secondly an attack in new zealand would bring to attention the truth of the assault on our civilization, that no where in the world was safe, the invaders were in all of our lands, even in the remotest areas of the world and that there was no where left to go that was safe and free from mass immigration. not in europe, not in the americas, not in australia or new zealand. the more diverse a group becomes, the less equal it becomes. the risk is too great. was there a political figure or party in history you most associate yourself with? support them politically, voice support of their leaders, their ideals and their people. do not fret on the manner of how victory is achieved, all methods are possible, in the face of ethnic genocide, all morality is ambiguous. the jaded cynicism with which i had greeted previous attacks didn ’ t eventuate. even at vienna in 1683 we europeans still lost over fourteen thousand good men. if you are released we will find you and kill you, if you are in prison we will reach you there, if you try to hide these rapist scum we will kill you as well. the only muslim i truly hate is the convert, those from our own people that turn their backs on their heritage, turn their backs on their cultures, turn their back on their traditions and became blood traitors to their own race.

the attack was planned to allow enough time to train, form a plan, settle my affairs, write down my views, then enact the attack. yes, i dislike them. due to the threat of ethnic replacement and our own horribly low birth rates, we do not have 150 years or even 50 years to achieve positions of power. does anyone even ask why? no, there isn ’ t a successful, influential grand movement established just yet, and no leading organizations, so there is no great structure created that could be brought to harm. the christchurch and linwood mosques had far more invaders, in a more prominent and optically foreign building, with less students, more adults and a prior history of extremism.