Crusader horsemen during a rugby game
On Monday, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced that Cabinet had approved a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch shooting. It was established by the Governor General through an Order in Council. Supreme Court Justice Sir William Young has been appointed to lead the inquiry and an additional Commissioner is expected to be engaged by the end of April. The Inquiry, which has been allocated funding of $8.2 million to carry out its work, is scheduled to start considering evidence from May 13th. It is expected to report back to the Governor General by December 10th 2019.
The Cabinet Manual explains that under the Inquiries Act, three types of inquiry are available to a Government.
The most commonly used government inquiry deals with issues where a quick and authoritative answer is needed. An independent inquirer is appointed by Ministers, who receive the final report. There is no requirement for the report to be publicly released.
A public inquiry, on the other hand, is independent of the Government. Established by the Governor-General through an Order in Council, it is used to investigate wide-ranging issues of serious public concern. The final report is presented to the Governor-General and is tabled in Parliament.
A Royal Commission of Inquiry, which is the most serious statutory response available to a Government, is used to investigate matters of grave public importance and difficulty. Such an inquiry, which is independent of the Government and reports directly to the Governor-General, focusses on fact-finding – investigating why the situation came about and recommending a range policy or legislative responses.
While the Prime Minister originally indicated in the days after the Christchurch attack that an internal investigation would be carried out, it quickly became obvious that for an event of this magnitude, an independent Royal Commission of Inquiry was needed.
While the Government is able to establish the terms of reference for the Inquiry, setting out the matters to be examined, it is the Chair – a High Court judge appointed by the Governor-General – who determines the way the investigation is run. The Government cannot interfere in the direction taken by the Inquiry or influence its findings.
A Royal Commission has significant powers including that of compulsion in regard to witnesses, documentation and awarding costs. This enables it to uncover information that might otherwise be difficult to obtain. Public hearings usually play a crucial part in the inquiry process.
It is important to understand that the findings of a Royal Commission, are not, however, binding on a Government.
The Young Inquiry has been directed primarily to examine what state sector agencies – in particular the Government Communications Security Bureau, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, the Police, the New Zealand Customs Service, and Immigration New Zealand – knew about the activities of the alleged shooter Brenton Tarrant before the 15 March 2019 attack, what actions, if any, were taken in light of that knowledge, whether additional measures could have been taken to prevent the attack, and what state sector agencies can do to ensure such occurrences do not occur in the future.
The Commission will investigate the accused’s activities in Australia, his arrival and residence in New Zealand, and his travel within New Zealand and overseas.
It will determine how he obtained his gun licence, weapons and ammunition.
His use of social media and other online activities will be investigated, along with his connections with other people – in New Zealand and internationally – including what government agencies knew about him and his activities.
The Commission will also examine whether there are any impediments restricting the ability of New Zealand’s state agencies to gather and share intelligence.
While the Government will welcome recommendations concerning any suggested changes to policy, practices and legislation, they have ruled out three areas of investigation: “Amendments to firearms legislation; activity by entities outside the state sector such as media platforms; or how relevant agencies responded to the attack, once it had begun.”
Further details about the Inquiry can be found on the Department of Internal Affairs website.
Meanwhile the Government’s controversial firearms legislation has now been passed by Parliament, even though some of the knee-jerk changes are so extreme, that under normal circumstances they would have been regarded as unacceptable.
Hasty legislation was not needed. An Order in Council had been signed by the Governor-General six days after the tragedy to effectively ban the type of semi-automatic weapons used in the attack, along with large capacity detachable magazines. Since the Order did not expire until 30 June 2020, this would have given the Government plenty of time to respect the democratic process and usher in properly considered changes to our firearm laws.
In fact, it remains bizarre that as recently as January, the Prime Minister trusted New Zealand gun owners so implicitly that she changed the law to allow most of the administration involving firearms to be carried out online, instead of requiring face to face visits to Police Stations.
Yet now, as a result of the actions of a lone foreign national, she has imposed oppressive restrictions that treat Kiwi gun owners as if they are potential terrorists.
There is no threat to justify the reckless speed with which this complex legislation has been rushed through Parliament. It is illogical and undemocratic.
The risk of mistakes in hasty law changes is high, as reporter John McNab points out in an article in Fishing and Outdoors, where he explains that even the Prime Minister’s announcement about the proposed law changes was wrong: “Our… Prime Minister and… Police Minister have announced a ban on assault rifles that are and have been banned for the last thirty-five years.”
He claims the Prime Minister was being deliberately “disingenuous and misleading” when she said, “Military style semi-automatics and assault rifles will be banned in New Zealand under stronger new gun laws announced today”, since fully automatic ‘assault’ weapons have been illegal for decades for civilians, even on a military firing range under military supervision.
The editor of the publication, Graham Carter, believes that the Prime Minister was “electioneering”, using language designed to create mass hysteria and turn the public against legitimate gun owners.
As one submitter reminded MPs at the Select Committee hearing, that is exactly what the shooter wanted: “His aim was division, intolerance and hatred, and he was using a firearms debate to get his way.”
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, Wellington lawyer and former MP Stephen Franks, believes that heavy handed law changes that appear unreasonable could have a high price:
“I have been a hunter for 50 years. I have a large rural property. I know hundreds of fire-arms users. I was unconcerned by a move against genuine MSSAs and large capacity magazines. But the Bill goes much further…
“Police will have little alternative but to enforce the new law, though thousands of gun owners could decide to ignore it, or worse, to hide their guns, or to offer them to relatives or others who will be willing to ignore the law change. Those firearms will become invisible, whereas at present, the Police can expect reasonable frankness about them.”
Graeme Edgelar, a Wellington barrister with a keen interest in law reform has been concerned about the expansion of the ‘Henry VIII’ clause in the new law, that would allow the Government to change criminal law through an Order in Council instead of having to go through Parliament.
Under new section 74A the Government has the power to change the definition of prohibited guns and magazines – as well as to expand the range of guns, components and ammunition that can be prohibited – using an Order in Council, rather than needing to pass a Bill through Parliament:
74A The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister of Police,—
(a) amend the description in section 2A of a semi-automatic firearm (except a pistol) or pump action shotgun that is a prohibited firearm:
(b) amend the description in section 2B of a magazine that is a prohibited magazine:
(c) declare any semi-automatic firearm (except a pistol) or pump-action shotgun of a stated name or description to be a prohibited firearm for the purposes of this Act:
(d) declare any magazine of a stated name or description to be a prohibited magazine for the purposes of this Act:
(e) declare any ammunition to be prohibited ammunition for the purposes of this Act.
In particular, Graeme objects to sections 74A(a) and (b), saying, “If you are concerned that you will not get the definitions right in the time available, the appropriate course is not to surrender Parliament’s authority to amend laws to the Crown, but to be more careful, and if necessary, insist upon being allowed more time to do your job… Even where so-called Henry VIII clauses are provided, they should never be able to be used in a way which expands the criminal law, and this is what the law would allow.”
The Government’s response to concerns about the wisdom of rushing through gun law changes is dismissive, demonstrating the dictatorial underbelly of Jacinda Ardern’s Government and the sinister ‘we know best’ attitude that pervades all socialist regimes.
The Christchurch attack is also being used to justify changes to ‘hate’ speech laws, even though over the years there have been few prosecutions and therefore little evidence that the present laws are failing. Yet to appease the Greens and the left-wing of Labour, Andrew Little is fast-tracking a review of New Zealand’s hate speech legislation. Whether he intends to criminalise views that the socialist elite do not agree with remains to be seen.
If it was the goal of the Australian shooter to disrupt life in this country, he has certainly succeeded. If he wanted to create division within New Zealand society, he has achieved that too.
In contrast to the Norwegian response to a mass shooting in 2011, where the Government decided the attack should not harm their democracy and that people should not live in fear, our Prime Minister’s scaremongering – to justify her crackdown on gun owners – has contributed to a growing hysteria in New Zealand. All across the country, RSA’s are cancelling their traditional ANZAC Day commemorations over security concerns, even though the Police say there is no threat.
There have also been calls for the name of the Christchurch-based Super Rugby franchise, the Crusaders, to be changed. Their name was chosen in 1996, to reflect the English heritage of their region, with their brand incorporating the popular pageantry of knights and horsemen of medieval England. But New Zealand Rugby is concerned that the ‘Crusaders’ name and symbolism, which is associated with the religious Crusades between Christians and Muslims could be considered offensive and it’s investigating whether it needs to be changed.
While team management says the status quo is ‘no longer tenable’, many fans believe they are over-reacting.
And while some of the victims of the Christchurch tragedy are calling for change, others like Linwood mosque survivor Abdul Dean, whose uncle was killed in the attack, are calling for calm. A keen rugby fan, he believes the Crusaders’ name should not be changed. Asked in a radio interview about the name change, he said, “I’m a true supporter of Crusaders and I don’t think it’s any sport’s fault or any one’s fault.” He believes there is absolutely no need to change the name, and that those officials who have responded to the criticism by saying that the name must be changed are feeling ‘too much guilt’ over the incident.
The marketing company Research First has been commissioned to assess public feedback on whether the name and branding should be changed – you can have your say HERE. Their recommendations will be presented to the Crusaders and NZ Rugby boards by the end of the 2019 season.
In the meantime, the Crusaders CEO Colin Mansbridge explains, “It will not be possible to arrive at a final decision and respond in our brand, wardrobe and insignia before the end of this season, but the outcome for any decision will be reflected in our marketing material, playing kit and at-game experience for the 2020 season. We will remain the Crusaders for the rest of the 2019 season.”
THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:
As a result of the Christchurch tragedy, do you think the Crusaders should make any changes to their name, branding, or imagery?
*Poll comments are posted below.
*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.
THIS WEEK’S POLL COMMENTS
| The attack on the 15th March 2019 Brenton Tarrant has no connection in the slightest with the Crusaders Rugby Team. In my opinion if one was to pursue the change of name for the Crusaders based on the attack on the 15th March 2019 one runs the risk of alienating Non-Muslims against Muslims and thereby causing Racial unrest. It is important that any changes to our Kiwi way of life are done for the right reasons not because of what happened on the 15th March 2019 otherwise one is playing right into what I believe Brenton Tarrant wanted which was to cause division and unrest between New Zealander’s. | Derrick |
| If “Crusaders”, why not “CHRISTchurch” too? | David |
| More importantly we should change the name of that Offensive city to MuslimMosque in respect of the citizens of importance and applaud another layer of apartheid. let us not fail to comprehend what the Crusades were- reprisals against atrocities and violence by an ethnic group. (bet this comment never gets posted either…). | Anon |
| My understanding is that the ‘Crusaders’ name was chosen for the Canterbury Super Rugby team to reflect the regions heritage to England and thus they selected an historical event of medieval crusades with all it%u2019s pageantry. For New Zealand Rugby or anyone else to be concerned about the ‘Crusaders’ name being offensive to Muslims need to reflect on other historical atrocities closer to home. Chief Te Rauparaha was considered by some Maori and Non-Maori a tyrant akin to Adolf Hitler with brutal tribal killings and cannibalism. Should the NZ All Blacks drop the ‘haka’ as this is a war dance to give people courage prior to massacring others? I am certain there are many New Zealanders (Maori & Non-Maori) who find it disrespectful and offensive to their deceased ancestor%u2019s memories. Where do you stop? Let us all be proud of our teams and have courage not to roll over simply to appease a knee jerk reaction to others ideologies. | Martin |
| Over the last few weeks some extraordinary long bows have been drawn. From the hastily drafted new Gun Law, to the fervour to “stop” hate-speech as defined by a myopic hard left (the pamphlet talking about colonialists bringing Maori in from the stone-age is “Hate Speech” but the diatribe uttered at the Auckland Domain,, led by Marama Davidson and Sharon Hawke, rates no mention or is apparently of no concern to the Government or the Media indicates the bias that any Law drafted by Mr Little as his Cabinet colleagues will be blessed with). How anyone could take offence in the naming of the Crusaders must have a most myopic view of the world and history. They also must have very very thin-skin. Do we remove the word “crusade” (Dictionary definition:” a vigorous campaign for political, social, or religious change.”) from the dictionary and public use because it may offend? Certainly, a most horrendous event, though the world has endured much worse, but are we not getting a little carried away on the emotional carpet ride and nonsensical guilt-trip? | Michael |
| The push for changes to the Crusaders branding or imagery has come from the PC brigade, not the Muslim community. It’s just another knee-jerk reaction which is not required. | Gifford |
| its bad enough that this country is cowtowing to a bunch of halfcaste NZrs but to change the name of a sports club for a bunch of imported tribes is not on if they don’t like our sports team name they should go back to where they came from where the children aren’t even allowed to play football or fly kites, and they have the check to say they are civilised. | Richard |
| An over reaction again | Malcolm |
| Have sent my opinion to the Crusaders site. Hope they decide unanimously to be sensible and leave well alone | Marilyn |
| Definitely NO !! The politician’s and the PC liberal brigade have well and truly overstepped the mark on this subject. | Wayne |
| Absolute lunacy! | Jan |
| Definitely not. This is their identity, pushing themselves to be the best sporting team in RUGBY – TOTALLY UNRELATED TO TERRORISM. Our nation has sympathised and helped those who suffered for this terrible act by an Australian. We have tried to help and show our heartfelt sorrow for the families that he came here, chose our nation for his despicable attack. But this does not mean we have to change our lifestyles or practices in sport. We have our own identity and this should not be affected – and does not need to be. Leave the Crusaders name intact. There is to reason to change any identity as a result of a foreigner’s actions. | CM |
| It never seemed to be a problem before, why make it one now. It was something named many years ago when a battle was fought, time has past and there is a word “crusade” that covers many causes and situations including the fact that some people go out on a crusade to try and convert them into a certain sector of society, ie religion. So are we to change all names that appear to insult us? | Audrey |
| The classification of Hate Speech is designed to DESTROY Speech. | Monica |
| This is another knee-jerk reaction – just like changing the gun laws… | Simon |
| The symbolism has nothing to do with what happened. All this angst and agony over something that had no bearing on the behaviour of this lunatic. | Carol |
| Sheer hysteria this and rsa change plays straight into offenders hands | Bev |
| NO,NO,NO, | WHITTY |
| Ms Ardern has to take responsibility that this tragedy happened on her Watch and she will always be associated with this no matter what unwise things she proffers. I object to the Chiefs name as it is to do with the Maori brand and I find the haka totally backward and warlike and nothing to do with a game of rugby – do away with them if J. Ardern wants to virtue-signal. I want the horses and all the pageantry to return as well. Shane Cannons has a petition against the name change on Change.org. | Monica |
| Absolutely NOT. What is the Rugby Union thinking – a bunch of wimps. There is nothing wrong with the name Crusaders – I’d rather see the Haka banned – how aggressive is this war dance – sorry – challenge. Would that opinion be deemed politically incorrect? | Fiona |
| Total over reaction by people with an evil agenda | Chris |
| Certainly not. This event had nothing to do with sport!! Change the name of the team?? are you going to change the name of the City as well?? | Grahame |
| Of course they shouldn’t change their name or imagery, the pc brigade have gone mad as usual! | Laurie |
| Most definitely not. The Crusaders should keep their name and horsemen and not be controlled by events that happened 700 hundred years ago. | Arthur |
| It is unfortunate these people died – but rugby has nothing to do with the tragedy. Get a grip you nana state tossers | Steve |
| Any change is total over reaction. | Bob |
| The only change needed is this hopeless stupid government, | Athol |
| No, it’s an overreaction as usual. | Jo |
| If everyone responded to critics of long past history, then almost nothing would be acceptable. | Arthur |
| No the name is apt for this sports team,the crusaders is fine and just. Ishlam is a cruel method of false prayer. Jesus and god before all others. | James |
| No relevance whatsoever. WHO is responsible for putting this ridiculous idea forward? Anyone know? | Paddy |
| Totally over the top. | paul |
| Why should They, the Christchurch affair had nothing to do with the Crusades. | Terry |
| Not only Muslims were involved in the Crusade conflict. | Nev |
| What can we change so Christians are not offended. It was the Prophet Mohammed who conquered part of Europe and killed anyone who did not agree with his ideas. Don’t fall for these ideas. Change the name and another idea or request will follow. Read www.Gatestones and see how Britain fares after the influx of immigrants. Stand up and don’t cower. By not commemorating Anzac day you show weakness. Our forefathers would roll over in their graves should they know it. | Ido |
| History is history. We should not deny that the crusades took place. We also have to remember the aggressive stance of the Moors in the Mediterranean | Peter |
| Absolutely not!! Why not also demand that CHRISTchurch changes it’s name,, as it could also “offend” Mosselman sensibilities ? | David |
| So sick of this bullshit and what our crap government is doing | Sue |
| The whole unfortunate event is becoming Dumber and Dumber and will have far reaching consequences. | Wally |
| The Catholic church sent crusades against anyone who wouldn’t come under their authority Europeans included and my ancestors – (Bohemia had 5 crusades sent against it I believe) – but that is history! Rugby is just a game! | Joanne |
| This is just another example of PC gone mad. There would be many instances where sport and other recreational names may cause offence. For God’s sake the Crusaders expeditions took place 500 years ago — get over it !!!!! | Alan |
| NZ has gone mad!! | Angus |
| No. PC idiots gone mad | Wayne |
| Lock step stupidity | Bruce |
| Crusaders name ,imagery and promo activity has nothing to apologise for or has any active line back to the wars over 1000 yrs ago -and factually those wars were to preserve Christianity from rapidly expanding violent empire “ISLAM” . | Warwick |
| Knee jerk reactions are never good reactions | Iain |
| No! Just over-board. | Jo |
| no need to even think about it | nevkathy |
| Ridiculous to even consider changing. We are getting too weak minded in this country where our freedom of speech which underpins all our freedoms is being seriously eroded. I am afearing where all this is going to end up…the accuser is not so tolerant as they make out. | Brian |
| The Crusaders name must stay. Their heritage represents the freedom that was forte for 1000yrs ago, & has been fought for in many wars, including two world wars Then along comes ‘Cinders’ with her, “I rejected Christianity, & I think the whole world should” mentality. Her statement, ‘THEY ARE US’ says it all. | A.G.R. |
| The Canterbury Crusader team is not Anti-Muslim. The pagentry is very popular with ALL Cantabrians. | Greg |
| No, don’t change the name. It has nothing to do with the Islamic people in NZ or anywhere else in the world. | Clive |
| over the top like a lot more happening to our way of life in NZ. | Raewyn |
| This was not a racial act. It was clearly an act against that particular religion. Im not saying it was right (it was clearly wrong) But racist it was not. | Innes |
| just get rid of the horses | Barry |
| The Muslim People DO NOT Want us to change any part of the Crusaders or the Rituals. Go figure, it’s are ‘Looney left’. By the way, the Police HAVE TOLD the RSAs that there IS A POTENTIAL THREAT around ANZAC Day, hence many Parade cancellations. | Geoff |
| Sorry, I think it’s a huge stretch equating the horrific murders to the name of a rugby team. Knee jerk reaction … | Maddi |
| If they change the name, so should the all BLACKS and the all WHITES AND SEVERAL OTHER TEAMS. What a stupid knee jerk reaction . | Ross |
| The incident had NOTHING to do with the Crusaders. To even consider a name change is PC gone utterly mad. | Jim |
| What next? So many sports teams have names that seem odd when you think of their meaning. | Ron |
| Crusaders forever | John |
| We are always going to offend somebody with something! | Jen |
| Let’s do a deal … When the “LGB AtoZ -” whatever lobby stop misusing the word “gay” – then, and only then, will I even consider voting to change the name of The Crusaders. WHY? Simply because I know of several delightful ladies who were Christened (is that allowed any more?) Gay and have been totally mortified by the twisting of the meaning of that word. | Ron |
| Absolutely not. How Rugby can be associated with this is a nonsense. Trouble is too many people feel guilty for no real reason. Our leftisst Prime Minister has done nothing to help the situation trying to make us all feel guilty for no reason. Hell, until now it’s been Islam against the west. Someone turns it around and we’re supposed to feel guilty! Bar humbug. | Graeme |
| What next? Everything being done now indicates to the shooter that he has had abig victory over our Country. The name should NOT be changed!! | Jim |
| Absurd,ludicrous,laughable and upsetting | Gary |
| No way to change Crusaders name.Its their name which they alone have owned for their great game they enjoy playing.This tragedy is NOT their problem…KEEP IT.. | Rex |
| No, to change the name is ridiculous and going too far. | Kerin |
| It is just a name. No attachment to any period of history. Just a name like Hurricanes. | John |
| The Crusades were a response to aggressive Muslim expansion in what used to be Christian countries. Christians who did not “submit to the will of Allah”, in other words forced conversion, were either sold into slavery or had to pay huge fines under the system of dhimmy. I would guess that there has been resentment of the Crusaders’ name by the Muslim community for quite a while and the mosque attacks now provide a perfect excuse for getting rid of a so-called Christian symbolism which has probably no relevance for any rugby fans. | Patsy |
| This whole thing is a Nw o directive that is going to turn out very badly for NZ | Mike |
| Time for a ‘cup of tea’ and not rush into a stupid regrettable over reaction to this horrible event. | Tim |
| We shouldn’t rush into things. | Thomas |
| This name change demanded by a bunch of red green activists is only the tip of the ice berg. We are facing massive threats to our diminishing democracy as we speak. As far as this Royal Commission is concerned: The current article says that the findings of the RC are NOT binding for the Government. Even if they – and we can be sure of that– find a lot of extremely embarrassing facts about the dismal performance of the Police and Immigration which made this whole mess possible, my question is how much of these findings will end up in the public domain. We can be sure that this devious ‘Govt ‘ will censor the living crap out of any report the RC will deliver and at the most we might be lucky that our alternative media sources can leak the report until these are cleansed from the net. AND— I am absolutely sure that this ‘GOVT’ will not be bothered about any recommendations made by the RC either. This action is nothing but a fig leaf for them to show Jo Bloke out there on the street that the ‘Govt is acting in the interest of all NZ landers. Yeah right!!!!!! | Michael |
| Under no circumstances, Rugby is Rugby let’s not change our way of life to suit the extremists in our Society. | Steve |
| If the choice is related to politics absolutely not. | Brooke |
| It’s a storm in a tea cup matter. | Hugh |
| Anybody with a grain of sense can see that there is absolutely no connection between one fruit loop Aussie and the crusaders. The whole government has gone completely overboard over this whole thing. Please stop, take a deep breath and think everyone. | Terry |
| Where do you stop? Vikings? Raiders? Knights? | Dave |
| This is a ridiculous overreaction to the disaster in Christchurch . What will this govt ban next ,on a misguided whim. | Mary |
| PC gone mad not to mention the fact it will create anti muslim feelings among ordinary Canterbury rugby loving folk | Olwyn |
| They should cut out the knights on horses but NOT change the team’s name. | Don |
| But if they do, may I suggest that they change it to The Saracens | Robert |
| Enough is enough, why don’t we just destroy all the worlds history and start again. This PC ‘B***s**t’ has gone on long enough, thousands of soldiers on both sides die in wars, the survivors and descendants from both sides find the existence and imagery of the other repugnant. Yes, the shooting happened, people died, get over it, get on with living, but most importantly loose the guilt trip. 29 people died on the roads last week, where are support groups for their families, where are the Fund raisers on the bank websites or the concerts and mass church services for their survivors. Where was the Prime Minister in their national dresses, parading in front of the world, I guess there just wasn’t any photo opportunity’s or publicity stunts available, after all these were just ordinary New Zealand’s, seems there lives are not worth as much a Muslim immigrants in the Prime Ministers eyes. | George |
| To do so would be an over reaction | richard |
| No change at all. | Neil |
| What is the government turning our country into? | Pieter |
| NO WAY, this is a knee jerk reaction,and is a naive misinterpretation of history. | Willy |
| Get rid of the swords but not the horses or the name or armour. It is sport not military and not a threat | Laurel |
| Who is adversly affected by the present name and activities? | Graham |
| The crusaders were 1000 years ago. That was their time in history. This the year 2019 and it is just a name no more than that. We all have differences and one has to learn to live with them. | Robert |
| Why should they…. | Carl |
| How far do you go with this. Do we change the name of the Highlanders because it is reminiscent of the atrocities committed by the english against the scots, or the Chiefs because of the crusade undertaken against other tribes by Te Rauparaha, maybe the Warriors could use a name change too. These are all part of our history and no amount of cleansing by this government can erase them. | John |
| The suggestion is simply silly. | Rob |
| What next…. Highlanders have to change for harassing the English, Chiefs have to change for acting superior… get a grip | Russ |
| Getting very sick and tired of the inuendo, publicity and nonsense from media relating to this subject. Sick PC. What a sick Govt and PM. | Ian |
| This is absurd that a name change should even be considered. Pandering to leftist/Green SJW Muslim apologists is the thin edge of the wedge and can only lead to further erosion of our freedoms. | John |
| Sheer lunacy | John |
| The Crusaders brand is as iconic as the Haka and the All Blacks. Don’t be bullied into submission, STAND PROUD CRUSADERS!!! | Linc |
| Only the branding & imagery. The name is fine and should be retained. | Martin |
| The name and meaning crusades has changed over several centuries. In any case the crusades into the Holy Land were an extension of stopping the Moslem hoards which had invaded North Africa and were close to over running Europe. | Duncan |
| If so, many more things should be changed. But nevertheless, we have another minority to bent over backward for. | Peter |
| Why should they? The Mussies haven’t even asked for any change so why roll over before you have even been asked to? | Paul |
| Have we gone mad to even think the name should be changed. The Muslim community have said they have no problem with it. | Jan |
| Absolutely not – The emotive carryover from the Christchurch atrocity has been used and abused by the Govt., and media to undemocratically push through all sorts of policy and law such as gun law, FB censorship, ANZAC Parade denied and arming of police for events that have no need for such an over reaction. This name change demand is totally unreasonable and should be quashed. | Bruce C |
| The massacre had nothing to do with this most successful rugby franchise . What next? | Michsry |
| get over it. | Bill |
| This whole affair has become a “Witch Hunt” —shows just how one idiot can cause mayhem and turn a Country to ruin and also allow One Person (P.M.) to drop her bundle and turn into a “Dictator” and treat us all like badly behaved children. | Marylin |
| Perhaps some pull back on some imagery in the short term. To change the name is to give in to the murderer. | Robin |
| Such a decision could have untold consequences. On an even playing field there are many names and practices that should also change. You could also suggest that other teams could be subject to change. The Warriors, The Chiefs and if you were to be more sensitive the name of religious connotation ” infidel”. The case being is not where you start but where do you stop. I strongly oppose any such change to the Crusaders name which is based purely on emotive justification and out of proportion. | Chris |
| The name is not connected in any way to the events of 15 March. | Rick |
| What a joke. I am sure we must have more important issues to deal with in this country. | Gary |
| Our sports franchise doesn’t have to change to appease any religious groups or governments pressure, nor do they need to as they are a sports team of our greatest international sports representatives, they have won hundreds of games and have had plenty of All Blacks playing in this franchise for decades ! | Kevin |
| No further comment needed | James |
| Storm in a tea-cup. Save us from socialist/communist flat-earthers. | Lesley |
| and we shouldn’t be stopping Anzac parades out of fear. The Brits carried on life as normal as possible during WWII Unless the bombs were dropping they weren’t hiding. | Darag |
| The history of the Crusades is sickening – IMO – & in the 21st century should not be upheld as an example of behaviour to be in any way admired or celebrated. | Isabel |
| Absolutely not. Crusaders should reject any attempts to change their branding or name on the principle of standing up to that foreign piece of shit who decided to shoot a few people up, instead of capitulating to his every whim and demand like our gutless government has been doing. | Pavel |
| IT’S ALL GOOD FUN. IF YOU START WITH CHANGING THE CRUSADERS NAME YOU MAY AS WELL CHANGE CHRISTCHURCH, ETC | Eric |
| Total mass hysteria overkill potential to what should be a simple fact. Name retention is only choice! | Joe |
| Absolutely ridiculous to even consider a name change. | steven |
| Changing the name is pro muslim | George |
| Absolutely not. These Muslims in our country are such a small minority why should we change our history for recent immigrants. We are a Christian country, nothing else | Chris |
| Absolutely not | Craig |
| The word crusaders has evolved to embrace more than what was behind its origin and is no longer applied entirely against muslims. | Michael |
| Most definitely …. the name ‘Crusaders’ represents the violence and oppression of white European supremicists. Let’s change the name to the ‘Jihadists’ as a sign of respect for our Islamic friends who preach peace and non-violence towards peoples of all faiths, equality for women, rejection of female genital mutilation and child marriage etc. Yes ….. ‘The Jihadists’ …. what a way to wonderful way to show our Muslim brothers that we truly care for them I’m surprised that our Prime Minister aka the queen of virtue signaling hasn’t rushed this idea through parliament and rammed it down all our throats | Steve |
| Crusaders is a great name and should be retained. The fact that christians and muslims fought each other for Millenia for the hearts and minds of ordinary people and power and influence is historical and totally irrelevant in the current context. | Alan |
| You’re joking. You are, aren’t you?. | John |
| What next | Jimmy |
| Will the next move be to change the city’s name from Christchurch? After all it is not quite inviting to other faiths is it. When will our flag have a crescent over the cross? | Murray |
| Change our culture for Islam. Definitely NOT. If they don’t like it, there’s a simple answer. | Bryan |
| PC madness. Will we change any names that might possibly upset some people? Time these wimps grew up. The crusades were 1000 odd years ago. | Ian |
| More political correctness. Yet even more of it. | Rod |
| They need to do nothing of the kind. The Crusaders of 1000 years ago have nothing to do with Rugby today. | Graeme |
| Are the Moslem’s offended by the Crusaders Rugby Club? Anyone can take offense at anything whether it is intended or not. The Christian method for dealing with offense is to turn the other cheek. Other races or religions sometimes threaten to retaliate with violent means against criticism and view submission to their views as a weakness to exploit. If they do weaken to criticism, who will be next? . | Rex |
| Absolutely NOT!! We should NEVER be changing our lifestyle in any format to placate immigrants. They must adapt to the Kiwi way of life. | Tony |
| The religious Crusades ended over 500 years ago. The word ‘crusader’ just means someone who will go the extra mile to achieve his goal, and that’s what OUR Crusaders are. Anybody who is really offended by this should get a life, find something worthwhile to be concerned about. | Joyce |
| Knee jerk cowardly reaction | Robyn |
| Such a proposal is an overreaction and what will be next.I understand the decision has already been made to change and Ardern and Robertson have their dirty hands all over it.Ardern denies this but then we know she is not a truthful person.The political lead wake following what was a sad affair has been over the top. | Don |
| To link a rugby sporting with actual medieval knights is drawing a very long bow indeed (pun intended). | Carl |
| Decency should prevail | Crikssie |
| This is an over the top reaction to an event | Barbara |
| Cultural sensitivity appears to be a one way street. | Richard |
| Not the name, but some of the imagery. | Selwyn |
| Absolutely not. Otherwise maybe we should also change the name Christchurch as it would also be considered to be offensive. Changing the Crusaders name will certainly offend me!!! | Clive |
| Time for the hysteria to end. The gunman has achieved even more than he might have imagined in dividing New Zealand society and giving left wing ideology even greater control of government agendas which may give rise to equally untenable reactions.. | Frank |
| And send the bill for all the enquires and commissions to the Aus Govt, seeing as he was from over there | Allan |
| Total nonsense. | Lee |
| Have we lost sight of the fact that the purpose of the Crusades was to eject the harsh and warlike Muslim INVADERS from the Holy Land, where Jews and Christians had co-existed in relative harmony for centuries? In a similar vein, is anyone going to insist the the British team Saracens change their name? No, thought not! | TOBY |
| If the Crusaders of the 12th century are offensive, wouldn’t the haka of the 19th more recent century be more offensive? How is it possible to ban one and revere the other? | George |
| The Crusades were a push-back against 400 years of Muslim invasions of Europe and were intended to recapture Jerusalem from Islamic occupation. | Brett |
| This is the most illogical response to the mass murders yet. The crusades were in 1300 or thereabouts and the connection to this great rugby team has never been made previously. In any case the Muslims were triumphant! Ardern S fingers are all over this I feell | Ray |
| Mott their ow-famous rugby name. | John |
| Definitely not – give them an inch and they take a mile. We are New Zealand nowhere else. If people don’t like NZ they should leave. | Chris |
| No absolutely not. If we allow a few to dictate to the many where will this knee jerk reaction end. It’s just ridiculous. | Carolyn |
| Again all the suggestions about name change branding etc is a knee jerk reaction. I know the history of the crusades etc and this was never the intention of the franchise to bring that to the fore. Again more political correctness and islamaphobia encouraged by the government and so-called do-gooders. For goodness sake get a life. | Kevin |
| If they do , maybe the “Canty panty-waists” would be suitable. | Jerry 2 |
| Brainless by a “Brain Dead” Dictator Prime Minister! Doesn’t care about DEMOCRACY | Roger |
| why should they have to change there name through a small event this still NZ and we are not at the stage of overseas countrys with there shaiai law Sweden being the latest but will happen here not to distant future | Russell |
| The worst PC suggestion I have ever heard — don’t change ANYTHING | Alan |
| Not their name or branding, but a change to a more passive imagery would be in order | Rob |
| The crusades are part of our and world history . Islam is a jiha.dist religion diametrically opposed to the Christian believes of this nation. God defend us from the crazy%u2019s !! | Terry |
| Absolutely not. Let’s wait for the hysteria to die down and use common sense. This is a golden opportunity for the dipstick left to change things to suit their weird view of how we should live a do. | Peter |
| A Cartoon by Garrick Tremain appeared in the Otago Daily Times recently showing that many of the teams names have been responsible fro a lot of grieve in the past as well as the Crusaders. The Highlanders, Hurricanes, Sharks, Cheetahs, Brumbies and Chiefs have all caused Humans to suffer badly The Muslims themselves are not exactly noted for their loving tolerance of minorities when they are the main force in a country’s politics. Forget the hysteria at the moment and leave the Crusaders name alone | Colin |
| Get over it. We will not be held to ransom by one sole nutter. If the name is changed he will have won. | Don |
| keep the name as is | Gerard |
| We NEED Crusaders now more than any previous history of New Zealand. For obvious reasons. | Coral |
| Absolutely NOT – there has already been too much hasty and ill-considered changes been made in the wake of the massacre. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and wait until we know much more about how it happened and apparent failure of the security services. | Roger |
| Completely fed up with the degree of PC bollocks we are currently subjected too! | John |
| The name has nothing to do with the crusades where in fact more christians were slaughtered by muslims than vice versa. The name reflects the heritage of the region. | Raye |
| The next thing they will be asking for Christchurch to change its name! | Steve |
| Perhaps the horses and swords could go, but definitely keep the name. | Brian |
| Any change would just be a knee-jerk reaction. It is just a name. | Graham |
| In a word – No. A ridiculous over reaction, | Les |
| There are more meaning to the word than the historical event. If I say I am a crusader for righteousness it’s surely not offensive?!? | Godfrey |
| Your question is a bit all-encompassing in that I think the imagery could be reviewed although not the name or branding. | Graeme |
| This is emotive piffle from the left. After all the Moslem outrages in Britain, the famous Saracens rugby club remains the Saracens. The Crusaders name should stay. | Gavin |
| I am against this.one man kills 50 People and I am feeling very sad about it It not the crusaders fault. Christchurch has had more than its fair share of sadness and don’t think it should be punished any further. | Claire |
| too much guilt being promoted. Look at the branding in its intended modern-day aspect as a feel-good, sporting rally cry. | Barrie |
| Typically stupid suggestion from the loony left. | Chris |
| ridiculous knee jerk pc pandering to an ideology.. thats NOT who we are.. | Wayne |
| Definitely not. whos scaremongering who. the govt. | Jim |
| This proposal is over the top. This is a great franchise that doesn’t need to be penalized for historical events over 1100 years ago. | Murray |
| As the Crusaders of medieval England had an aspect of sport so this name is suitable for a sports team now. The Moslem’s enemies at one time were called the Crusaders but we are in no way supporting that situation today. | Allan |
| a pathetic ‘knee action’ move by the Govt: | Donald |
| An overreaction to change anything | Warren |
| We are being bullied by politicians, who have little understanding of the free world | Florence |
| we are not defined by what happen in Christchurch we are defined by what we do about it. A name change is just bureaucratic rubbish to achieve nothing. | Peter |
| Absolutely not. While the gun laws have to be changed ( who in their right mind needs an automatic weapon of any kind at home ) The other changes being discussed/ planned are way over the top and overall are quite ridiculous. | Tom |
| gut reaction whilst emotions running high. Wit until things have calmed and have a rational conversation about it. | Brian |
| No, No and No. | Stewart |
| Absolutely beyond comprehension that Kiwis could be so unthinking & prepared to mindlessly go along with the suggestion. | Ralph |
| No change at all! Keep horses, swords & chain-mail !! | Frank |
| The Press hysteria ofter this tragedy is unbelievable. If the Crusader name is change so should the Warriors change their name. | David |
| Why make an issue out of something that is a no brainer. Its only the best branded rugby club and supported by more people than there are “pussy’s” who are too scared about “offending:” someone to have a real life of their own. | Gary |
| It’s hysterical nonsense | Brian |
| There is nothing wrong with the name, the name hasn’t caused an Australian nutter to kill people, and if the muslims can’t handle the name of the Crusaders, then perhaps they should move. And furthermore it was the PC Brigade along with the PM that said the name should be changed. | Frank |
| Imagine how many other name changes would also need to be made if Crusaders was not PC anymore.Why don’t they consider the violence shown on Public Television first.? | Carl |
| Another ridiculous decision based on what?? Democracy is failing in this, and many other Westernised countries. We have a government which wasnt voted for, who make law changes with no mandate nor public consultation. Frightening as this is the thin end of the wedge | Sharen |
| This suggestion is a misunderstanding the nature of terrorism. What shall we ban next? Clowns? Stand up comedians? | Jo |
| My children in their 40’s don’t know anything about the Crusaders as they were a thousand years ago as a force of the Catholic Church to protect, preserve and secure the rights of Christians to travel across Muslim territory. Some of the ways in which they made their point may be unacceptable these days but in their minds they were ” doing the right thing”. So back to the Canterbury rugby team the name should be retained as now people say they are crusading for the likes of health reforms and the like without any military connotations. The Crusaders of old were a united team. So are the Canterbury Crusaders | Mike |
| To do so would do more damage to NZ’s reputation branding NZ as a soft touch for terrorism. The NZ approach has been specifically directed as if this is a crisis by design. Anyway the God of the Christians knows all the details even if we do not. | Anon |
| An emphatic NO is more than enough | Barry |
| Absolutely not. What changes have the Muslim communities around the world made after the dozen of attacks worldwide? Probably none I’d suggest. | Brent |
| Many millions were slaughtered in the name of “Islam” as well. They invaded the Middle East and the “crusaders” just tried . to liberate the population | Martin |
| This PC business is getting out of hand. Next somebody will be advocating the Warriors change their name as it is discriminating against the pakeha. We never had all this rubbish years ago. | Dennis |
| The name Crusaders is distinct to the People of Christchurch, together with the Horses, and should never be considered for change! | Roy |
| This is only the first demand being made by Islam Imam’s, because they view Jacinda as weak and scared ! NZ don’t capitulate !! | Pierre |
| Crazy! Something that happened many generations past and yet some holier than thou can take offence. | John |
| you need to read history of Islam again…and how apologists are creating mayhem in the dying west | Wayne |
| Exactly the wrong response to a strange ‘terrorist’ attack. | Peter |
| Go The CRUSADERS Ride on for ever | Bruce |
| I am not a rugby follower but under no circumstances should any aspect of Crusader branding be changed in any way – name, branding, pageantry etc. New Zealanders of European descent have a heritage that stretches back to the time of the original Crusaders just as Muslim New Zealanders have a heritage that stretches back to the time of Saladin – the Muslim warlord who drove the Crusaders out of the Holy Lands and into the sea. Game one all I would have thought, get over it! It is odds on that many of those protesting the Crusader name are wearing Hugo Boss suits. Hugo Boss designed the uniforms worn by the Third Reich, perpetrators of the Holocaust and a barbarous regime supported by much of the Muslim world. The Vikings had a pretty savage record yet the name is worn all over the world with pride by sporting teams and the like without a peep from the touchie feelies. Where will this nonsense end? | David |
| If we change the Crusaders name or branding would we also change the name of say the Saracens | Frank |
| Don’t let the bastards win | Andi |
| Another knee-jerk reaction.!! | Graeme |
| They should keep the name. It has positive connotations also. | Mark |
| No way should the Crusaders change there name just because it may offend the muslims. why did not they complain before the Christchurch affair,also what about the Ottoman empire the muslims represented the same killing acts as the Crusaders of old did .What a bunch of Hippocrates | David |
| The Crusades were many centuries ago, and the world has moved on from then/there. If we allow our decisions to be driven by the desire to avoid any offence, what will be next. Change/scrap Xmas? | Laurie |
| You can not change history. | Don |
| The socialist left CRUSADE has frightened so many ‘lost souls’ they probably wont adventure out again lest some misadventure befalls them – unless of course they are totally cocooned by the power of the state. No one is allowed (nor encouraged) to speak for themselves anymore! | Stuart |
| Absolutely not everyone is getting hysterical about this | Gareth |
| keep the name just stop using horses & swords.The name should stay. | Cindy |
| No, that is just a knee-jerk reaction. | Jane |
| Why not ban Saracens as team names also, needs to be. Alan was here. | Allan |
| Not now or ever pander to the vocal minority They will want the “All Blacks” changed next | Tom |
| No, just going overboard. | Rach |
| the idea of a name change is ridiculous nonsense. | Jeremy |
| I don’t think it offends anybody. | Pete |
| …If they do they are just caving into the bloody terrorists……STAY STRONG AND NEVER GIVE in the the ‘scum’ of this Earth… | CHowes |
| It’s an unnecessary knee jerk. What about all the other teams that have names that could be offensive? | Paul |
| hysteria from misguided people. The muslims come for a better life, they should accept our way. re guns, in 1942 we had no soldies or guns left here we made our own machine guns for the home guard based on ww1 bolt action rifles unfortunately after ww2 they were all destroyed. google charlton auto rifle. | john |
| Absolutely not! The hysterical left have to be firmly rebuffed or this will be the first of many harmless symbols to be attacked. | Lee |
| Over-reacting hysteria, promulgated & expanded to a ridiculous degree by Adern’s Government | Bob |
| I object to the Muslim attitudes when they interfere with the laws and customs of the country they have come to. | Gordon |
| Definitely not.. Has the whole country gone mad??? | Chris |
| Its a knee jerk response and the question is where do you stop! Cancel Knighthoods because the knights fought in the wars as well? Bloody stupid and there is too much PC going on theses days. | Roger |
| Means nothing | Joe |
| DEFINITELY NOT. | Clark |
| After all the hype has passed and the kindness of NZer’s is recognized surely the People concerned should repay our country with a blessing to the Crusaders allowing them to retain their name and allow sport to be sport. Also our Govt of the day should remain well clear. . | Elizabeth |
| To do so would be no more than an empty gesture. It might feel virtuous, but would be meaningless. How much more of our tradition and culture are we to surrender to the perpetually offended? | Graham |
| During the winter of 1191-1192 AD, Richard the Lionheart was suffering from a fever, while he and his Knights [ thew Crusaders ] were recovering from the previous battle of Arsur, to gather strength for the next planned battle in Jerusalem. Richard knew that Saladin was a strict Muslim, and that Islam shared the fundamental Christian values requiring to help those in need. By now the mutually earned respect was so strong between the Knights Templar [Crusaders ] and the Saracens of Saladin, that King Richard was able to appeal to his otherwise nemesis Saladin, requesting fresh water and fresh fruit to cure his fever. Saladin sent a gift of pure frozen snow and fresh fruit to all of the Templars for their health. Shortly thereafter, cancelling the planned final battle, Richard and Saladin signed a peace accord, the Treaty of Ramla of 1192 AD. At the time the name Crusaders was coined life was different and each side was as bad/good as the other. The Saracens won many battles over the Crusaders. So leave history as it is; leave the Crusaders as they are ; move on with understanding and stop being so bloody P.C. | Tony |
| The idea of changing something that has a longstanding acceptance by the community, simply because some people now find it distasteful, seems, unfortunately, to be coming prevalent in our society. | John |
| Why do we have to keep changing history, it’s about time people grew up, and the younger members of society learnt the unsanitised version of our past. | Merryl |
| They should change their name to DHIMMI to reflect their Politically Correct and gutless response to an event of no relevance to rugby. They should also adopt Islamic symbols and cl=olours as an act of callow subservience to Political islam. Also they should play blindfolded because they are too stupid to see the truth before them | Chris |
| An over-reaction promoted by PC scaremongers who are taking this opportunity to promote their extreme views. | Maurice |
| Politically engineered guilt and manipulation should have no place in the sporting world. | David |
| No, not necessary. | Jo |
| In London they have the Saracens rugby club which was formed in 1876. Saracen is the mediaeval name for Muslim and I am unaware of demands to change the name in in the light of muslim terrorism in the UK. | Roger |
| to change it’s name would be ridiculous | John |
| Maybe take out the sword yielding horse riders ? But the name is fine. | Andrew |
| Keep it as it is. Do not change anything | Maurice |
| Knee jerk demands emotionally based Get things into perspective.200 Christians murdered by Muslim in Pakistan just recently. Changing names will not help TRY CHANGING ATTITUDES | Kelvin |
| Should we have banned the Mohammud cartoons? I would say no, and yet they were considerably more offensive to Muslims than a rugby team name. | Murray |
| Definitely not. I can’t believe such a ridiculous thought should even arise. The Christchurch tragedy had absolutely nothing to do with Rugby. Leave it as it is for goodness sake. | Helen |
| If we change the Crusaders name, why not also change Hurricanes (storms cause damage) the Blues (sound like depression) the Warriors (that promotes violence) the Blacksticks (black is racist). So how far do we go to not offend anyone? Keep Crusaders name. | Andrew |
| Imagery only | Anon |
| How come they don’t want to change the name of the city Christchurch as well. Surely with Christ in the name that must be offensive. Time to stop all this PC nonsense. | Peter |
| The Crusades took place in the 1300s 700years ago. It’s ancient history a bit like the treaty of Waitangi | Andrew |
| TOTAL OVER REACTION, particularly from Politicians!! | Graeme |
| Absolutely NOT. Surrendering to these ignorant morons is not an option. | Alan |
| I’m not a rugby follower but admire the people who do play. changing the name is maybe satisfying a few idiots so why give in to those who can think for them selves | Johan |
| Only do away with the horses and horsemen and the garb that portrays them as Crusaders. Don’t change name or branding. | John |
| This calling for a name change is a scam! What on earth has the team name ‘Crusaders got to do with a planned shooting at a mosque by a complete nutter! | Ron |
| Absolutely not…the over reaction to this horrific event is frankly concerning. If our PM truly was the wonderful leader the media are saying she would be promoting everything must go on as usual. | Gail |
| The Crusaders sought to reclaim what was the Kingdom of Judah (and other lands) from the Islamic invaders of the Holy Land and in so doing were defending the Judaeo-Christian heritage/culture of some of us. | John |
| The Crusades were 700 years ago. The Crusaders and the armies of Saladin were both guilty of atrocities. Forget it and move ahead. Keep the name!!! | James |
| No way , theres no justifiable argument to change the name. | Clint |
| And if an Islamic extremist should gun down 50 worshiping Christians or attack an ANZAC Parade, what then? | David |
| Here we go again, a bunch of fuzzy, I must feel good, politically correct idiots looking for a gong or badge that have decided that a name that relates directly to the region the franchise represents need to be changed. Shame on the NZRFU for even entertaining such a obviously politically motivated response to our PM’s call to anything that may be construed as racist to be changed. Next will be the call to change the name of Christchurch as this to may offend some religious sect. Get a grip and get on with your lives. | Barry |
| definitely not, The mighty Crusaders name must stay | Nigel |
| Leave the name alone. | Kevin |
| I don’t care about the sport or the Crusaders but even the suggestion to change something for the reasons proposed is bloody stupid. | Vaughan |
| What does the Koran say about the killing of infidels | Peter |
| I am deeply sympathetic to the victims and their families. However, the toxic concoction of stupidity, naivety and self-loathing that followed, led by the Prime Minister’s false package of moral purpose is sickening. Instead of embracing our own culture, New Zealanders en masse embraced another. The Crusaders have an opportunity to embrace their own, or cower to the ‘left’, and forgo their heritage, their history and the legacy that they have created. I leave you with two inconvenient facts:- Radical Muslims conduct 84.27% of terror attacks in the Western world; and, 98% in developed countries. In the organisation in which I work, a New Zealand university, this data is regarded as ‘Hate Speech’. | James |
| A total knee jerk reaction, has anyone approached the Muslim community & asked them if they are offended or how many Muslims are Crusaders fans & attend their games | Noel |
| The name and the brand is not anti-muslim at all. It’s the name of a rugby team that goes out and meets challenges effectively. Don’t let the PC Brigade win this argument. What’s next? change the name of the Highlanders and the Chiefs and the Warriors? | Kerry |
| The Crusades were organized by western European Christians after centuries of Muslim wars of expansion. Their primary objectives were to stop the expansion of Muslim states, to reclaim for Christianity the Holy Land in the Middle East, and to recapture territories that had formerly been Christian. The crusades were the result of Islamist aggression that if left to continue would have spread into Europe. | Trevor |
| The Crusades were defensive in nature. How about a deal? The Crusaders change their name when Turkey acknowledges and apologises for the Armenian Genocide. | Richard |
| It has just gone overboard. | Jo |
| never | Allan |
| PC gone mad, again. Not even promoted by Muslims but interfering do gooders. Do we have to remove the cross from St John too? Note: there is a team in GB called the Saracens, lets appeal that too? | Nick |
| What a load of crap. Im not a rugby supporter, but changing the name of the Crusaders is as sick as changing existing names of places in NZ into Maori names to please the pathetic few. Its a sick idea. | Des |
| Rugby Union had nothing to do with the killing of Muslims in Christchurch and as such, it has nothing to answer for. | Nick |
| This is the first time that the deeds of the early crusaders are found to be importantNot once before the murder in Christchurch were those deeds mentioned | John |
| Absolutely not! The madness of one individual is being over-reacted to to advance the claims of a left-leaning minority to shut down freedom of speech and choice. | Brian |
| Knee jerk reaction | Neil |
| You could argue, fatuously, that many other name could be changed because some folk might be sensitive to them e.g. “All Blacks”, “Warriors”, “Saracens”. JB | John |
| Absolutely not. | Phil |
| Definitely not! The name is just a bit of fun, a good name for a group of sportsmen who are united in the pursuit of a common goal. Are we now to consider banning the use of the word “crusade”, meaning “a vigorous campaign for political, social, or religious change”? Where does all this PC nonsense end. If people who have come to this country don’t like the names of our sports teams, perhaps they should go back to where they came from. | Greg |
| It is political correctness gone mad | David |
| This has to be the most idiotic rubbish to come out of this whole affair. If tey proceed teh only thing that will happen is they will lose a lot of their support base, and I feel some of the rest of the country may very well stop following Super rugby as well. To give into this is to say that we have really given into Islam by pandering to a minority group even though some of them say they do not want it to happen. The reason the Muslim community do not want it is to ensure they are not targeted. | Murray |
| Get rid of horses and swords | Richard |
| For Petes sake…its only a name; knee jerk re-action | Don |
| Jacinda is too inexperienced, too unwise, too egoistic to lead this debate. Its time to step back and consider our actions wtih wisdom not emotional hysteria. | Jenny |
| We are primarily a christian country and we have over-reacted to the 15 March atrocity | Graeme |
| The Crusaders kept a bunch of uncivilized murderers who were intent on the genocide of Christians out of Europe. We are now letting them in. | Tony |
| Absolutely not. The name has nothing to do with the tragedy. | David |
| Absolutely not. Rugby management are panicking. They should hold firm. It is ridiculous to even contemplate such a politically correct response to the threat to a successful brand. | Murray |
| No change is necessary. | Brian |
| The Crusaders is a great brand and the horses especially are an important part of the showmanship of events. Nothing should be changed. | Peter |
| Rugby bosses should show the same courage they expect their teams to display. the franchise has no links to the tragedy. What happened in history cannot be changed. We must all learn to live and let live. | Paula |
| Why are people even listening to those who are calling for change. The terrorist attack had nothing to do with rugby. No response is needed. | Stuart |