The title of Chris Wilson and Michal Dziwulski’s book He Told Us makes their point clear: that information about the March 15 terrorist, his planning, and his motivations was available if we simply look. More importantly, the terrorist's own claims about his actions can easily be shown to be lies and propaganda.
The session was chaired by former MP and Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel, who introduced Chris and Michal, who uncovered “crucial information...that different agencies missed”, along with Sara Qasem, poet, writer, community advocate and daughter of shuhada Abdelfattah Qasem.
Lianne described He Told Us as a “very hard book to read” and how it challenges us to ask whether lessons have been learned and helped her realise how imperfect the Royal Commission of Inquiry was. Chris’s response was from the book’s conclusion: that we can identify and action the lessons if we choose, but if we don’t try, then future prevention will be impossible.
Chris and Michal’s reasons for writing He Told Us were in part personal. Chris is from Ōtautahi and felt March 15 personally but also it was linked to his teaching and research at the time. He felt a sense of unease that the inquiries were not investigating properly. He found the more that they looked and pulled at threads, the more questions they had. Michal’s family fled Poland in the early 1980s and came to Aotearoa as refugees. He feels motivated to advocate for those who find it difficult to have their stories told.
Chris and Michal explained how relatively easy it was for them to find the terrorist’s own words and posts online. While the Royal Commission claimed there was no evidence of warnings or intelligence on websites referred to as “the chans”, Michal noted they were easily able to find the terrorist’s posts using his known writing and information about where he was and when (using the same techniques that helped catch the Unabomber in 1994).
Lianne commented that the book names all of the shuhada and their stories are interwoven through the book. Chris explained this was important for them and a motivation for the book. The community and their stories are important and they juxtaposed this with how the terrorist was an empty loner. Sara emphasised that on March 15, “it is impossible to put into words the kind of imprint it leaves”, but it was necessary because the issues that need dealing with had not been. While talking about her father for the book was difficult, she wanted to show there was more to the shuhada than March 15.
On the Royal Commission, Michal noted that its terms of reference were repeatedly redrafted through consultation with agencies from broad to narrow: from what could or should have been known to what was known and done. This was not made clear to the public and contradicted public statements.
The Report was released in December 2020, and its wide-ranging content on far-right radicalism was “much like a student literature review” (ouch Chris Wilson), it concluded the information available was very limited and not much could have been done with this. The Report included almost no information about the terrorist and how he acted before March 15.
Sara talked about how the families were left out of the process and it was rushed. She implored “how is our fear of accountability greater than our fear of this ever happening again?” and that the families deserved the full story as the bare minimum.
Chris and Michal talked about their frustration with the Inquiry and Report. The criminal investigation stopped once the Inquiry was announced and the Report made findings without looking at the evidence available. Michal stated that the Report’s claims that the terrorist was a ‘stealthy operative that could not be detected’ cannot be true with the easily available evidence of his travel, actions and intent. He was by no means careful. Asked by Lianne why agencies have not looked into this, the authors said they faced silence and wondered why they have not looked.
Sara reflected whether this would have been the case before and after the attack if the terrorist had been a Muslim or an immigrant. She noted rising Islamophobia and how events are often reported in the news around Gaza and Palestine, and how language and framing is so important.
The authors noted that the terrorist’s manifesto was a piece of propaganda and lies, but that it was effective. It targeted different groups and ideologies with emotional language and key ideas. Michal noted that there have already been several copycat attacks. But a key point of the book was that the terrorist was a failure and desperate for attention, and it was important to deflate the facade.
Michal noted the Report repeated the terrorist’s claims in the manifesto and the one (!!) interview without interrogating them. As an example, despite his claims of being driven to act after a breaking point, his own words and posts show him as a person seeking a reason to engage in violence for a long time.
Sara saw the authors’ frustration as reflecting that of the families, and hopes the book will create hope that the truth can and will be brought to light. There is more to her community than resilience but when faced with walls, how can people be able to move forward.
She closed the session by reading a moving poem about her father, “In Another Life”.
This was a difficult but important session to attend. I wish I could say I was surprised that organisations and inquiries have been more interested in not wanting to look too deeply to avoid the answers, but I’m not. The session and book are important for us to understand how vital it is to ask questions and push for the truth and to learn.
More
Photos of the He Told Us event
- Books about the Mosque shootings
- Listen to the Widows of Shuhada podcast
WORD Christchurch Festival 2026
- Follow our WORD coverage
- Get a copy of the WORD programme at libraries or check it out online
- Visit our WORD Christchurch 2026 page
- WORD Christchurch's website
Add a comment to: He Told Us: How An Australian Committed Far-right Terrorism in Christchurch