We need answers. How did we miss this rotten core of our society?
How did we miss this? The little we know asks questions of those who would keep us safe. We need answers. At first, New Zealand appeared to have a terrorist in the style of Anders Breivik, the far-right terrorist who killed 77 people in Norway in 2011.
Breivik was a “lone wolf ” – someone who planned alone and carried out his attack alone.
This killer was something different. There are signs that point to an ugly rotten core in our society that could have been identified earlier.
In his online manifesto, he said he had recently come to New Zealand from Australia to plan an attack.
When he settled in, he decided New Zealand was the place to carry it out.
Something happened in Christchurch that changed his views.
In his manifesto, he said “an attack in New Zealand would bring to attention the truth of the assault on our civilisation, that nowhere in the world was safe, the invaders were in all of our lands”.
That sounds like he’s been radicalised. And the fact the attack happened here suggests whatever influence there was on him, it was domestic. He found like-minds. Then there are the firearms.
He had multiple firearms and, of those he did have, witnesses report the shots sound like “firecrackers”.
While some semi-automatic rifles can be bought with a basic licence, repetitive semi-automatic weapons with extended magazine capability of the sort witnesses describe need a special category of gun licence.
It is meant to involve extensive police and background checks. It seems unlikely a recent immigrant – Australian or wherever – whose introduction to weaponry in New Zealand is getting the most restricted licence would raise a flag.
It seems far more likely the weapons were supplied by people already here.
As information emerged today, we learned four people had been arrested – three men and a woman. Not only did they have extensive weaponry, they also managed to plant improvised explosive devices across the city.
It’s one thing to fly beneath the radar as a lone wolf. It’s completely different to join and develop a functional and organised terrorist cell that can deliver compelling rhetoric to new recruits and provide weaponry and knowledge to carry out an attack.
Cells operating as a group require communication and co-ordination, which increases the number of points
at which authorities can notice and disrupt their plans.
We have a number of security agencies in New Zealand that will face serious questions.
The easiest to contemplate are the firearms. Stuart Nash, the police minister, is looking at firearms law now. He needs to look harder.
The real danger are the people who choose to carry them.
The police force, which expends huge effort gathering and ordering intelligence on gangs, will need to consider whether it committed sufficient resource towards the increasingly polarised, hate-filled groups that have sprung up across Western nations.
Gangs prey upon themselves. Extremist groups prey upon us.
These groups are responsible for massacres in Western countries that should have tripped warning bells.
There are hard questions for the NZ Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS). It has, like its Western counterparts, a strong focus on potential threats in the Islamic community.
Has it dedicated the same effort to other parts of society? It used to. Pre-9/11, NZSIS paid huge attention to neo-nazi, far-right groups.
But now, NZSIS, and its electronic counterpart, the Government Communications Security Bureau, have more funding than ever and almost double the staff of six years ago. They also have the most powerful legislation they have ever had.
This attack isn’t a call for new powers or greater funding. The spies have all they need. Instead, we need to check how they use what they have.
There’s nothing that sharpens the focus of a security service than an oversight agency working hard to make sure it is doing its job properly.
It’s one thing to fly beneath the radar as a lone wolf. It’s completely different to join and develop a terrorist cell