Acts of violence arising from hatred, racism, and bigotry have no place in a world of civility. The brutal attacks on Muslim worshippers at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, leaving 51 dead and 49 injured, can never be justified. Through adopting Van Dijk's ideological square of 'Us. vs. Them' [3], the present study uncovers the impact statements of the attacks' survivors and victims' families, denouncing the severity of the event and expressing the shattering effects of the attacks on self, (...) society, and humanity at large. Over a period of three days, about 90 people delivered their statements in the High Court in Christchurch. The data were compiled through YouTube videos and news articles that reported the testimonies. The findings showed that the overall discursive strategy used in the impact statements is that of positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation. Such presentations are realized by focusing on the positive aspects of the ingroup members represented by the attacks' survivors, victims' families, and people of New Zealand on the one hand, and the negative characteristics of the out-group members represented by the terrorist, on the other. As the paper sends a strong message for accepting 'otherness' and rejecting antagonism, it is of significance to readers and researchers in inter-faith dialogue, human rights, equality, freedom, and justice. (shrink)