europhobic hatefest is: ‘unity in diversity’ is a fallacy.


6 thoughts on “Jewish-Muslim Conflict at First Annual Europhobe Hui”

  1. Both the zionists and islamists see western liberalism as a tool to crack open western national resistance to ethnic entryism. Good article.

    1. Zionists and Islamists [who are largely CIA-armed Sunni Supremacists] have been helping each other for decades now.

      Zionists police ‘The Judeo-Christian West’ while the Islamists act as the loyal opposition to provide nourishment to (((civic-nationalist))) political careers.

        1. Thanks, Sir for visiting my blog. It means a lot coming from you.

          I first saw your work at Counter-Currents; then I read your ‘Artists of the Right: Resisting Decadence’ as well as ‘More Artists from the Right’. Both are great.

          Keep up the good work, Mr. Bolton.

  2. Juliet Moses condemned the current emphasis (“zeitgeist”) on “whiteness”; there she is pointing to Critical Theory. Not everything is black and white “Juus taking over the world”.

    That’s the thing. On a scale we have those who see identity (especially religion) as a strong motivator that must be taken note of and on the other, (our current Zeitgeist) which holds that through government and media we can turn a population into post ethnic cosmopolitans.

    Eric Kaufmann shows how the ultra religious (Amish, a Jewish sect, muslim sect etc) are impervious to modern secular thinking and their birthrates eventually make then a strong political force.

    1. I thought civilisational cycles were defined by ebb and flow of sorts. It wouldn’t be the first time a secularisation of a non-european kind has occured. A major difference is perhaps the way in which secularisation influences these divergent cultures. A resurgence of faith seems to be common among Muslims, for example.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *