Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/12/21 20:58:04
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I remember my lecturer in university trying to explain Muslim atrocities carried out in the modern age as a response to the crusades. I said that this explanation has two major flaws; one, it overlooks the fact that muslims had been attacking Christians centuries before the crusades (which if anything were a Christian counterattack to take back the lands they'd lost). And two, considering how long ago the crusades were, at what point do you say "look, get over yourself and just let it go"?
She didn't like my response one bit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/12/21 20:59:26
2016/12/21 21:00:13
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
As the US wasn't in existence and the New World wasn't discovered, its difficult to use that as a justification for attacks on the US. Germany as well-as it wasn't in existence either.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2016/12/21 21:29:12
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I remember my lecturer in university trying to explain Muslim atrocities carried out in the modern age as a response to the crusades. I said that this explanation has two major flaws; one, it overlooks the fact that muslims had been attacking Christians centuries before the crusades (which if anything were a Christian counterattack to take back the lands they'd lost). And two, considering how long ago the crusades were, at what point do you say "look, get over yourself and just let it go"?
She didn't like my response one bit.
Why go to ancient history when modern era has plenty of western countries messing around there and bombing stuff for money and personal gain.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2016/12/21 21:42:21
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I remember my lecturer in university trying to explain Muslim atrocities carried out in the modern age as a response to the crusades. I said that this explanation has two major flaws; one, it overlooks the fact that muslims had been attacking Christians centuries before the crusades (which if anything were a Christian counterattack to take back the lands they'd lost). And two, considering how long ago the crusades were, at what point do you say "look, get over yourself and just let it go"?
She didn't like my response one bit.
Why go to ancient history when modern era has plenty of western countries messing around there and bombing stuff for money and personal gain.
Out of curiosity, what money has the US gained from our recent military efforts? The only personal gain I can think of is combat experience.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/12/21 23:38:56
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I remember my lecturer in university trying to explain Muslim atrocities carried out in the modern age as a response to the crusades. I said that this explanation has two major flaws; one, it overlooks the fact that muslims had been attacking Christians centuries before the crusades (which if anything were a Christian counterattack to take back the lands they'd lost). And two, considering how long ago the crusades were, at what point do you say "look, get over yourself and just let it go"?
She didn't like my response one bit.
Yeah... you can go back and forth since before the Ionic wars/battle of marathon (predating both Christianity and Islam) and these two areas are *still* going at it.
Its almost as if this planets history is one of multiple civilizations clashing, doing horrible things to one another in the process, waxing and waning in power over one another, where the spoils go to the victor for as long as they can hold it.
Why go to ancient history when modern era has plenty of western countries messing around there and bombing stuff for money and personal gain.
Because historical facts do not have a best before date.
Interestingly enough whichever side is getting the bad end of the stick always wants the line between "history that doesn't matter" and "history that does matter" drawn right at the point where they stopped beating on the other guy and the other guy started beating on them.
2016/12/21 23:41:11
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
Disciple of Fate already mentioned some stuff so I'll just a bit:
Orlanth wrote:
You have both swallowed a double helping of missing the point.
It is irrelevant whether terrorists are refugees, or what are the statistics probabilities of being victim of an attack.
Two points are relevant.
1. There has been an influx of about a million refugees into Germany from the middle east.
2. ISIL has been know to have attempted to infiltrate the refugee migration.
If they really wanted to infiltrate Germany there are much subtler, easier, directer, and quicker ways to do this. Refugees usually don't just just appear wherever they want to be and they are supervised to a degree when they arrive here. Entering the country via a student visa (or any other way that looks normal) would be so much more effective for their nefarious goals.
Then there is one relevant point to draw from this.
1. The security services therefore need to vet about a million people in a very short space of time and perform a risk assessment.
This is relevant solely because:
1. The security service personnel focus and budget is not unlimited, and this task absorbs a lot of attention.
Consequently there is one concern:
1. The security services are distracted by the influx and it is thus easier than normal to get a terrorist into Germany, from anywhere, and to operate said terrorists mission.
And entering Germany in a non-conspicuous way gives them all the above mentioned benefits with the exception of "hiding within other refugees and hoping to not be found by overworked security services", and if I remember correctly refugees actually point out "refugees" who look suspicious to the authorities which again makes the job of the infiltrator harder and helps security services. If they really want to infiltrate as refugees then they are some sort of rube goldberg-ish dumb terrorists. Sure it might work but any other way is way more efficient.
That is all that is being said. Whether people should be pro-refugee, anti-refugee, looking at refugees by crime or terror statistics etc etc is all irrelevant to the topic. Immigration policy is a topic relevant to society and should not be swept under the carpet, but analysis of the terror attack in Berlin raises reasonable concerns in separation to this.
However it would be ignorant to dismiss the influx of refugees as a factor purely because one may be in favour of welcoming immigration for any reason. It would be the case of the truth of overstretch security services due to the scale of immigration being unwanted information, and thus not being 'true'. A factual based approach is better when dealing with the hard reality of terrorism.
For example had the million or so refugees arrived in Germany over the course of five years rather than one the distraction of the German state security may or may not have been lessened and they may or may not have been able to respond in time to negate this threat. We now know that Germany was warned pf imminent attack, and the Germans are not complacent, they are however overworked due to the massive and demographically sudden influx of refugees.
The statistical relevance and context is not irrelevant just because it doesn't confirm what "besorgte Bürger" ("concerned citizen") fear. Getting emotional after an attack is normal but then reacting on these emotions without thinking it through is the worst one can do. We have more to fear from Reichsbürger who are hoarding weapons than from refugees. You advocate for a factual based approach but want ignore the statistical reality. How's that supposed to work? You are peddling just more of the concerned citizen rhetoric with imaginary scenarios. Refugees aren't just let loose freely wherever they arrive (they are processed and some are even sent back). Total security doesn't exist and pushing the idea that one has to be afraid of refugees just to feel safe is kinda crummy because they are usually some of the most vulnerable people (they are not refugee-ing for the fun of it).
And immigration policy has nothing to do with refugees. Some might get permanent residency but usually they are sent back once the danger isn't there anymore (even if it's many years later). This can be quite harsh especially on kids who arrive here at a young age, integrate, make friends, learn the language (and often can't even use their mother language anymore), and have a life here but are sent back due to the strictness of the law.
2016/12/22 04:15:50
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
On the contrary, I think you missed my overall point. Statistics do matter when discussing the refugee influx. The highest profile attacks committed have been done so by French and Belgian nationals who certainly did not need to infiltrate refugee groups to get back. Second of all, the Berlin attack however tragic was on a much smaller scale than those in France.
You point is that refuges are statistically nota threat and also are not seen to be responsible for actioned attacks and very few terrorist infiltrators have been detected amongsrt the large influx of Syrian refugees. So in your opinion it is unwelcoming and unhelpful to focus on them, If that was your point, then I understood it.
1. There has been an influx of 1.1 mil refugees into Germany, with only 4 people who actually decided to commit an attack.
2. IS has attempted to infiltrate refugees, but its been over two years since the start of the refugee crisis and Berlin is the first time that they have managed to kill more than one person in Germany. Either the people they tried to send over are grossly incompetent, or more likely they have been able to recruit them here due to living conditions.
The relevant point to draw from this is that the refugee population is not anymore dangerous or even less dangerous than the radicalized nationals, who are even now suspected of hiding the attacker in Berlin, possibly also enabling him access to a firearm.
Ok first however you cut it whether recent arrival or due to Moslems born in the EU this entire problem is imported. Jihadism is imported from the Islamic world, and arrives as a side effect of unintegrated Islamic culture in Europe. Europe has been exposed to Islam for a very long time, but what is happening now is new and it the result of unintegrated immigrant cultures from the Islamic world.
Second the statistic of 1.1 million refugees yielding only four known terrorists who have committed an attack is a very easy sounding statistic. So there isnt a problem them?
Sorry wrong.
1. Four is four too many. Four is also a lot, not a little Take any other ethnic people group migrating to or within Europe you would likely not have as many. And remember this is an active threat. If an Irish team gets into Europe and fans come to the match it is not unlikely that someone in the crowd had connections to the sectarisnism in the Troubles, but they aren't likely active and aren't a threat to Germany anyway. I doubt they would need special attention, more then football fan normally get.
2. Approximately one in a quarter of a million refugees is a terrorist who has known to have already committed an attack. How many more are committed terrorists yet to have done so? We don't have a figure for that, and I suspect we would be alarmed if we had. How many trained sleepers. Actioned terrorists are a relatively small percentage of the whole. Most of those people will be in fact deserters from ISIS or similar causes, Terrorism 101 teaches you to send terrorists with clean hands into the target country, as they are less likely to be spotted . You have to know of them from their sympathies and their training not their activities.
Then you have on top of this a large number of sympathisers who have done nothing wrong yet, but have leanings towards ISIS and may be persuaded to sign up when in Europe.
3. The fact that we know know there were four means that the security services were right to investigate. They found four on the first pass through the data/ How many have they missed? Do they need another look? Also you have to look at groups of people if refugee A B and C come to Munchen and settle in together nothing happens, but when their friend D arrives they all get back into bad habits.
You don't need many instigators to radicalise an inherently part radicalised community. So its not just ne pass through the data. I will admit that now they have documentation this will be easier.
4. The fact that we know there were four means that the whole 1.1 million needed to be sifted, largely they arrived without documentation and without dossiers from native security services assessing their threat, which a migrant from within the EU will have. You will need to assemble a life history of each and every one to find those four. If the number was more scary, like a hundred known terrorists the wokload would still be essentially the same, though more double checking and deeper cross-referencing will be needed. Its an enormous amount of work and would be very time consuming personnel consuming and distracting for those who need to commit their time to protecting Germany from terror.
Security agencies certainly don't have an endless budget. Yet even in countries with significantly larger and well developed agencies such as the U.S. you still have attacks from time to time, it is impossible to stop each and every one of them.
No you cant stop them all, but you can try and in doing so stop most. This was why the IRA found it very difficult to operate in the latter half of the Troubles. It wasn't for lack of funding or commitment.
You don't see much about the successes:
Let me remind you that neither France or the U.S. has masses of refugees come in as a consequence of the refugee crisis. You can try to handwave this away as complacency, but it is a curious occurrence is it not?
French complacency is a separate issue. Its a problem with the French police at just about any time. Getting international cooperation from the French police and not just from the UK (though there might be special love there) is a noted problem. They are known to be laid back, they are known to drop the ball. France is known as an easy target, it has that rep. That rep extends to the terror networks. Terrorists think, right or wrong, that is is extremely hard to enter Israel undetected, they fear the Israeli security services. That know the Uk is easy to enter and its politics are a soft touch, but they also believe in the rep of the UK security services and expect to be caught unless they act very carefully. The NSA and FBI have similar reps. France has a rep of being sleepy and easy to attack, so they get targeted.
Again, on the contrary, politicians and parties such as those of Wilders in my country or the AfD in Germany would like us to believe that refugees are dangerous murderers, or as you say hiding them.
No. Even Wilders doenst say that, neither does the AfD. They highlight Islamic refugees. That is the first distinction.
Second there is a case to answer for and many people in Europe are waking up to it. Women know that lonely walks in dark woods are not safe, but now have to add town squares and festivals as rape threat zones, entirely due to mass immigration. That is the hard reality, and one progressives repeatedly gloss over or try to dismiss with false statistics.
Yes four in a million actively known prior terrorists appears to be a little, but its a lot. Yes immigrant crime appears to be a little compared to national reported crime statistics, but it shows an alarming rise. Also like in Sweden a lot of these crimes are being deliberately ignored or the attackers ethnicity glossed over to maintain the rosy statistics that all is well.
Wilders et al have a point, but defending that point is not my intention here. My main problem with those who are actively complaining about Islamic extremism and lack of cultural integration is that it has been left to the alt-right to make comment as mainstream politicians refused to do so.
The UK had that problem, thankfully the word is had. New Labour allowed the Islamification of Birmingham primary schools and rape gangs on Rotherham because they didn't want to upset the unity zeitgeist. Cameron had the balls to admit there was a problem, yes parts of the Islamic minority in the UK had been getting away with horrendous abuses, it wasn't an alt-right scare story, and he was going to take action on it. Cameron moved very swiftly on the radicalised schools in 2010 shortly after he took power. He also dealt with the rape gangs in Rotherham. The Tories have since had problems because the full story is a powder keg even they had had to keep the lid on - Notably that to keep up the national rhetroic of community cohesion the parents of girls who were abducted had been censured by the police for being racist for complaining about their childrens rapes. One horrible case of a father who has arrested for a breach of the peace because he wanted to rescue his daughter from a house where she was being raped by a gang of Moslem men. Reportedly the police still did nothing to help the child. The head of the public inquiry into this mess have been changed several times, and I think the government is trying to find a way to wind it up because while the Tories are willing to stop the abuse, unlike Labour, they are not willing to let the public know how bad it had got because it would provide ammunition to anti-Islamic groups.
At least the rapists were put on trial quietly and are in prison now with long sentences, and the Islamic local community knows that their access to R&R at the expense of British children has been removed.
Crap like that is what a society must do if it want to maintain the illusion that all is well and mas Islamic non-integration is not a problem. If you don't like the AfD then mainstream not alt-right polticians need to step up admit that there is a case to answer for and take responsibility. German women are not meat puppets, or at least shouldn't be. And no its not a 'tiny minority' of refugees from Islamic cultures who think they are, its a belief shared by lots of people which is why such attacks are often by large gangs.
Statistics have to be shown to combat false perceptions of insecurity. Of course immigration and refugee policy should be a separate discussion, but each and every time people want to link immigration or refugees to terrorism out come the statistics to prove those people wrong.
Actually your statisitcs only appear t prove them wrong. They prove them right. Four detected known ex-terrorists in an influx of a million recent refugees is quite a bit, it is indicative that ISIS have tried to infiltrate. You have your iceberg dead ahead. How much of it dont you see.
Its a bit like spinning this:
"Good news patient we have looked at your blood sample and only found four blood cells showing signs of HIV."
What you are missing is that unlike previous influxes of immigration it is on the terms of the immigrant. Germany has welcomed Moslem migrants for generations and while they have had some problems this is normal in any multi-cultural society. But the nation was still predominantly German. Suddenly refugees means a whole community imported wholecloth, which means it comes with its own societal values attached. To make matters worse due to the progressives an their deep need for head in sand denial about the problems of integrating a culture which views women as inferior, infidel as infidel and considers rape just a fact of life in a male dominated world.
So you have a culture which radical islamics have contempt for and see as weak, which encourages them. And you give them good reason to come to that assessment. Radical clerics believe not unrealistically that they can dominate Europe, they are strong in their beliefs European culture is weak on ours and they see the frequent demonstration of that as blood in the water.
I think they are wrong, but not due to progressives but because of the backlash which is inevitable when the concerns become mainstream and can no longer be written off as alt-right scares. The mainstream right can then deal with the issues with public blessing and the progressive left will have to shut up for once, and they will because much of the anger will be directed at them and the public base of support for progressives will evaporate. It need not end up in an alt-right hell, it might yet end up in a massive showdown between radical Islam and the European majority though, and the long it is left before leaders step up the worse and bloodier it will be.
Its a lose lose, but it need not have happened if progressives had not got in the way and insisted that we live in a multi-culutral utopia spoiled by the alt-right and a tiny handful of religous extremists.
Anyway what has actually changed is that you have whole communities imported, Which means you don have the old trickle of immigrants, mostly from Turkey, who get jobs in the lucrative German building trade. You have whole columns of refugees arriving with no jobs for them. They are also settled as whole communities, and when I mean that I don't necessarily mean in the intigrated sense. The only ones who will have integration are those who are extended families and those who have common cause.
If the last few years have shown us anything, it is better to be afraid of your neighbour than the Syrian in the detention center.
So much wrong with this statement.
No. First its unlikely your neighbour if taken from the German population as a whole excepting only Syrian refugees is a problem. skewed statistics are skewed. Germany is one of the safer places to live in Europe, but it is getting worse, and notably some types of offense,like rape are getting more prevalent and this is being connected to immigration due to witness reports.
Second it also it takes to time settle in and get some terror done. There is a good reason you see people long staying in Europe committing attacks, they have got settled and built a web of contacts and a powerbase. Those Tunisians had settled in.
Third many of the Syrian refugees are in camps at the moment, that is a bad time to kick off, they are well monitored.
Fourth they are being processed and vetted, so the radicals amongst them have good reason to be quiet right now.
Even so they day after the Berlin attack an airport now being used to house Syrian refugees was raided by armed police in connexion to the attack. Even if it is just because of sympathisers.
Yes the threat is there, its a big threat and yet it will be statistically low on activity right now for reasons unrelated to it being a threat.
What you need to realise is that refugees in camps who are bored unemployed, distrusted and because of the rape gang culture which has inflamed Germans no longer welcome; these people are a hotbed for recruitment. furthermore they came from Syria, they arent naive converts who dont know what killing is like, many wll have seen it first hand, many many even have themselves killed for one reason or another. The major test is already done, these are life hardened people, and prime recruits for a radicalisation that is already rooted in them.
If you were an ISIS leader how would you use that resource, kick off in camps and get exposed, or quietly recruit build a web of radicals and contacts and then cause some real mess once your minions are wandering around Europe.
Refugees as a whole don't seem to hide any more murderers than the native population, indeed looking at France or the U.S. in recent years its very much the opposite.
Take the Liquid Bomb plot, they were all Uk citizens, and most were British born. They didn't consider themselves British in any way except legal rights, the entire community identifies themselves as Pakistani first by and large and only a portion consider themselves British and the radicalised seldom do except to blend in. The essential dynamic of the refugee/immigrant is still there due to non-integration. The delimiter tends to be sectarian, most Indian born or Indian ancestry UK citizens consider themselves British, even though any also consider themselves Indian.
'Refugees' per se are not the problem, as 'refugees' can come from anywhere. For example the UK has Brexit refugees right now, people entering the UK to be on this side when the break happens, and likewise there are Brexit refugees in Europe from the UK who consider themselves more European than British and consider the best time to move is now.
The difference is that most refugee patterns are not a problem and never were. The UK and France has large communities of African refugees and immigrants, and most consider themselves British or French, especially by the second generation, and very often with the first. Radicalised refugees are a problem, and they remain a problem long after they are no longer technically refugees. The Tunisian terrorists who caused the problems in France this year were technically French terrorists, most had French passports and had lived in France a long time. They were still identified and self identified as Tunisians, and had no intention of integrating as Frenchmen. This problem can last generations through non integration. Now some will be exceptions to the rule and because the numbers of known major attackers is still low we can see a wide variety of background, but there will be a commonality of what is behind them.
It is not surprising in the least that after the Berlin attack the Syrian refugee centre was raised even though the refugees are still locked inside for processing and not all have the liberty to move within Germany at will. They are tomorrows problem, even though they aren't driving lorries into people today doesn't mean there is no threat.
Edit: Just to comment on your CCTV and video post. Germany is very opposed to those kinds of surveillance due to its history, so they have very little CCTV to go off, this is why they arrested the Pakistani, because they got his description from a witness instead of any video evidence.
This is true, but there is more CCTV than you might think. Shop CCTV can see a lot more than what is in the ship if the windows are not shuttered, shop CCTV doesnt have the same stigma as public cameras, and German cities normally don't employ heavy shutters.
Germans also comply with the police and as a society are very precise, more so than most people groups. The police asked for mobile phone footage, selfies etc, and Berliners have responded with the timeliness and unity we see from Germans and makes them a strong people. Ask for help from the US and British public ad you might get it, might not. The Germans will cooperate en masse, its in their nature and a private of what happened will actually be easier to build from witnesses than our own police might find.
Germany doesn't need the surveillance culture the UK has, community is strong there. The Uk used to have that, but its gone now, and had to be replaced electronically.
Edit 2: The new suspect was apparently already known to intelligence agencies as having contacts with radicalized Muslims and trying to by a firearm from a police informant. Can we put this one on complacency too if it turn outs to be him, just like France?
Not really. The Germans are clearly on the case but Germany let in vast numbers of Syrian refugees and others. Perhaps the undercover intelligence officer was seeing so much his superiors didn't want to expose him for just this one fairly minor bust. Evidently they weren't being complacent, complacency would come if any other intelligence agency had forwarded specific intel and it had been ignored.
You cant watch suspects 24/7. Watch the video given it shows just how many spooks is needed to trail one suspect, its a lot of people.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/12/22 04:27:14
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2016/12/22 04:41:05
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
Orlanth wrote: Women know that lonely walks in dark woods are not safe, but now have to add town squares and festivals as rape threat zones, entirely due to mass immigration.
You know, it's funny how similar "{place} is not safe" advice is given in the US, despite not having the same immigration level. In fact, over here it tends to be things like rich white college students from "good" families getting off with a ridiculously short sentence because it would be wrong to "ruin his promising future", white Christians blaming the victim for "consenting" to sex by flirting/wearing sexy clothes/etc, Catholic officials hiding child rapists because it would be bad PR to let them get caught, etc. It's almost like rape is a universal problem, not something exclusive to Muslim immigrants.
To make matters worse due to the progressives an their deep need for head in sand denial about the problems of integrating a culture which views women as inferior, infidel as infidel and considers rape just a fact of life in a male dominated world.
It sounds like you're describing certain right-wing Christians in the US. Is this the start of an argument that Christian immigrants should not be permitted, due to their misogynistic beliefs and the chance that they could do awful things?
Second it also it takes to time settle in and get some terror done. There is a good reason you see people long staying in Europe committing attacks, they have got settled and built a web of contacts and a powerbase. Those Tunisians had settled in.
This is just plain wrong. It takes very little time to settle in and get some terror done, if you're talking about the kind of thing like the attack in the OP. Renting a truck is easy. You just need a valid driver's license to rent a vehicle, and then off you go to smash into the nearest crowd of people. A terrorist coming into the country as a tourist could rent a car at the airport as soon as they arrive and drive straight to the massacre site. The most likely reason we don't see more attacks like this is that there are very, very few people willing to commit suicide in the process of murdering innocent victims.
The major test is already done, these are life hardened people, and prime recruits for a radicalisation that is already rooted in them.
So now we're talking about people who are candidates for radicalization, not people who are already terrorists in the process of executing a plot? Are you honestly suggesting that we exclude millions of potential immigrants because they might be convinced to become terrorists? This is paranoia, not a reasonable approach to security.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/12/22 04:41:37
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/12/22 04:41:41
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
Kilkrazy wrote: Yes, it often happens like that, unfortunately. OTOH, the police will be on higher alert guarding places.
Has ther been often attack quick after another? Apart from trouble of coordinating wouldn't it be more effective to lull people into sense of safety and then boom
There very often have been clustered, co-ordinated attacks in Muslim countries, where it is easy for extremists to organised and support them.Attacks in western countries are apparently nearly all the doing of lone wolves or very small groups with little support. They may cluster due to news coverage provoking another nutter, or because clustering is simply natural. For instance here is a mini-cluster of an attack in Berlin and an attack in Ankara.
Orlanth wrote: Women know that lonely walks in dark woods are not safe, but now have to add town squares and festivals as rape threat zones, entirely due to mass immigration.
You know, it's funny how similar "{place} is not safe" advice is given in the US, despite not having the same immigration level. In fact, over here it tends to be things like rich white college students from "good" families getting off with a ridiculously short sentence because it would be wrong to "ruin his promising future", white Christians blaming the victim for "consenting" to sex by flirting/wearing sexy clothes/etc, Catholic officials hiding child rapists because it would be bad PR to let them get caught, etc. It's almost like rape is a universal problem, not something exclusive to Muslim immigrants.
America is not Germany, America has far more rough corners than western Europe does and it doesn't require a change in the demographic for some urban centres to have very nasty reputations. It has been a problem for a long time. Some parts of Detroit have been dangerous since the 60's. the large number of attacks on Cologne were a new phenomenon and got attention.
It is the first we hear of the rapists who blame women for flirty clothing by categorised as 'Christians'. It isn't the pulse of the US community of these offenses.
The Islamic rape gang problem in Europe right now has some weight behind it.
The nasty problems within the Roman Catholic church are being addressed, and in any case the Catholic church is vast, its has more employees than a mid sized European country has citizens and the Roman Catholic community is the largest human organisation in history. When the number of priests and church workers totals in the millions, it is inevitable that some are going to be criminals. This doesnt excuse the offences.
However Europe is not known for large scale rape culture, some parts of the middle east are different and they brought their values with them rather than adopted our own..
To make matters worse due to the progressives an their deep need for head in sand denial about the problems of integrating a culture which views women as inferior, infidel as infidel and considers rape just a fact of life in a male dominated world.
It sounds like you're describing certain right-wing Christians in the US. Is this the start of an argument that Christian immigrants should not be permitted, due to their misogynistic beliefs and the chance that they could do awful things?
Your known and self expressed hate on for Christians is getting the better of you, again.
Misogynists exists as individuals in all countries, it isn't a problem in mainstream Christianity at all, There is no reason to consider that Christianity poses this threat to the US outside of your warped imagination. The threat of Islamic extrmeism is well documented and the abuses growing heavy handed and make sudden impact on communities where this problem didn't not exist on this scale a priori.
Sweden had plenty of Christian but no rape culture, not it has massed Islamic immigration and a nasty evident rape culture the government doesn't know what to do about. No excuse to blame Christians there.
Second it also it takes to time settle in and get some terror done. There is a good reason you see people long staying in Europe committing attacks, they have got settled and built a web of contacts and a powerbase. Those Tunisians had settled in.
This is just plain wrong. It takes very little time to settle in and get some terror done, if you're talking about the kind of thing like the attack in the OP. Renting a truck is easy. You just need a valid driver's license to rent a vehicle, and then off you go to smash into the nearest crowd of people.
So why isnt it happening twice daily?
France run out of lorries? France run out of diesel fuel? France run out of Islamics? France run out of crowds? ISIS decided the French are ok now? All nope.
Its not as easy as you assume.
A terrorist coming into the country as a tourist could rent a car at the airport as soon as they arrive and drive straight to the massacre site. The most likely reason we don't see more attacks like this is that there are very, very few people willing to commit suicide in the process of murdering innocent victims.
However the sympathies are there, and the dogma is there, radicalisation takes time.
Also the driver in the Berlin attack didnt commit suicide, he got away. So your assumption holds no logic.
Are you honestly suggesting that we exclude millions of potential immigrants because they might be convinced to become terrorists? This is paranoia, not a reasonable approach to security.
That hasn't been the conclusion drawn, its not the concept being duscussed. The concept is that massed Syrian immigration has placed a burden on the security services which has consequntly left them vulnerable. If you read plain text more and assumed less you might be able to see this. I was clear enough. So clear in fact I even bullet pointed it.
However to answer your question. What I would honestly suggest is:
1. Western society recognises at public and government level that Islamic terrorism is an issue and Islamic non integration is an issue and it requires concessions from the Moslem community that it will abide by our values.
2. Moslem communities must accept our way of life is not negotiable. If they want to live under sharia or want to make their new home nation a Moslem state they need to live elsewhere. If they come to Europe it is understand that they live under our secular values. Which religious communities within Europe already do.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2016/12/22 06:56:59
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
Orlanth wrote: America is not Germany, America has far more rough corners than western Europe does and it doesn't require a change in the demographic for some urban centres to have very nasty reputations. It has been a problem for a long time. Some parts of Detroit have been dangerous since the 60's. the large number of attacks on Cologne were a new phenomenon and got attention.
I'm not talking about extreme situations like the worst parts of Detroit, I'm talking about things like "don't be alone in a parking lot at night", which happens all over the US. And the hypothetical rapist in this scenario is not a Muslim immigrant.
It is the first we hear of the rapists who blame women for flirty clothing by categorised as 'Christians'. It isn't the pulse of the US community of these offenses.
I didn't say the rapists were Christians, I said the people excusing the rapists were Christians. It may not be the pulse of the US community, but "rape all the children you want" is not the pulse of the Muslim community.
The nasty problems within the Roman Catholic church are being addressed, and in any case the Catholic church is vast, its has more employees than a mid sized European country has citizens and the Roman Catholic community is the largest human organisation in history. When the number of priests and church workers totals in the millions, it is inevitable that some are going to be criminals. This doesnt excuse the offences.
The issue is not that the rapes happened. As you said, an organization that size is going to have criminals get in. The issue is that the priests who raped children were quietly covered up, victims were bribed to stay silent, etc. This was done by church leadership knowing perfectly well what was going on, and making a conscious decision to hide the crimes to protect the church's image. This is an incredibly awful thing, and yet Muslim immigrants had nothing to do with it.
Misogynists exists as individuals in all countries, it isn't a problem in mainstream Christianity at all
I didn't say mainstream Christianity, I said certain right-wing Christians. I acknowledge that the people I'm thinking about are not a majority of Christians, but the people who commit violent crimes in the name of god are not the majority of Muslims. If you get to blame all Muslims and treat them with suspicion because a minority do something awful then Christians get the full blame for every extremist Christian doing or saying something awful.
There is no reason to consider that Christianity poses this threat to the US outside of your warped imagination.
Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. Right-wing Christianity does pose a threat to the US. Remember that the second-place finisher in the republican primaries was Cruz, who was happy to appear on stage at an event where the organizer was talking about how the penalty for homosexuality is death (but you shouldn't murder gay people, that's god's job) and accept the organizer's endorsement. Christians may not be a threat as terrorists, but they are still a threat. And I'll also point out that Muslim terrorists are not a threat to the survival of a nation as a whole. Killing a few people by running them over with a truck is, in the context of the total deaths each year, a rounding error. The nation will survive.
So why isnt it happening twice daily?
France run out of lorries? France run out of diesel fuel? France run out of Islamics? France run out of crowds? ISIS decided the French are ok now? All nope.
Its not as easy as you assume.
As I said, the most likely reason that it isn't happening is that terrorists are a tiny, tiny minority.
As for it not being that easy, sorry, but it's indisputable fact that it's easy. If you have a driver's license and a credit card you can rent a truck sufficient to run over people and kill them. No special training, no special licenses, just show up at the rental place with some money and sign the contract. Anyone who wants to commit a similar attack could do so with a trivial amount of effort. The inescapable conclusion here is that there are hardly any people who are willing to do it.
Also the driver in the Berlin attack didnt commit suicide, he got away. So your assumption holds no logic.
This is a rare exception to the rule. Usually in cases like this the attacker commits suicide as the police are closing in and capture is inevitable, or goes down shooting rather than being taken alive. And in countries with the death penalty you will probably be executed for your crimes. If you commit mass murder you should expect to die, and even the best-case scenario is probably spending the rest of your life in prison.
1. Western society recognises at public and government level that Islamic terrorism is an issue and Islamic non integration is an issue and it requires concessions from the Moslem community that it will abide by our values.
2. Moslem communities must accept our way of life is not negotiable. If they want to live under sharia or want to make their new home nation a Moslem state they need to live elsewhere. If they come to Europe it is understand that they live under our secular values. Which religious communities within Europe already do.
Unacceptable. You can't force people to "integrate", and you can't force people to "abide by our values" outside of following all relevant laws. This is a blatant attack on individual freedoms, and there is absolutely no way you would tolerate it if someone else decided that your culture was the one that had to be "integrated" and changed to satisfy others.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/12/22 06:58:24
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/12/22 08:20:52
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
Unacceptable. You can't force people to "integrate", and you can't force people to "abide by our values" outside of following all relevant laws. This is a blatant attack on individual freedoms, and there is absolutely no way you would tolerate it if someone else decided that your culture was the one that had to be "integrated" and changed to satisfy others.
I’m sorry, but this is totally unacceptable. If someone immigrates to a country, it is their responsibility to integrate into that nation’s society. This is 100% non-negotiable. A society has absolutely no responsibility to accept just anyone and everyone who wants to enter. This is how a society stays alive and prevents parallel societies from forming, and social instability that would develop as a result. As someone living in a western nation, I do not want my society’s values of secularism, gender equality and democracy to be eroded. And yes, if I were to move to a different country, I would do my best to integrate into their culture, out of respect if nothing else. Immigration without assimilation is just an invasion. The fate of the Native Americans is a good example of immigration without careful integration.
Also I don’t mean to be rude, but I genuinely find your stance on this to be disturbing. I can’t understand why someone living in the west (I assume you are living in USA), and who appears educated would make the statement that you did. This may be an area where American and European culture differs.
2016/12/22 08:27:42
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
chochky wrote: If someone immigrates to a country, it is their responsibility to integrate into that nation’s society.
Define "integrate". And do so in a way that can be used to write a law for who is allowed to stay. Make sure your definition is completely objective and unambiguous so that it can be applied without any personal bias by the person making the decision. And make sure it is a test that can be applied to a person already living in the country, since a mere promise of "sure, I'll integrate" on entering means nothing. Once you have failed to do this you can take back everything you said.
As someone living in a western nation, I do not want my society’s values of secularism, gender equality and democracy to be eroded.
Then defend them by persuading people that you are right, electing people who will protect the relevant legal rights, etc. Ensure that things like separation of church and state are in your constitution (or whatever equivalent you have), and any laws conflicting with those principles can be struck down. Your value of "democracy" is worthless if includes the state deciding what is an acceptable belief to hold or express, and removing anyone who doesn't agree. That isn't democracy, it's tyranny.
I can’t understand why someone living in the west (I assume you are living in USA), and who appears educated would make the statement that you did.
Because I value the concept of individual rights and I don't like the idea of the state getting the right to decide if someone has "integrated" sufficiently or banning people from the country based on their political beliefs. Unlike you I understand how such a law would be incredibly easy to abuse, and be little more than turning the majority's biases into law.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/12/22 10:48:37
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
On the contrary, I think you missed my overall point. Statistics do matter when discussing the refugee influx. The highest profile attacks committed have been done so by French and Belgian nationals who certainly did not need to infiltrate refugee groups to get back. Second of all, the Berlin attack however tragic was on a much smaller scale than those in France.
You point is that refuges are statistically nota threat and also are not seen to be responsible for actioned attacks and very few terrorist infiltrators have been detected amongsrt the large influx of Syrian refugees. So in your opinion it is unwelcoming and unhelpful to focus on them, If that was your point, then I understood it.
My point was that you can't just handwave other countries as complacent, but then blast Germany cause it had to be all the refugees clogging up the system. In Germany it was complacency too in part as I will explain at the end.
1. There has been an influx of 1.1 mil refugees into Germany, with only 4 people who actually decided to commit an attack.
2. IS has attempted to infiltrate refugees, but its been over two years since the start of the refugee crisis and Berlin is the first time that they have managed to kill more than one person in Germany. Either the people they tried to send over are grossly incompetent, or more likely they have been able to recruit them here due to living conditions.
The relevant point to draw from this is that the refugee population is not anymore dangerous or even less dangerous than the radicalized nationals, who are even now suspected of hiding the attacker in Berlin, possibly also enabling him access to a firearm.
Ok first however you cut it whether recent arrival or due to Moslems born in the EU this entire problem is imported. Jihadism is imported from the Islamic world, and arrives as a side effect of unintegrated Islamic culture in Europe. Europe has been exposed to Islam for a very long time, but what is happening now is new and it the result of unintegrated immigrant cultures from the Islamic world.
Second the statistic of 1.1 million refugees yielding only four known terrorists who have committed an attack is a very easy sounding statistic. So there isnt a problem them?
Sorry wrong.
1. Four is four too many. Four is also a lot, not a little Take any other ethnic people group migrating to or within Europe you would likely not have as many. And remember this is an active threat. If an Irish team gets into Europe and fans come to the match it is not unlikely that someone in the crowd had connections to the sectarisnism in the Troubles, but they aren't likely active and aren't a threat to Germany anyway. I doubt they would need special attention, more then football fan normally get.
2. Approximately one in a quarter of a million refugees is a terrorist who has known to have already committed an attack. How many more are committed terrorists yet to have done so? We don't have a figure for that, and I suspect we would be alarmed if we had. How many trained sleepers. Actioned terrorists are a relatively small percentage of the whole. Most of those people will be in fact deserters from ISIS or similar causes, Terrorism 101 teaches you to send terrorists with clean hands into the target country, as they are less likely to be spotted . You have to know of them from their sympathies and their training not their activities.
Then you have on top of this a large number of sympathisers who have done nothing wrong yet, but have leanings towards ISIS and may be persuaded to sign up when in Europe.
3. The fact that we know know there were four means that the security services were right to investigate. They found four on the first pass through the data/ How many have they missed? Do they need another look? Also you have to look at groups of people if refugee A B and C come to Munchen and settle in together nothing happens, but when their friend D arrives they all get back into bad habits.
You don't need many instigators to radicalise an inherently part radicalised community. So its not just ne pass through the data. I will admit that now they have documentation this will be easier.
4. The fact that we know there were four means that the whole 1.1 million needed to be sifted, largely they arrived without documentation and without dossiers from native security services assessing their threat, which a migrant from within the EU will have. You will need to assemble a life history of each and every one to find those four. If the number was more scary, like a hundred known terrorists the wokload would still be essentially the same, though more double checking and deeper cross-referencing will be needed. Its an enormous amount of work and would be very time consuming personnel consuming and distracting for those who need to commit their time to protecting Germany from terror.
And in the 70's and 80's we had left wing socialist violence in Europe, certainly a side effect of large non-integrated socialist cultures in Europe The leading cause for homegrown radicalization is the inability and difficulty that second or third generation immigrants have in functioning in society, there are still issues of racism towards employment and less viable chances overall in life. These people radicalize cause they see it as there only way out and are in one way or another desperate, not because they are not integrated. Jihadism is just another side effect of a large political stream of thought such as socialism or nationalism. We have to combat it, but the way isn't to treat all Muslims as fifth columnists.
IDK why you think I'm wrong as the evidence so far is stacked against you.
1. Four is too many. Four is also smaller than the amount of murderers nationals bring forth that is too many. Again you can provide me the numbers if it is too high amongst that section of the population right? Demonstrate that the refugees are out of proportion. Going of homicide statistics proves you wrong though. And really we shouldn't compare the Irish from the troubles to a war zone with daily airstrikes, poison gas attacks and years of siege, one is more likely to bring out a higher number of psychological issues than the other.
2. In two years its been four people! Meanwhile almost 1600 Germans have murdered someone else. The better have a whole army biding their time to make up for their efforts so far. And we have a good idea how many are committed terrorists, just look at the nationals list, Germany had several hundred nationals going abroad to fight who are now returning. Your terrorism 101 is also a tad outdated. The most successful terrorist attacks have all been committed by trained terrorists. So far you are just speculating about numbers that isn't in any way supported by the evidence. When will we see this massive increase in attacks? If it is as easy as stealing a truck, why isn't this a weekly occurrence?
3. Of course it means they were right to investigate, it's what they exist for. But based of those statistics either they are doing a good job or there just aren't that many. Of course this could change later with radicalization, but that is an argument to help them to the best of our abilities, to make sure they don't have a need to fall back into bad habits.
4. The fact that 800 Germans get murdered by fellow Germans each year means we should divert all our efforts from refugees to the native population. I mean 800! What is 4 compared to that? Lets not pretend four is somehow a big number, each one is one too many sure. But there is just a limit to prevention and we don't know when that limit has been reached. Eventually the amount of money we throw at a problem will be inconsistent with the size of the problem.
Security agencies certainly don't have an endless budget. Yet even in countries with significantly larger and well developed agencies such as the U.S. you still have attacks from time to time, it is impossible to stop each and every one of them.
No you cant stop them all, but you can try and in doing so stop most. This was why the IRA found it very difficult to operate in the latter half of the Troubles. It wasn't for lack of funding or commitment.
You don't see much about the successes:
Let me remind you that neither France or the U.S. has masses of refugees come in as a consequence of the refugee crisis. You can try to handwave this away as complacency, but it is a curious occurrence is it not?
French complacency is a separate issue. Its a problem with the French police at just about any time. Getting international cooperation from the French police and not just from the UK (though there might be special love there) is a noted problem. They are known to be laid back, they are known to drop the ball. France is known as an easy target, it has that rep. That rep extends to the terror networks. Terrorists think, right or wrong, that is is extremely hard to enter Israel undetected, they fear the Israeli security services. That know the Uk is easy to enter and its politics are a soft touch, but they also believe in the rep of the UK security services and expect to be caught unless they act very carefully. The NSA and FBI have similar reps. France has a rep of being sleepy and easy to attack, so they get targeted.
If both those countries drop the ball once in a while, why does it have to be refugees for Germany? Why can't Germany just drop the ball, as it is starting to look like. Yet even Isreal, with its massive investment had great trouble with the second Intifada or just last year with loners stabbing or running over people. There is a limit to what you can prevent. Maybe the four in Germany just prevent that limit to an extent.
Again, on the contrary, politicians and parties such as those of Wilders in my country or the AfD in Germany would like us to believe that refugees are dangerous murderers, or as you say hiding them.
No. Even Wilders doenst say that, neither does the AfD. They highlight Islamic refugees. That is the first distinction.
Second there is a case to answer for and many people in Europe are waking up to it. Women know that lonely walks in dark woods are not safe, but now have to add town squares and festivals as rape threat zones, entirely due to mass immigration. That is the hard reality, and one progressives repeatedly gloss over or try to dismiss with false statistics.
Yes four in a million actively known prior terrorists appears to be a little, but its a lot. Yes immigrant crime appears to be a little compared to national reported crime statistics, but it shows an alarming rise. Also like in Sweden a lot of these crimes are being deliberately ignored or the attackers ethnicity glossed over to maintain the rosy statistics that all is well.
Wilders et al have a point, but defending that point is not my intention here. My main problem with those who are actively complaining about Islamic extremism and lack of cultural integration is that it has been left to the alt-right to make comment as mainstream politicians refused to do so.
The UK had that problem, thankfully the word is had. New Labour allowed the Islamification of Birmingham primary schools and rape gangs on Rotherham because they didn't want to upset the unity zeitgeist. Cameron had the balls to admit there was a problem, yes parts of the Islamic minority in the UK had been getting away with horrendous abuses, it wasn't an alt-right scare story, and he was going to take action on it. Cameron moved very swiftly on the radicalised schools in 2010 shortly after he took power. He also dealt with the rape gangs in Rotherham. The Tories have since had problems because the full story is a powder keg even they had had to keep the lid on - Notably that to keep up the national rhetroic of community cohesion the parents of girls who were abducted had been censured by the police for being racist for complaining about their childrens rapes. One horrible case of a father who has arrested for a breach of the peace because he wanted to rescue his daughter from a house where she was being raped by a gang of Moslem men. Reportedly the police still did nothing to help the child. The head of the public inquiry into this mess have been changed several times, and I think the government is trying to find a way to wind it up because while the Tories are willing to stop the abuse, unlike Labour, they are not willing to let the public know how bad it had got because it would provide ammunition to anti-Islamic groups.
At least the rapists were put on trial quietly and are in prison now with long sentences, and the Islamic local community knows that their access to R&R at the expense of British children has been removed.
Crap like that is what a society must do if it want to maintain the illusion that all is well and mas Islamic non-integration is not a problem. If you don't like the AfD then mainstream not alt-right polticians need to step up admit that there is a case to answer for and take responsibility. German women are not meat puppets, or at least shouldn't be. And no its not a 'tiny minority' of refugees from Islamic cultures who think they are, its a belief shared by lots of people which is why such attacks are often by large gangs.
The AfD blamed this attack on Merkel for letting the refugees in. If this isn't a clear cut case for AfD thinks refugees=terrorists=dead Germans=blame Merkel for refugees I don't know what is. Blaming just the Muslims isn't any better, it just makes you more racist, the ones most open to radicalization are some of the most secularized Muslims.
Again with these rumours, I qoute:
Recent numbers from Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Agency (BKA) suggest that the influx of refugees into the country this fall had a low impact on crime numbers relative to the natural uptick that would happen with any population increase: Although the number of refugees in the country increased by 440 percent between 2014 and 2015, the number of crimes committed by refugees only increased by 79 percent. (The number of crimes against refugees increased as well.) Furthermore, according to Deutsche Welle’s analysis of the report, the number of offenses increased in the first half of 2015 but “stagnated” in the second half, precisely when most of the refugees were arriving and the rumor mill switched into overdrive. And although sexual offenses account for over 25 percent of the rumors on the Hoaxmap, the BKA data showed that only 1 percent of refugee-related crimes fell into the sexual offense category.
Only 1% of refugee crimes, no crimes committed by refugees are higher relatively to the German population. Give me your hard facts, here is my police report, I sure hope you have a good one, damn those progressives and their false police statistics! And before you say 'oh but its just reported less', so is that of the native population I say in advance, until you can prove otherwise us progressives are going to sit in this corner on these hard 'false' facts.
The rest of it is basically working on integration. European countries have certainly dropped the ball on that one with their live and let live attitude. We need more government programs to help these people educate themselves, learn the language and integrate. It is a two way street and both sides have done less than they are supposed to. I mean here we make immigrants pay to learn Dutch. That's insane, these people have very little money as its is and now we want them to pay to learn Dutch!
Besides the jobs will come. In the future Germany will need these kinds of people. If you think German nationals get drowned out now, in 2050 the population is projected to decline by 20 million to 60 million. Demographically Muslims already there will take up a bigger part without refugees. You will need these people to prevent the rapid aging that will happen soon in Europe.
The AfD, Front National and Wilders all lie based on false statistics. These people don't have the answers, they are just the alt-right or breitbart of political parties. We tried having Wilders involved in government and he knew gak all, these are not coherent parties, they are foreigners bad! Ethnic (christian) nationals gud!
I think Peregrine is helping out this part nicely.
Statistics have to be shown to combat false perceptions of insecurity. Of course immigration and refugee policy should be a separate discussion, but each and every time people want to link immigration or refugees to terrorism out come the statistics to prove those people wrong.
Actually your statisitcs only appear t prove them wrong. They prove them right. Four detected known ex-terrorists in an influx of a million recent refugees is quite a bit, it is indicative that ISIS have tried to infiltrate. You have your iceberg dead ahead. How much of it dont you see.
Its a bit like spinning this:
"Good news patient we have looked at your blood sample and only found four blood cells showing signs of HIV."
What you are missing is that unlike previous influxes of immigration it is on the terms of the immigrant. Germany has welcomed Moslem migrants for generations and while they have had some problems this is normal in any multi-cultural society. But the nation was still predominantly German. Suddenly refugees means a whole community imported wholecloth, which means it comes with its own societal values attached. To make matters worse due to the progressives an their deep need for head in sand denial about the problems of integrating a culture which views women as inferior, infidel as infidel and considers rape just a fact of life in a male dominated world.
So you have a culture which radical islamics have contempt for and see as weak, which encourages them. And you give them good reason to come to that assessment. Radical clerics believe not unrealistically that they can dominate Europe, they are strong in their beliefs European culture is weak on ours and they see the frequent demonstration of that as blood in the water.
I think they are wrong, but not due to progressives but because of the backlash which is inevitable when the concerns become mainstream and can no longer be written off as alt-right scares. The mainstream right can then deal with the issues with public blessing and the progressive left will have to shut up for once, and they will because much of the anger will be directed at them and the public base of support for progressives will evaporate. It need not end up in an alt-right hell, it might yet end up in a massive showdown between radical Islam and the European majority though, and the long it is left before leaders step up the worse and bloodier it will be.
Its a lose lose, but it need not have happened if progressives had not got in the way and insisted that we live in a multi-culutral utopia spoiled by the alt-right and a tiny handful of religous extremists.
Anyway what has actually changed is that you have whole communities imported, Which means you don have the old trickle of immigrants, mostly from Turkey, who get jobs in the lucrative German building trade. You have whole columns of refugees arriving with no jobs for them. They are also settled as whole communities, and when I mean that I don't necessarily mean in the intigrated sense. The only ones who will have integration are those who are extended families and those who have common cause.
Again with the empty rhetoric. Give me something to work on, evidence the Iceberg is covered in refugee infiltrators. Non of the facts are on your side.
You're spinning it a bit like this. 800 Germans have HIV, but these 4 refugees have it too, better deport them all because the rest of them might have it too!
I feel like were just repeating the last point so my responses have all been laid out there.
If the last few years have shown us anything, it is better to be afraid of your neighbour than the Syrian in the detention center.
So much wrong with this statement.
No. First its unlikely your neighbour if taken from the German population as a whole excepting only Syrian refugees is a problem. skewed statistics are skewed. Germany is one of the safer places to live in Europe, but it is getting worse, and notably some types of offense,like rape are getting more prevalent and this is being connected to immigration due to witness reports.
Second it also it takes to time settle in and get some terror done. There is a good reason you see people long staying in Europe committing attacks, they have got settled and built a web of contacts and a powerbase. Those Tunisians had settled in.
Third many of the Syrian refugees are in camps at the moment, that is a bad time to kick off, they are well monitored.
Fourth they are being processed and vetted, so the radicals amongst them have good reason to be quiet right now.
Even so they day after the Berlin attack an airport now being used to house Syrian refugees was raided by armed police in connexion to the attack. Even if it is just because of sympathisers.
Yes the threat is there, its a big threat and yet it will be statistically low on activity right now for reasons unrelated to it being a threat.
What you need to realise is that refugees in camps who are bored unemployed, distrusted and because of the rape gang culture which has inflamed Germans no longer welcome; these people are a hotbed for recruitment. furthermore they came from Syria, they arent naive converts who dont know what killing is like, many wll have seen it first hand, many many even have themselves killed for one reason or another. The major test is already done, these are life hardened people, and prime recruits for a radicalisation that is already rooted in them.
If you were an ISIS leader how would you use that resource, kick off in camps and get exposed, or quietly recruit build a web of radicals and contacts and then cause some real mess once your minions are wandering around Europe.
Again you have nothing to back up your claims. Refugee crime rate is not even relatively higher than that of the native population. How are statistics skewed, we have it on record that there is no increase in reports, you're just grasping at straws saying but they could be, but then so could those of the native pop. You mean time to settle in as in second and third generation? If so why refuse all refugees? Because 0.01% of their children might one day turn evil? We should let 1.1 mil people rot because of that chance?? We have had refugees from the Middle-East and Jihadism since the 70's yet it has never been an enormous problem, what makes people believe its going to be one now?
Again, all rhetoric, nothing to back it up with. Police are following leads on one refugee suspect, not shaking down all refugees.
Refugees as a whole don't seem to hide any more murderers than the native population, indeed looking at France or the U.S. in recent years its very much the opposite.
Take the Liquid Bomb plot, they were all Uk citizens, and most were British born. They didn't consider themselves British in any way except legal rights, the entire community identifies themselves as Pakistani first by and large and only a portion consider themselves British and the radicalised seldom do except to blend in. The essential dynamic of the refugee/immigrant is still there due to non-integration. The delimiter tends to be sectarian, most Indian born or Indian ancestry UK citizens consider themselves British, even though any also consider themselves Indian.
'Refugees' per se are not the problem, as 'refugees' can come from anywhere. For example the UK has Brexit refugees right now, people entering the UK to be on this side when the break happens, and likewise there are Brexit refugees in Europe from the UK who consider themselves more European than British and consider the best time to move is now.
The difference is that most refugee patterns are not a problem and never were. The UK and France has large communities of African refugees and immigrants, and most consider themselves British or French, especially by the second generation, and very often with the first. Radicalised refugees are a problem, and they remain a problem long after they are no longer technically refugees. The Tunisian terrorists who caused the problems in France this year were technically French terrorists, most had French passports and had lived in France a long time. They were still identified and self identified as Tunisians, and had no intention of integrating as Frenchmen. This problem can last generations through non integration. Now some will be exceptions to the rule and because the numbers of known major attackers is still low we can see a wide variety of background, but there will be a commonality of what is behind them.
It is not surprising in the least that after the Berlin attack the Syrian refugee centre was raised even though the refugees are still locked inside for processing and not all have the liberty to move within Germany at will. They are tomorrows problem, even though they aren't driving lorries into people today doesn't mean there is no threat.
It does sectarian for one reason, it's just to outlet for all the problems they encounter, their justification, most of these young men weren't strict Muslims (drinking, sex, eating pork) to begin with but Radical Islam is their outlet for frustration just like communism used to be. In the Netherlands in the 70's and 80's we had Indonesians from our former colony commting terror attacks to protest there treatment, they were in majority christian. It is almost like colonizing someone, then having a massive transplantation of an entirely different cultural and ethnic group has some effect if not managed properly. All European nations are guilty of doing less than they should have done to integrate these people, and of course some of the blame should rest on those that are unwilling as well. Yet the amount that goes on and commits these kind of attacks is tiny and not in any way representative of these communities. We have blown this issue out of proportion because it seems very scary to us that we can just be killed by a random angry person. Yet the chance of dying in a car accident is much higher but it doesn't make people less hesitant to drive a car. Why should we let 1.1 million people suffer and possibly die to save 14? Yes 14 is a tragic number but so is 3400 traffic deaths. Were pretending this is some massive problem just biding its time and were all going Admiral Ackbar. Again, statistics show that, no Ackbar, its not a trap, that really is just a moon and not deathstar 2.0.
Edit: Just to comment on your CCTV and video post. Germany is very opposed to those kinds of surveillance due to its history, so they have very little CCTV to go off, this is why they arrested the Pakistani, because they got his description from a witness instead of any video evidence.
This is true, but there is more CCTV than you might think. Shop CCTV can see a lot more than what is in the ship if the windows are not shuttered, shop CCTV doesnt have the same stigma as public cameras, and German cities normally don't employ heavy shutters.
Germans also comply with the police and as a society are very precise, more so than most people groups. The police asked for mobile phone footage, selfies etc, and Berliners have responded with the timeliness and unity we see from Germans and makes them a strong people. Ask for help from the US and British public ad you might get it, might not. The Germans will cooperate en masse, its in their nature and a private of what happened will actually be easier to build from witnesses than our own police might find.
Germany doesn't need the surveillance culture the UK has, community is strong there. The Uk used to have that, but its gone now, and had to be replaced electronically.
Sure, but I was just mentioning that they did not seem to have a good video of the attacker this time as they arrested the Pakistani first and only almost two days later figured out that it might have been someone else. That's the point I was referring to in this case, apologies if that was unclear.
Edit 2: The new suspect was apparently already known to intelligence agencies as having contacts with radicalized Muslims and trying to by a firearm from a police informant. Can we put this one on complacency too if it turn outs to be him, just like France?
Not really. The Germans are clearly on the case but Germany let in vast numbers of Syrian refugees and others. Perhaps the undercover intelligence officer was seeing so much his superiors didn't want to expose him for just this one fairly minor bust. Evidently they weren't being complacent, complacency would come if any other intelligence agency had forwarded specific intel and it had been ignored.
You cant watch suspects 24/7. Watch the video given it shows just how many spooks is needed to trail one suspect, its a lot of people.
In this case he left his ID in the truck (apparently). Further information we have gotten is that he looked and inquired into ways to make explosives and sought out IS online. That combined with the firearm sure makes it seem like the intelligence agencies dropped the ball. To make it even worse, he was already supposed to have been deported back to Tunisia but they were unable to. So here we have a man who was clearly looking at a way to attack Germans and acting on this in front of the police, that would assuredly be deported back to Tunisia, perhaps making him even more desperate or rushed to commit this attack, yet he was still walking around as a free man. If that isn't a whole heap of ineptitude and complacency I don't know what is!
chochky wrote: If someone immigrates to a country, it is their responsibility to integrate into that nation’s society.
Define "integrate". And do so in a way that can be used to write a law for who is allowed to stay. Make sure your definition is completely objective and unambiguous so that it can be applied without any personal bias by the person making the decision. And make sure it is a test that can be applied to a person already living in the country, since a mere promise of "sure, I'll integrate" on entering means nothing. Once you have failed to do this you can take back everything you said.
Just to jump in with Peregrine. This is laughably easy. Just tell a refugee who has no money, job, education applicable to your country, connections or language skill to 'educate and integrate yo self'. It is the nation who should ensure these people get the opportunity and the support to do so. If you offer all the help to the best of your nation's ability and they say no, sure maybe they can't stay, but culture or religion shouldn't be one of the reasons to say no. The luck of the drawer on who's V we fall out off sure makes it easy to judge those who fell out of a much less fortunate one.
chochky wrote: As someone living in a western nation, I do not want my society’s values of secularism, gender equality and democracy to be eroded.
Then defend them by persuading people that you are right, electing people who will protect the relevant legal rights, etc. Ensure that things like separation of church and state are in your constitution (or whatever equivalent you have), and any laws conflicting with those principles can be struck down. Your value of "democracy" is worthless if includes the state deciding what is an acceptable belief to hold or express, and removing anyone who doesn't agree. That isn't democracy, it's tyranny.
And stop fear-mongering about immigrants, giving idiotic political parties a voice and polarizing these people. People sure love to adopt the values of the people that demonize them and want to deport them all once their in power. Having 1/3rd of your native population supporting those parties will do nothing for those values as its either: they are Muslims (not a very secular argument), gender equality (lets make up facts of how many immigrants rape women that is totally untrue!) and democracy (giving rise to some of the most right wing demagogy we have seen in decades). I fear more for my own native population of which 1/3rd feels the need to vote on Wilders (who threatens 2/3 of your values) than all those Muslims and immigrants who vote for the centrist social party. Front National or the AfD aren't that different in that regard. Lets not blow this problem out of proportion lest it become the abyss gazing back into you. I'll let you in on a little secret. We have a party in parliament that until a year ago didn't allow women in the party and is pro kitchen type stuff, with a great big helping of a particular religious book inspiring their program. I'll let you in on another one, Muslims don't have a party like that in our parliament.
chochky wrote: I can’t understand why someone living in the west (I assume you are living in USA), and who appears educated would make the statement that you did.
Because I value the concept of individual rights and I don't like the idea of the state getting the right to decide if someone has "integrated" sufficiently or banning people from the country based on their political beliefs. Unlike you I understand how such a law would be incredibly easy to abuse, and be little more than turning the majority's biases into law.
Exalted.
Edit: I feel the need to put this at the end of my post, for those who don't want to read it, but it is very important to note this part.
Recent numbers from Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Agency (BKA) suggest that the influx of refugees into the country this fall had a low impact on crime numbers relative to the natural uptick that would happen with any population increase: Although the number of refugees in the country increased by 440 percent between 2014 and 2015, the number of crimes committed by refugees only increased by 79 percent. (The number of crimes against refugees increased as well.) Furthermore, according to Deutsche Welle’s analysis of the report, the number of offenses increased in the first half of 2015 but “stagnated” in the second half, precisely when most of the refugees were arriving and the rumor mill switched into overdrive. And although sexual offenses account for over 25 percent of the rumors on the Hoaxmap, the BKA data showed that only 1 percent of refugee-related crimes fell into the sexual offense category.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/12/22 11:15:35
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
2016/12/22 11:15:11
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
Neither do I as it completely fails to take into account the huge cultural significance that the Crusades had in the Islamic world.
It completely does take into account that the crusades happened and had a significant impact on the Islamic world, no one argued against this in the first place so its strange you would claim this indisputable fact is being ignored.
The part you don't like is that it also takes into account the cultural impact on Europe from aggressive middle eastern led (and later islamic led) invasions, which were in fact, longer lasting, and farther reaching in their conquest then the crusades by a large margin. Not to mention the "cultural impact" of having ME culture try to wipe various European cultures off the map for the last 2500 years or so.
Or are you really going to argue that the war of Marathon, the Ionian wars ,the war of Thermopylae, all the way up to the moors conquering Spain, or the ottoman empire's attempted expansion into Europe are not acts of "cultural significance" in Europe that might have provoked a response in kind?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/12/22 11:21:24
2016/12/22 11:21:15
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
Neither do I as it completely fails to take into account the huge cultural significance that the Crusades had in the Islamic world.
It completely does take into account that the crusades happened and had a significant impact on the Islamic world.
The part you don't like is that it also takes into account the cultural impact on Europe from aggressive middle eastern led (and later islamic led) invasions, which were in fact, longer lasting, and farther reaching in their conquest then the crusades by a large margin. Not to mention the "cultural impact" of having ME culture try to wipe various European cultures off the map for the last 2500 years or so.
Or are you really going to argue that the war of Marathon, the Ionian wars ,the war of Thermopylae, all the way up to the moors conquering Spain are not acts of "cultural significance" in Europe that might have provoked a response in kind?
Lets not pretend both sides don't like a good war or genocide once in a while. All nations and cultures have had their shameful moments.
But just for fun. Lydian attack on the Persians. Spartans in Asia Minor, Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Reconquista. What are we playing, arbitrary geographical lines?
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
2016/12/22 11:28:52
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
Neither do I as it completely fails to take into account the huge cultural significance that the Crusades had in the Islamic world.
It completely does take into account that the crusades happened and had a significant impact on the Islamic world.
The part you don't like is that it also takes into account the cultural impact on Europe from aggressive middle eastern led (and later islamic led) invasions, which were in fact, longer lasting, and farther reaching in their conquest then the crusades by a large margin. Not to mention the "cultural impact" of having ME culture try to wipe various European cultures off the map for the last 2500 years or so.
Or are you really going to argue that the war of Marathon, the Ionian wars ,the war of Thermopylae, all the way up to the moors conquering Spain are not acts of "cultural significance" in Europe that might have provoked a response in kind?
Lets not pretend both sides don't like a good war or genocide once in a while. All nations and cultures have had their shameful moments.
But just for fun. Lydian attack on the Persians. Spartans in Asia Minor, Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Reconquista. What are we playing, arbitrary geographical lines?
Why on Earth would you accuse me of pretending otherwise?
I never alluded otherwise or pretended otherwise, I flat out said it was both sides fault earlier "Its almost as if this planets history is one of multiple civilizations clashing, doing horrible things to one another in the process, waxing and waning in power over one another, where the spoils go to the victor for as long as they can hold it. "
2016/12/22 11:32:57
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I love how rape apparently wasn't a problem before the refugee crisis. Honestly, go to any moderately popular club on a Friday night and it'd be easy to find people who don't know how to behave towards other human beings.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
2016/12/22 11:41:24
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
Neither do I as it completely fails to take into account the huge cultural significance that the Crusades had in the Islamic world.
It completely does take into account that the crusades happened and had a significant impact on the Islamic world.
The part you don't like is that it also takes into account the cultural impact on Europe from aggressive middle eastern led (and later islamic led) invasions, which were in fact, longer lasting, and farther reaching in their conquest then the crusades by a large margin. Not to mention the "cultural impact" of having ME culture try to wipe various European cultures off the map for the last 2500 years or so.
Or are you really going to argue that the war of Marathon, the Ionian wars ,the war of Thermopylae, all the way up to the moors conquering Spain are not acts of "cultural significance" in Europe that might have provoked a response in kind?
Lets not pretend both sides don't like a good war or genocide once in a while. All nations and cultures have had their shameful moments.
But just for fun. Lydian attack on the Persians. Spartans in Asia Minor, Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Reconquista. What are we playing, arbitrary geographical lines?
Why on Earth would you accuse me of pretending otherwise?
I never alluded otherwise or pretended otherwise, I flat out said it was both sides fault earlier "Its almost as if this planets history is one of multiple civilizations clashing, doing horrible things to one another in the process, waxing and waning in power over one another, where the spoils go to the victor for as long as they can hold it. "
Sorry if you thought it was directed at you personally, it was adressed at the tangent as a whole in this topic.
Its all about politics of empire and power. If they wouldn't use religion they would use nationalism, if they wouldn't use nationalism it would be communism etc etc. Religion is a tool, not the reason.
The Crusades were a bit of a shock, because Europeans sailed or walked half way around the world just to occupy some third rate piece of real estate in the middle of a desert. Its more understandable if its your neighbour, but the guy you havent ever met before comes off as a tad unprovoked. We in Western Europe mostly forgot about the Middle Eastern attempt as we have had the upper hand for the best part of 500 years. But you can see in countries like Russia-Germany and Greece-Turkey that past conflicts still rage. Yet we have been very active over there. Playing the blame game doesn't go anywhere though, as major Jihadist groups have been a response to our presence in the region, however unjustified founding a jihadist group might seem it makes perfect sense to those who want power.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlmightyWalrus wrote: I love how rape apparently wasn't a problem before the refugee crisis. Honestly, go to any moderately popular club on a Friday night and it'd be easy to find people who don't know how to behave towards other human beings.
Well those darn refugees made us talk about it. I remember the quiet times before all the refugees when we just didn't talk about rape. Weren't those the days (que nostalgic sigh)...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/12/22 11:43:06
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
2016/12/22 12:01:39
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers - possible terror attack
Unacceptable. You can't force people to "integrate", and you can't force people to "abide by our values" outside of following all relevant laws. This is a blatant attack on individual freedoms, and there is absolutely no way you would tolerate it if someone else decided that your culture was the one that had to be "integrated" and changed to satisfy others.
I’m sorry, but this is totally unacceptable. If someone immigrates to a country, it is their responsibility to integrate into that nation’s society. This is 100% non-negotiable. A society has absolutely no responsibility to accept just anyone and everyone who wants to enter. This is how a society stays alive and prevents parallel societies from forming, and social instability that would develop as a result. As someone living in a western nation, I do not want my society’s values of secularism, gender equality and democracy to be eroded. And yes, if I were to move to a different country, I would do my best to integrate into their culture, out of respect if nothing else. Immigration without assimilation is just an invasion. The fate of the Native Americans is a good example of immigration without careful integration.
Also I don’t mean to be rude, but I genuinely find your stance on this to be disturbing. I can’t understand why someone living in the west (I assume you are living in USA), and who appears educated would make the statement that you did. This may be an area where American and European culture differs.
People don't integrate in reality. They bring their culture with them-for good and bad. That culture becomes part of the dominant culture or it remains a substrata of it.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2016/12/22 12:03:36
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
easysauce wrote: so its strange you would claim this indisputable fact is being ignored.
Future War Cultist wrote: I said that this explanation has two major flaws; one, it overlooks the fact that muslims had been attacking Christians centuries before the crusades (which if anything were a Christian counterattack to take back the lands they'd lost). And two, considering how long ago the crusades were, at what point do you say "look, get over yourself and just let it go"?
He did.
Given just how often the Crusades are referenced by modern Jihadiis its just daft to pretend that the crusades aren't a significant factor in their world view which does indeed mean that modern Islamic violence could be seen as a response to the Crusades, although this is obviously only a small part in a much greater whole.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/12/22 12:05:45
Then defend them by persuading people that you are right, electing people who will protect the relevant legal rights, etc.
Or, far more easily, don't let them in the first place. Problem solved.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2016/12/22 12:24:34
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
I'm not pretending that the crusades aren't significant to them because obviously they are. What I'm saying is, they need to let it go, which of course they never will.
I guess I should have explained it better. The way my lecturer was talking about it suggested that she believed that jihadists had a good raison d'etre. "We" hurt their ancestors close to a thousand years ago for no apparent reason, so to this day they're all riled up against us and want to avenge them. Maybe if we bend over backwards to apologise to them they'd cease killing us (fat chance). Personally I don't go in for that sins of the father bs, never mind the sins of the great x 30 grand father.
But she forgot to tell us the full story, about how they had been attacking the west long before the crusades, and how they had conquered those lands in the first place. So they weren't quite the innocent victims of historical atrocities that she was making them out to be. And again, it was almost a thousand years ago. Statute of Limitations are usually around thirty years.
If I had to hazard a guess, I think that my lecturer was just looking for any excuse to blame the west for everything. A very lazy attitude for a professional academic to take.
@ Frazzled
That's some good common sense right here.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/12/22 12:35:32
2016/12/22 12:35:41
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
The thing is, quite often we get to hear that the authorities had knowledge of these dangerous persons that later on committed these attacks...quite often they (the later terrorists) showed allegiance to Isis or whatever...what I think we need is a law that acts on the basis of guilty by association....if you post on fb or wherever what good chaps do heinous crimes in Arabia...then grab them by the collar and put them in a dark hole...
But instead we monitor these guys for months to no avail as they somehow smell the case against them and lay low for a while...then they act...it happened like that way too often...sometimes it really should be enough to imprison a guy for having evil thoughts...
A solution to not removing failed asylum seekers has to be found. The suspect had failed his application, but was still in Europe. Apparently if you fail asylum application but then don't produce papers (likely because having you've destoyed them and lie about your identity to prevent deportation), you get to stay because they don't know where to deport you to.
It sounds like quite a large portion of failed applicants aren't deported, but given that governments want to fudge these number to lower them and right wing paper want to make the most alarmist claims they can, the exact numbers aren't clear, but a few news sites are saying that as many as 50% of failed applicants in Germany don't leave. According to a BBC article the EU as a whole only sent back only 38% of failed applicants in 2013. Entering Europe illegally pays off, because they clearly cannot manage the situation and cannot check or remove false claimants, and that will be exploited by those wanting to commit crime and terrorism.
2016/12/22 12:51:32
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
This is just the issue, where do you send the people that no country wants to take. In this case Tunisia wasn't willing to take him back and as they had no evidence they could not force him to go there. Were not really allowed to put them on a boat and cut them loose. Maybe people would be ok with that happening to this guy, but what about an innocent person?
And not taking in refugees means they either die or suffer immensely, are we really advocating that?
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
2016/12/22 12:58:39
Subject: Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
And not taking in refugees means they either die or suffer immensely, are we really advocating that?
Yes, "let them drown in the Aegean" actually popped up a while back.
I saw that gem pass by before. This year in general has been classy as feth for DakkaDakka
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
2016/12/22 17:29:00
Subject: Re:Berlin lorry ploughs into Christmas shoppers in terror attack
CptJake wrote: Out of curiosity, what money has the US gained from our recent military efforts? The only personal gain I can think of is combat experience.
Okay, so, the largest industry in the US (and a lot of other western countries) is finance and insurance. There are literally trillions of dollars riding on things like oil, construction, defence contracts, stocks, shares, securities, government bonds, as well as the outcome of geopolitical events, which might influence these markets, and a thousand others.
Every time there is an election, or a disaster, or an attack, or a war... there are teams of analysts and traders at places like Goldman Sachs, tuned in, looking for a way to profit out of it. And they're not just idly spit-balling ideas. They're on the phone with politicians, lobbyists, media corporations, business leaders etc... making damn sure that things break in their favour, and they can throw hundreds of millions of dollars at it, because they'll make billions in return. Make no mistake, no matter who loses, Wall Street always wins: they control the game.
They will happily steer that ship wherever the most profits are, and it doesn't bother them at all to watch markets collapse, jobs lost, nation states fail, or war break out. In fact they love that kind of stuff, it's great for business.
Go and read about Goldman Sachs involvement in the Greek debt crisis, they practically engineered the whole thing. They both contributed to, and profited from the credit crunch, betting against the market, and their own clients (people lost their pension funds). Then maybe take a look at the people Trump is padding his cabinet with, take a look at who Bush, Clinton and every president in modern history took his advice from, to see how deep this incestuous and corrupt relationship goes.
The "America" you like to think you live in, might not have profited out of recent military action. Probably, nobody you know profited. But the people at the top pulling the strings, they all profited, I guarantee it.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/12/22 17:32:25
The leading cause for homegrown radicalization is the inability and difficulty that second or third generation immigrants have in functioning in society, there are still issues of racism towards employment and less viable chances overall in life. These people radicalize cause they see it as there only way out and are in one way or another desperate, not because they are not integrated. Jihadism is just another side effect of a large political stream of thought such as socialism or nationalism. We have to combat it, but the way isn't to treat all Muslims as fifth columnists.
1750 pts Blood Specters
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
