Chelsea Clinton accused of causing New Zealand mosque shootings because she criticized Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism

What really saddens me about the killing of 49 Muslims worshiping at a mosque—beyond of course the slaughter of innocent Kiwis and the pain of their relatives, friends, and loved ones—is the immediate reaction of those who want to politicize the event. Some politicization is of course inevitable, as we don’t want this to happen again, but the sorrow and sadness of those in the West hadn’t even abated a bit before the anger set in (some even bypassed the anger to go straight to the offense). Who let the slaughter happen? Everybody must find a scapegoat, immediately.

The usual suspects were indicted: Donald Trump, the NRA (which of course doesn’t operate in New Zealand), the YouTube gamer PewDiePie, and so on. I haven’t read the suspect’s manifesto, and to be sure it may not be a complete account of his “reasons” for the murder, but people are seizing on every word so they can point a finger of blame. Right now, it seems more seemly to express solidarity with the victims (as many Kiwis, including Jews in NZ synagogues, are doing), and worry about the causes when the dust settles.

But people can’t wait. When Chelsea Clinton, now pregnant, went to a vigil at NYU for the massacred Kiwis, she was accosted by a Palestinian Muslim, whose attack was filmed by leftist Jewish activist Esor Fasa. The attacker (verbal attack!) blamed Clinton for the mosque murders.Read the Newsweek story below (click on the link) to see why Clinton took heat, as I doubt that you can guess. After all, the Clintons don’t have any history of “Islamophobia”. 

From the report:

On Friday night, the daughter of former president Bill Clinton paid her respects to the victims as she participated in a vigil at New York University in Manhattan.

However, a student at the event told Clinton “her rhetoric” had in fact contributed to help the attacks in New Zealand.

Esor, who describes herself as a “Jewish leftist, organizer & known in alt-right circles as ‘antifa chick R*se.;” then posted a video of her “best friend” lashing into Clinton, telling the pregnant mother that “it’s a disgrace that she came to the vigil, calling out Chelsea’s Islamophobia and hypocrisy.”

The video posted starts with Clinton telling Viva in reference to her supposed “Islamophobic remarks”, “I am so sorry…It certainly was never my intention..I do believe that words matter…I think we have to show solidarity…” The student then interrupts her and says, “They do matter…and this, this [vigil] right here, is the result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words you put out into the world, and I want you to know that and I want you to feel that deep inside. 49 people died because of the rhetoric that you put out there.”

A contemplative and patient Clinton begins to say, “I am so sorry you feel that way…” before the cameraman or somebody off screen yells, “What does that mean? Like, what does “I’m sorry you feel that way mean?”

Esor Fasa also posted a tweet (now deleted, because her account is deleted), that was this one:

The video of the encounter is below, thanks to reader cesar who sent it. Above that is the notice that Esor, who is a coward, deleted her Twitter account. I’m sure she received plenty of pushback for calling Chelsea Clinton an Islamophobe, but if you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. The Muslim student is unidentified.

Notice the finger-snapping in the video, which is Woke Leftists’ way of applauding (it apparently doesn’t “trigger” those who are afraid of clapping).

The tweet below is what caused Clinton to be demonized; I wrote about it a while back, and it’s Clinton’s response to Ilham Omar’s anti-Semitism. Apparently it’s okay to be anti-Semitic but not “Islamophobic”, which is what you’re called when you decry anti-Semitism. It’s weird, though, because you’d have to say that Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats who also condemned Omar were complicit in the New Zealand murders. Such is the fury of the Woke Left.

We’ll see more of this, of course, and I don’t know how to temper the fury of those who want to demonize people who are completely innocent. I write about it, but I’m a small fish. All I can say is to urge readers not to put up with the kind of finger-pointing nonsense that this student engaged in.


  1. Serendipitydawg
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    “What does that mean? Like, what does “I’m sorry you feel that way mean?”

    “It means that what you felt was certainly not what I intended, you ignorant cretin. I feel a genuine need to attend a vigil for blameless victims of a terrorist crime.” – if only.

    • Serendipitydawg
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:50 am | Permalink


      Technical term – though no doubt I am expressing an ableist agenda here.

      I am annoyed. Plus, I don’t even like Chelsea Clinton (well how could I? I don’t knnow her) but this kind of idiocy is virtue signalling on a grand scale. It is a shame that tw*tter no longer has the opportunity to their justice warrior to the wolves.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

        Yes, and I abhor virtue signalling – let me pile on so I look so woke and “on the right team”.

      • Serendipitydawg
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

        opportunity to throwtheir justice warrior to the wolves.

        OK, definitely to time to get ready to head out for dinner and Timothy Taylor Landlord on draught, though, arguably, I have probably had enough, so I will be consuming the draught beverage on behalf of PCCe, who will at best be able to get bottled.

        Goodnight all, and thanks to Diana.

      • Filippo
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

        Just congenially curious, if you don’t know her, then on what rational basis do you not like her?

        • Serendipitydawg
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

          None, poor phraseology on my part; it is a case of neither like nor dislike.

          No doubt many would say that she is a privileged scion of a wealthy and influential family but it can’t have been easy growing up with all of that, and I for one am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on her reasons for attending. Of course, she may have made a big deal of it on social or other media, but I am do not subscribe to those and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, do not suspect ulterior motives.

          Regardless, the hectortoring portrayed is the worst kind of “I am so much better than you because I really care” that I have seem, and I am still annoyed about it several hours (and pints of bitter) later.

    • Franklin Abrams
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:51 am | Permalink

      Those so called leftist organizers seem as dumb as unstructured rocks.

    • Roger
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

      It also means it’s better than arguing all day with someone determined to have an argument, but then they even argued with that.

    • Torbjörn Larsson
      Posted March 17, 2019 at 8:49 am | Permalink

      In principle I can understand such reactions at times because all too often, at least locally, an official and deliberated apology is formulated with *only* those words. It then reads like a not-pology.

      But in this case it seems it was an understandable addition and the critics wanted to argue everything.

  2. Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    ” After all, the Clintons don’t have any history of “Islamophobia”.”

    Obviously not, they are just all in for about any war in the middle east and turning countries into failed states… but not into Islamophobia (no sarcastic quotes implying such an obvious thing doesn’t exist required) per say.

    And at the end of the day… who cares about Chelsea Clinton? Why should they? Of course her moronic condemnation of someone bringing up the most basic fact of lobbies influence politicians recently put her slightly in the limelight… but still who cares. Does anyone actually want more dynasties ruling the US?

    • BJ
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

      “Of course her moronic condemnation of someone bringing up the most basic fact of lobbies influence politicians recently put her slightly in the limelight… but still who cares”

      Are you intentionally misrepresenting all the things Omar said, or are you just not aware of them? Are you also willfully being blind to the fact that she lied about how AIPAC operates, or are you just ignorant of it?

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

      Your comment must be sarcastic, but in these crazy times, it will be helpful to end it with “/s”.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

      …the most basic fact of lobbies influence politicians….

      As mentioned at WEIT the other day, Ben Shapiro summarized:

      Omar didn’t make a single statement about Israel’s policies or government. She suggested that the Jewish State has hypnotic power, that Jewish money undergirds American support for Israel, and that Israel supporters have dual loyalty. This isn’t about Netanyahu or settlements or anything else Israel-related. It’s pure anti-Semitism.

      Nor should we forget that Omar herself is now fundraising for the Hamas-linked CAIR.

  3. Ken Kukec
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    Wait, Chelsea Clinton got verbally attacked for calling out a remark by Ilhan Omar — a remark that Omar herself said she “unequivocally apologize[d]” for (however half-assed her apology in fact may have been)?

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      Omar should have never apologized for noting the simple fact that lobbies have power over politicians in Washington. That she had to apologize just proved her point. I still don’t know why anyone gives half a rats butt about Chelsea Clinton. How is she relevant to anything?

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

        If Ilhan Omar had legitimate points to make, she should have set them out forthrightly, without clothing them in antisemitic tropes regarding cupidity and dual loyalty.

        And if Ilhan Omar didn’t believe she had said anything improper, she should have had the courage of her convictions to stand by what she said. Sure, she would have faced political consequences, but no one “forced” (or had the power to force) her to retract her statements or apologize for them.

        • Heather Hastie
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

          Well said.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

        She is involved in various progressive causes, and her name on those causes really helps them with visibility and donations. I would say she is a force for good in the sense of what most of us would consider good.
        My impression of her (from appearances on television) is that she is very bright and well spoken and genuinely a nice person. Anyway, she is relevant because people think she is relevant.

        • merilee
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

          I assume Mark S. is talking about Chelsea Clinton?

        • Heather Hastie
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

          I agree. As far as I can work out admittedly from afar and through the media filter, Chelsea is a genuinely nice and good person.

          • Heather Hastie
            Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

            She’s also been to NZ at least once.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

        Omar is every mean stereotype about Third World Muslims incarnated.

      • Filippo
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

        “I still don’t know why anyone gives half a rats butt about Chelsea Clinton.”

        Yes, you’ve made that abundantly clear here.

        Does Professor Coyne owe you an explanation?

        Why don’t you instead ask Esor Fasa and her ilk since they are the ones confronting and videoing her, and whining and bloviating on social media about her?

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

        Look, newbie, read the Roolz before you barge in here huffing and puffing. The point is not Chelsea Clinton, the POINT is that the political climate now results in the demonization of people in absolutely ridiculous ways.

  4. Randall Schenck
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    I don’t think I would read too much into this stuff. People on this train seem to be mentally deficient in some of their behavior and in their life. Either they will get over it, get some help or not. Yesterday, on this site I was accused of pointing the finger at Trump for the murders in NZ. Also, that I was a bully and very impolite. I do not worry very much about these things because these people have problems and they live on line. Frankly, I suspect they have to live on line because the real world has rejected them. I hope they get some help for their fantasies but as they say, I am not a doctor and do not play one on TV.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

      Sadly, I know people just like this who behave like this online and in real life. They tend to surround themselves with people who are too afraid to think/speak for themselves and enjoy the safety of associating with a loud mouth.

      • Randall Schenck
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

        Enjoy the safety of associating with a loud mouth and too afraid to think/speak for themselves.

        I am not sure I even understand all of that but it hardly makes sense for someone who is offended by just about everything to also want to be around a loud mouth. I will work on that one.

        • Diana MacPherson
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

          They tend not to be the ones offended by anything. They just go along with the loud mouth knowing that the loud mouth will mouth off anyone on their behalf. They will also conform to hating anyone said loudmouth dislikes.

          • Jon Gallant
            Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

            ” …people who are too afraid to think/speak for themselves and enjoy the safety of associating with a loud mouth.” Dead-on right, Diana—and also, in particular, dead-on Left. Precisely how Leftist groupuscules come to be dominated by a guru or loudmouth-in-chief. Comical examples included the Revolutionary Communists, who actually described their guru Bob Avakian as their “precious leader”, a bow to less comical overlords like Stalin, Mao, Kim Il Sung, Enver Hoxha, etc. etc.

            The curious recent development is the spread of this cultish behavior to mobs of mostly students or pretend-students. An Aero essay on its “academic” side can be found at: , although this article says little about the sociopsychology of the trend among students.

  5. Diana MacPherson
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    I wish Chelsea Clinton had just told them, “you’re bullying me, step aside please” and just ignored them. I also wish someone in the audience of the woke had been brave enough to tell the bullies, “leave her alone”.

    • Serendipitydawg
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

      As ever, you said it so much better than me.

      I plead alcohol intoxication* 😀
      * and try typing that when you are three sheets to the wind.

    • Harrison
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

      To a thinking person, Chelsea Clinton’s position is rather complex. She’s wealthy and the scion of a political dynasty, but she’s also been the subject of attempts to publicly humiliate her since adolescence. Rush Limbaugh famously called a 12yo Chelsea “the White House dog.”

      Social crusaders are not known for their nuance, though.

      • infiniteimprobabilit
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

        Rush Limbaugh? The moron who apparently thinks (or at least says) the massacre was a ‘false flag’ operation by a leftist? That Rush Limbaugh?

        I would count being insulted by that thing as an honour (though maybe, considering his credibility, not a very significant honour at that)


    • DrBrydon
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

      Yes, people need to start standing up to the feelings bullies. If the Woke think it works, they will keep doing it. No more guilt trips.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

      I also wish so, but if people around her were not willing to defend her, she had to stay safe. The bullies were so aggressive that they could attack her physically, and she is pregnant.

    • max blancke
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

      They have this whole absurd hierarchy thing going on. Within the framework of that, they can’t bully her.

      She will always be the oppressor, and they the oppressed. Unless a heterosexual White guy walks into the room, then he becomes the target.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

        Yes, and some of the things this person wrote on her Twitter were that she doesn’t care what some white people think; she only cares about brown people and Muslims.

  6. Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

    The social media is better at spreading hate than moderation, so it is hard to temper the furies it creates. What a curse it has become.

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

      Something more to think about. How far should social platforms be allowed to go in exploit human weakness? How much responsibility should they bear for harm that results from their products and their business model? Should platforms bear fiduciary responsibility for the user data they hold? Should there be limits on the exploitation of that data?

      As best we now know….the answer is none. They own everything and the user owns nothing. A guy videos live for 17 minutes while he kills people. Facebook finds out about it from the police. oops.

      • DrBrydon
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

        It’s really a Pandora’s Box. Individuals now have the ability to mass communicate, which is a totally new thing in History. In the past there were limited outlets for expression, aside from standing on a street-corner, and the various media were, in the US, censored by the FCC for broadcast media, or self-censored for print. At essentially no cost a person can now reach (most of) the world. Should the media companies self-censor? Probably? Should the government step in? Maybe? As to whether the internet companies should be liable for customer information and privacy, absolutely. It is high-time that there was a consumer protection law that addressed that, and for an update to the Uniform Commercial Code that addressed what is permissible in End User License Agreements.

        • Randall Schenck
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

          I am pretty sure we will see regulation of these giant monopolies soon. The Congress is educating themselves now and will soon begin. They will also likely break these companies up. Facebook currently has more than 2.2 billions users, bigger than any religion. In the book ZUCKED, he spends the last two chapters explaining action to be taken.

      • Harrison
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

        I would recommend reading this recent Reason article which at the end links to an older Popehat article:

        Holding social media companies accountable for their users really is a terrifying slippery slope whose most probable end result would be the shuttering of public input on the internet en masse.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

        In this case, however, Twitter self-regulated: the bully got such a backlash that she deleted her account.

    • Deodand
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

      As Caitlin McKiernan, an author who happens to be transsexual put it, “Nothing but good would come from pulling the plug and silencing Twitter forever. It is a chaos engine and needs to be dismantled.”

  7. Malgorzata
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:22 pm | Permalink


  8. Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Doesn’t Chelsea Clinton get secret service protection?

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

      Yes, at least she can if she wants it.

  9. BJ
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

    Clinton had no chance of not encountering this. Some people (especially the “woke”) will politicize everything at any moment, no matter how inappropriate. Can’t wait a day, can’t wait an hour, can’t wait a minute. And they’ll politicize it no matter how irrelevant or wrongheaded their position is.

    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:13 pm | Permalink



  10. Posted March 16, 2019 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Titania McGrath could have “been” Esa in a jokey tweet. But for real it is not all all funny.

    One thing that rather characterizes the SJW crowd, as far as I know, is that they show 0 interest in disagreeing with each other. There must surely be a range of views among them, as there are in any group, and so they must surely see some in their ranks that shock even them. Even those from the pretty-far-right will openly rebut the neo-nazis and the like.
    But will spokes-people from the SJW left ever rebuke this woman? I am not holding my breath.

  11. Ken Kukec
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    I haven’t read the suspect’s manifesto, and to be sure it may not be a complete account of his “reasons” for the murder …

    Plainly, some of what the shooter included in his “manifesto” was meant purely as an inside joke playing off the tropes and memes common to the Far Right white-nationalists medium of choice, 8chan (the site on which the shooter posted his manifesto).

    He claimed, for example, that “the person that has influenced me above all was Candace Owens,” and that,

    her views and her own views helped push me further and further into the belief of violence over meekness. Though I will have to disavow some of her beliefs, the extreme actions she calls for me are too much, even for my tastes.

    Now, Candace Owens is a loathsome and insipid American right-wing troll in her own right, but she’s never advocated violence (to my knowledge, anyway). And no one who’s ever read anything she’s said or written could take at face value that she’s more radical than the shooter himself.

    This seems to be an instance of some strange far-right white-nationalist perversion of épater le bourgeois.

  12. Posted March 16, 2019 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

    I find the suggested moratorium on politics surrounding an event not practically feasible and also not realistic regards to its meaning. The meaning, to most people, is how it ties to their lives, which can be anything from terrorism to gun laws and any number of subjects.

    The problem, I think, is tabloid and similar “journalism”, not usually more abstract discourse on politics in which the unfortunate event is merely an example. We’d rather see professional and social media rubbernecking as the depraved activity that it is, than asking people to refrain from discussing guns, terrorism, and other topics.

    I know almost nothing of the Clinton daughter and the anti-semitism row, and had to look up what a “vigil” at NYU got to do with New Zealand. It was organised by the local Muslims to show solidarity, and I suspect that Clinton’s criticism of Omar made her unwelcome in that community. I think, looking at this from afar, this has more to do with the typical hyperpartisan politics in the USA. I even tend to think the Muslims are perhaps right, if not in the particular case, but in spirit: what has Clinton to do at this event? I am not so fond of politicians who arrive at a scene to stalk over ruins and corpses to use the spotlight for themselves.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

      First, Chelsea Clinton is not a politician, she is the daughter of politicians. Second, the vigil was at NYU, an institution Clinton is affiliated with, and was open to all. Explain to me how she was at fault.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

        With politicians, I also mean celebrities, who when “showing face” at such events inevitably draw attention to themselves, which I view as making it about themselves.

        • Filippo
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

          What if one or both of the Obama daughters attended the event? Do they qualify as celebrities?

          Obviously, Ms. Clinton needs to give someone a quitclaim deed to her life so as to enable that someone to “lead, guide, and direct” (as is uttered from the So. Baptist pulpit during the offertory prayer) her in every aspect of her life.

        • Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

          You know, maybe Chelsea Clinton just wanted to show some solidarity with the Muslims. In fact, I think that is what she was doing. Can’t you be a bit charitable about this. Are only Muslims or non-Muslims who aren’t famous allowed to show up? Can’t well known people show empathy and solidarity?

          Give me a break.

          • Heather Hastie
            Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

            As a NZer, I appreciate Chelsea Clinton making the effort to be there for us.

            And I’m sick of all the people who think they know what this is like for NZers and why this happened here. Most of them aren’t even a little bit right about the situation in NZ.

            Kiwis are in shock because this isn’t us. Things like this don’t happen here because the idea of such violence is totally alien to our culture. At the moment, many of us don’t even know how to react because it’s so alien to our way of life.

            The statement from our PM that Jerry posted yesterday reflected the feelings of most of us.

            I’m not claiming we’re perfect or that there’s no racism. But we accept and tolerate differences easily because we live all mixed together, especially in our schools, from earliest childhood.

            We’re small – only 4.5 million people with people from more than 200 countries. If we didn’t get on with each other nothing would get done because there aren’t enough of us for different groups to separate themselves out in their day to day lives.

            Have a look at this item from a NZ TV show, ‘Tagata Pasifika’ from Nov last year when they interviewed the head of the NZ Muslim Assn:

            • BJ
              Posted March 16, 2019 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

              Well said, Heather. That’s why I only offered my condolences to NZ yesterday. I know NZ is nothing like the US and isn’t numb to these things and deals much better with differences in race, culture, etc.

              Unfortunately, the rest of the world will politicize your tragedy. In the age of the internet, there’s no way around it.

              If I was in NZ, I probably wouldn’t go on the internet for weeks after this (except to some fantasy hockey websites, movies, and entirely apolitical Youtube channels that make me feel good — places I know I won’t encounter anything related to the tragedy and its politicization). I feel for you and your country. I hope nothing like this ever happens there again and that you can block out the insanity of the rest of the world, which is something I always imagined is an enormous benefit of living in NZ! I’d like to move somewhere like that some day…

              Best wishes to you, Heather.

              • Heather Hastie
                Posted March 17, 2019 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

                Thanks BJ.

                I’ve started going through the murderer’s manifesto. This politicization of the tragedy is what he expected and wanted to happen. And one of the main places he wanted to politicize it was the US. He wanted to poison the already difficult climate re race, immigration, gun rights and more. That, if nothing else, should be a good reason not do it.

              • BJ
                Posted March 17, 2019 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

                Well, if quite a few commenters on this site are any indication, he sure succeeded. And this is the only site on the entire internet involving politics on which I actually read and write comments, and that’s because the level of discourse is much higher here than most places. So, if that’s the state of things here…well…you can see where I’m going with this 😦

            • Gayle
              Posted March 17, 2019 at 4:08 am | Permalink

              Hear hear! Thanks for saying this, Heather.

        • Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

          So if a “celebrity” shows up at a vigil they are “making it about themselves.” (How, exactly?) if they don’t show up, they are indifferent to the plight of the victims. Kind of hard for someone not to lose with this kind of logic.

          • Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:55 pm | Permalink

            A celebrity can use the attention given to them to draw attention to a cause. But they can also draw attention away from a cause to themselves. There’s a delicate line between the two.

            I think when you were in some other controversy recently, then a public appearance will probably cause the latter. Also, most people didn’t attend the event and yet are not all indifferent. You can show solidarity in many ways.

            Last but not least, you’re critical of a somewhat personal assessment of mine. It’s okay to like celebrities hanging out at such events.

            • Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

              To reiterate PCC. Give me a break.

            • Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

              Clinton has a position at NYU: to wit (from Wikipedia)

              Starting in 2010, Clinton began serving as Assistant Vice-Provost for the Global Network University of New York University, working on international recruitment strategies. She is the co-founder of the Of Many Institute for Multifaith Leadership at NYU and serves as its co-chair.

              Does that make you change your mind about her presence there?

              If you were a mensch, you’d simply retract what you said, especially in view of the above.

              • Posted March 17, 2019 at 5:05 am | Permalink

                The Of Many Institute for Multifaith Leadership is a pioneering initiative devoted to educating and inspiring religious and spiritual leaders to utilize multifaith dialogue and service as a force for positive social change. Started in 2012 by Chelsea Clinton, Khalid Latif, Linda Mills, and Yehuda Sarna, The Of Many Institute is home to all multifaith resources and programs on campus.

                This does, and makes the woke confrontation worse, because now she’s there on “multifaith dialogue” and expresses goodwill towards Muslims, whatever happened with Omar, and her hand is slapped away by students.

    • Margery Limerez
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

      She was invited.

      • Ken Phelps
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

        Oh sure, mess everything up with facts.

        • Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

          That’s not quite fair when I qualified exactly the extent of my ignorance. I still think that way. When a celebrity attends such events, they walk the thin line of making it about themselves, which I dislike.

          • Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

            You’ve already said that, and what you’re claiming is that no celebrity should go to a public event in support of a good cause.

            That’s arrant nonsense. And Clinton has an official position at NYU.

            Are you that obdurate that you can’t admit you were wrong?

  13. Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    I’m sorry you feel that way.

    Not a good response. That puts the blame back on the other person and makes them more angry.

    Just say “I’m sorry”, and walk on by or get away any way you can.

    Or else just look ar them and say move on by.
    Does not pay to engage someone irrational.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

      The blame belonged on the other person. I think Clinton tried to de-escalate without fully submitting to a bully.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

        I agree she was trying to de-escalate. I am just suggesting what I believe would be a better way to go it.

        • Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

          do it.

  14. Posted March 16, 2019 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    Notice the finger-snapping in the video, which is Woke Leftists’ way of applauding (it apparently doesn’t “trigger” those who are afraid of clapping).

    I’ve been traumatized by finger-snapping ever since hearing “When You’re A Jet” in West Side Story.

    • BJ
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

      Holy shit! You’re completely right. Haven’t any of these people considered how snapping must trigger people who come from areas where there’s gang violence and who have also seen West Side Story?!?

      Someone needs to replace Titania McGrath and immediately make this the new “woke” position on snapping. The only solution is complete silence to indicate approval.

    • Gayle
      Posted March 17, 2019 at 4:15 am | Permalink

      Ha ha! Didn’t the upper classes used to click their fingers and demand service from the “garçon”? Finger clicking is therefore “classist”!

      Anyway, I thought that jazz hands were the official non-triggering replacement for clapping?

      • Posted March 17, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

        I’ve also been triggered by jazz hands, ever since a bad shiatsu session while Thelonius Monk was playing in the background.

        I am the most oppressed of them all! Pander ye, to me!

  15. Jonathan Wallace
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

    Its not just the woke left who wasted no time in politicising it. Some commenters on this site yesterday linked the atrocity to a presumed need to control immigration – with no evidence provided to indicate that New Zealand suffers from too many immigrants.

    • Gayle
      Posted March 17, 2019 at 4:21 am | Permalink

      Yes, they did – in the same vein as the odious Australian Senator Anning. I’ve also read (elsewhere) crap about how “The Left” are to blame for this act of terrorism, because they’ve “shamed” the far right for expressing their opinions. So it’s everybody else’s fault besides the vile racist (and his supporters) who did this!

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted March 17, 2019 at 9:43 am | Permalink

        When the incel ploughed down people on the sidewalk in Toronto, immediately, it was all about how feminists had caused it and how troubled the murderer was. No one really cared much about the real victims and the real murderer.

  16. Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

    As a Kiwi I would like to thank Chelsea Clinton and others who attended for expressing condolences toward all affected.

    • Heather Hastie
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

      + 1.

  17. Roo
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

    I have always considered the left a bit hysterical on the topic of language, but maybe they have a point – perhaps this is what happens when you form a lexicon that equates words with violence. While accosting an innocent pregnant woman at a vigil (way to keep it Klassy) is Awful, the subtle trivializing of *actual violence (essentially equating it with opinions you don’t like, as if they are they fall into the same category of suffering,) is beyond awful. The underlying message is “Well, this person shot dozens of people, but *this person wrote a Tweet I didn’t like, so I should condemn them both in this tragedy.” Vile. The best I can say for these kids is that I was kind of awful as a teen too, as are many teens without fully developed frontal lobes, and hopefully they’ll outgrow it.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

      Let us hope. But no everyome’s frontal lobes grow big enough or effective enough to control the stuff that come from the inner and older parts of the brain, the amygdala, etc.

      • Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

        But not everyone’s

      • Roo
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, this particular person sounds like she needs intensive therapy – running up to a mourning, visibly pregnant woman and ranting about how you want her to feel pain deep inside is a whole ‘nother level of creepy. That said, the causal hipster types who cheer on that type of behavior out of groupthink will probably grow a bit older and wiser at some point.

        • Diana MacPherson
          Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

          And she doubled down when criticized for her behaviour saying that she doesn’t care what white people think and that she has been crying all day because Clinton made her feel bad and she felt bad that others were uncomfortable with Clinton’s presence. Good grief, get a grip. Classic 2-year-old behaviour.

          • Heather Hastie
            Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

            Yep. It wasn’t Clinton that made her feel bad. She needs to take a long, hard, look in the mirror (as my mother always told me to do).

          • Roo
            Posted March 17, 2019 at 9:12 am | Permalink

            Yeah, I guess on the somewhat positive side this might be at least a small collision with reality for the most insular circles of the Woke Left – a small step out of echo-chamber land.

  18. Eli
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    Jerry, I think you misread the article, Chelsea Clinton was accosted not by a leftist Jewish activist Esor Fasa but by her friend, apparently a Muslim Palestinian woman tweeting under the name “vivafalastin” (meaning viva Palestine). This Palestinian activist, among other stuff, believes Israel must be destroyed.

    On the other hand, this leftist Jewish activist is against Israel’s right to exist too:

    • Eli
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

      By “this leftist Jewish activist”, I am referring to Esor Fasa who apparently doesn’t think Israel should exist.

    • Posted March 16, 2019 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

      Yes, I misread; my bad. I’ve changed the post to reflect the news reports. Thanks!

  19. aljones909
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

    Not always popular to bring this up but it should be noted that New Zealand will soon join the sane world and introduce strict gun control.
    The gunman was an Australian. Australia introduced stringent gun control legislation after Martin Bryant killed 35 people in 1996.

    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

      We have fairly strict gun control laws at present. That is, in relation to what firearms you can legally own. Basically, no handguns, no automatics, without very special and not-so-easy-to-get licences.

      It seems the shooter’s guns were licensed, though I suspect his licences may have restricted the places where he could legally carry them (not that he took any notice of that).

      But I believe individual guns are not registered or tracked. I guess that could change.

      But obviously farmers and hunters have legitimate reasons for gun ownership.


      • infiniteimprobabilit
        Posted March 16, 2019 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

        Or rather, I guess, the shooter was licensed to own guns like that. (Correcting my phrasing)


  20. Posted March 16, 2019 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    Pewdiepie doesn’t even make gaming videos anymore!


  21. Nicolaas Stempels
    Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

    It could just as well be argued that the verbal assailant (and the ‘what does it mean’ Greek chorus) are responsible. Such completely outrageous, ‘unsatirable’ accusations, may inflame the latent hatred for Muslims and their SWJ accomplices

  22. Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:06 pm | Permalink

    Snapping = West Side Wokeness.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted March 16, 2019 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

      😀 I’m traumatized by the snapping because of that episode of Star Trek TNG where Riker gets abducted by aliens that make those clicking sounds.

  23. Ewan
    Posted March 17, 2019 at 4:47 am | Permalink

    “What REALLY saddens me about the killing of 49 Muslims worshipping at a mosque—beyond of course the slaughter of innocent Kiwis…” (Emphasis added.)

    I don’t know if you would agree, but it seems to me parity of treatment is a prerequisite for any ethics worth the name.

    Pause to imagine what you would have written had the victims been Jewish New Zealanders worshipping in their synagogues and their murderer a rabid anti-semite. Then consider whether this article is the appropriate response to what happened (any more than the behaviour you rightly object to).

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted March 17, 2019 at 9:45 am | Permalink

      Are you suggesting PCC would be more sympathetic? Because I don’t think I see that he wasn’t in this article.

      • Ewan
        Posted March 17, 2019 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

        I have to confirm (what I already know and you will by now suspect) – I am slow-witted. I do not understand your question. Sorry.

        Our host has said that what saddens him is the immediate reaction of those who want to politicise the event – when the sorrow and sadness of those “in the West” (?) hasn’t even abated… Our host then proceeds to devote his post to his immediate reaction, and indeed a whole subsequent post, – discussing the politicisation, and his take on the politicisation – it’s anti-semites again – despite the fact, as he says, that the sorrow and sadness… His priorities would be less open to question had he not devoted his immediate response, and a whole subsequent post, to the politicisation (which he condemns) and counter-politicisation (which he supports). – And supports in some detail – no doubt someone could do a word count for us. The natural response is to say, simply and sincerely, that this is not the time.

        Our host has said, “I haven’t read the suspect’s manifesto, and to be sure it may not be a complete account of his “reasons” for the murder, but people are seizing on every word so they can point a finger of blame.” I simply ask you to imagine him saying anything remotely similar, scare quotes and all, had the victims been worshipping in synagogues and the killer a rabid anti-semite, rather than worshippers in mosques and the killer rabidly anti-Muslim. Many previous posts will help you imagine. We aren’t to read anything into “every word”. We aren’t to “point the finger of blame”. Who knows why he killed Muslims in mosques?

        Fair enough. This is a time for mourning. There will be time enough for reflection. And for lessons to be learned and blame apportioned. Let us not join in an unseemly political shouting match.

        Our host has said that “beyond of course the slaughter of innocent Kiwis and the pain of their relatives…” (of course!) – what REALLY saddens him is… Alas, this appears all too sincere. I believe it.

  24. Torbjörn Larsson
    Posted March 17, 2019 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Personally, I am not fazed by immediate politicization [disclosure: which discussion I was partaking in] since in a large enough group it often happens as one could expect. And notably in US the *delay* of analysis is a politicized move, in gun advocates say, whatever that means in the context.

    Anyway, I seem to be deflecting today, being Sunday and all:

    Notice the finger-snapping in the video, which is Woke Leftists’ way of applauding

    This is so, unintentionally I am sure, ironically funny! It would not take much of an appendage to clap against oneself or some nearby object.

    However, finger snapping is “ableist triggering”. It is in my experience somewhat physically demanding. According to the local military tests I have unusually strong underarms and so hands, but for some reason or other I had to work hard to passably learn it as an adult.

    I could not do it at all as an adolescent, yet these jokers think it is a snap.

%d bloggers like this: