>>Maybe this isn't the place to discuss why Tarrant did what he did. He did it because he believed that the shooting of muslims, in a mosque, was the right course of action. The right course of action not just as a retribution for "Ebba"'s murder, but for an entire spectrum of real or supposed ills and wrongs related to mass immigration induced ethnic debasement in white countries essentially Now we, can observe the outcome(s), the result(s), of his action So? Well it didn't change anything for the better. I mean a dozen dead muslims aside, which is a drop in the ocean in terms of numbers, statistically speaking, what change did it bring on the table? Well it painted anything and anyone right wing nationalist leaning as reich wing supremacist terrorism essentially, it only validated the MSM's fake-ass narrative when it comes to it That's all. Now maybe on this one he prevented the next terror attack by eliminating a future terrorist that went completely under the radar who knows? We'll never know for sure, so it doesn't really count. Now one might say "yes, but if all white people did just like him, the problem would be solved!" ... Well that's starting with the premise that all white people are tarrants... Which is probably real in the minds of a unhinged jews/diversities but reality is that tarrant types are something like less than a percent of the white population... I mean just open your eyes and look around you... I don't know for you but I'm not exactly living in the middle of modern day sparta... It's like that. But let's skip over reality here and pretend that yeah, it's possible. The outcome would be? A steaming pile of shit I think, an anarchic warzone essentially for years and then after that or in between? Idk, maybe a military dictatorship, maybe... Madmax, lebanon, sarajevo, mexico-brazil shithole type of situation I guess... Because what else? Now one might also say "yeah but with nukes or WMDs a less than one 1% could..." could what? I mean even if the less-than-1% had nukes or WMDs... Which is a fucking stretch but let's pretend for the sake of the argument that it is possible... I mean seriously, shit all over the place then what? What are the expectations here? What do those people, believing in that course of action, expect. What do they REALISTICALLY expect, in terms of positive outcome of course... Once you push the reasoning to its logical conclusion... It doesn't land anywhere good. I mean really, try to picture a good outcome, try to come up with a realistic chain of events/narrative resulting in a desirable outcome with such course of action... Mass suicide being of course, not a desirable outcome, evidently. You see, there's a dichotomy here; on one hand some people are tempted to pull a tarrant in the face of a given problem, hollywood style, because in hollywood all problems get solved that way in 1h30... And on the other when you pause and think about it, seriously... End result? Purpose? Benefit?...