Merged Terror attack on German Christmas market

[Polaris]

Some more background information is being reported on the suspect.

Amri lived in Tunesia until 2011. He left, entered Italy and was housed in a refugee camp. In the camp he was involved in arson for which he served four years in prison in Italy. After that, the Italians tried to deport him to Tunesia, but Tunesian authorities apparently refused to take him back. Meanwhile, he had also been sentenced to 5 years for robbery in Tunesia in his absence. A little more than a year ago he moved to Germany.

When I saw that it was Daily Mail combined with "Tataouine" I thought that was a joke news piece.

Guy gets let into one country and starts a fire. Gets let into another country and drives over people with a truck. If he survives his wounds, the ungrateful POS should be left in the ocean with no sign of land. He doesn't deserve to be in any country.

Was he not born in Tunisia? I would think they'd kind of have to take him back if he was their citizen.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

. But if we are to take Indonesia as the standard.... woe is us.

No we aren't.

But I think it's a useful reminder that more than half of Muslims are Indonesian. And half are also women (give or take) Because the typical Muslim in the mind of most people who comment are bearded Middle Eastern men.

On a broader note I will agree that most countries that are dominated by one specific ideology or way of thinking tend to oppress the others. And that I can't agree with.

But we should remember that the Chinese minority in Indonesia is the Chinese majority in China oppressing their minorities and so on.

We should aspire to be better than all of this all take each person as we find them and help those who need it.

If the perpetrator of this act has indeed been raised in a refugee camp then it reinforces my view that those places are insufficient for human flourishing.

 

[blutoski]

If the perpetrator of this act has indeed been raised in a refugee camp then it reinforces my view that those places are insufficient for human flourishing.

Yup. Distribute the refugees and treat them fairly if you want them to thrive and perhaps even integrate.

And we never learn. Roman history buffs like me are quick to point out that Rome's Goth problem is traced to their handling of the Danube refugee crisis of 376. First put them in a concentration camp, then starve them, then turn their kids into sex slaves. Gosh, why would they turn against the state?

 

[blutoski]

When I saw that it was Daily Mail combined with "Tataouine" I thought that was a joke news piece.

As it happens, it's not a coincidence. Tattoine is named after Tataouine. The Episode IV sets for the "Lars Homestead" were in Matmata, a few miles north of Tataouine.

 

[Pianoro]

Was he not born in Tunisia? I would think they'd kind of have to take him back if he was their citizen.

As per international law, of course countries have to take their citizens back. In practice however, this is so difficult that, for example, both the EU and many individual European countries have treaties with numerous countries around Europe and in other parts of the world regarding the repatriation of their citizens.

I think the issue is that the people in question often don't have any ID. At that point it becomes a matter of goodwill by their home country to provide the required documents to the current host country. It's easy to see how, for example, in this case, Tunesia would have little interest in going out of their way to take Amis back. I don't know though if this is what actually happend in this case.

 

[A'isha]

The situation with the governor of Jakarta is messy and complicated and related to a whole host of issues that encompass but also go beyond the problem of conservative Islamist groups in Indonesia.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/...lerance-now-doubt-persecution-christian-mayor

 

[McHrozni]

McHrozni:

2. Despite this blacks in America don't go on killing sprees over these grievances. Muslims do.

Take this for what it's worth, but here in S.F. we were subjected to a killing spree back in the 1970's by an offshoot of the Nation of Islam (in reality pretty far removed from Islam) that was carried out by American born blacks.

The Zebra murders:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_murders

As far as the current situation with terrorist incidents, having worked in the ME off and on the ******** committing the acts are to Islam what Westboro is to the Baptists.

The only black killing spree in revenge of treatment of blacks was done (or inspired) by an Islamic black supremacist group. Let that sink in for a moment, shall we?

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

The problem is that in the Khmer Rouge/Cambodian analogy, there is an overlap, but the two groups are drawn from a different sorting of category (national or cultural identity vs. socio-political ideology). In the Islam/Muslim example, you're trying to compare a religion to those who adhere to said religion. First off, one of those is not a grouping of people, so the concept of looking at how much overlap there is or how to make a distinction is lost, but furthermore would end up being a 'perfect overlap' anyways.

I'm using it as an example to demonstrate how saying Islam and saying all Muslims are distinct. There is some overlap, obviously, but attacking Islam does not, by itself, mean anything for any Muslim.

In the long run, you end up with a community that feels like society at large is their enemy (which fuels extremist recruitment, by the way) and has zero trust in public institutions. On the other hand you have a law enforcement agency that has been turned into 'muscle' to shake down citizens to supplement their failing budgets. So increased likelihood of an attack and institutions less likely to detect them, let alone respond to or thwart a plot.

Nobody wins. Actually, I hate to use the phrase, but this looks like a formula for 'the terrorists win.' ISIL has even spelled this out in explicit terms in their publications. Quite strange that so many people capable of influencing public policy are doing exactly what the enemy wants.

Yes. This is what has been going on, and this is why the terrorist threat has risen. The question is how do we fight it? One way we can fight it is by Muslims who genuinely believe Islam is radically different from what ISIS claims it is to make their views known widely, loudly and often. An occasional condemnation of the most severe abuses by lone clerics is a drop in the ocean, a meaningful effort would have to involve regular showings of tens of thousands of European Muslims by now, and occasional truly massive demonstrations of hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of Muslims, plus people who sympathize with them. Thousands might be enough three years ago, but now we need more than that to overcome the damage already done by terrorists and perceived (rightfully or otherwise) indifference.

Do that, and you've defeated the terrorists within a few years. There might still be an occasional attack here and there, but it will drive a wedge between extremists and moderates, not between Muslims and non-Muslims. I can see no alternative effort that could be considered acceptable and has even a minimal chance of defeating the terrorists. No one has ever come up with one, even though I've been asking.

This is why claiming "it's not Islam" and screaming "don't blame Muslims" is misguided to the point of being dangerous. It is Islam, and it is Muslims and Muslims alone who can change Islam to the point it will no longer be a danger. Shielding them from some temporary nasty glances and whanot benefits no one, least of all them. They have no motive to do what is necessary as a result, and in a slightly longer period of time, well ... we do remember what happens to hated minorities when populists who scream they're a danger to be removed come to power, don't we? We shouldn't blind ourselves, if all Muslims don't start working hard to contain the terrorists, the terrorists will win in the sense they will destroy the West due to an overreaction to Islam. The right time for that was fifteen years ago, the final call was ten years ago, and five years ago it was still reasonable to assume it could be done without exorbitant efforts. Today it's still within the limits of possibility, but it would require a herculean effort from a people who refuse to do more than occasional lip service. The energy needed at least doubles every five years, and in five to ten years it might become impossible for even this approach to work, the mixture of fear and hatred will have seeped too deep by then, and Muslims will be shut out from the civilized world, shunned, despised, and hated for at least a generation and quite possibly more, irrespective of what they do or don't do - and that's the best case scenario.

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm using it as an example to demonstrate how saying Islam and saying all Muslims are distinct.

But then go on to blame Muslims and tell Muslims they need to do something about it.

We shouldn't blind ourselves, if all Muslims don't start working hard to contain the terrorists, the terrorists will win in the sense they will destroy the West due to an overreaction to Islam.

Normal everyday Muslims are doing exactly what you ask everyday by going about their business in a normal everyday peaceful way. I'm not sure exactly what more you expect of them.

I don't remember the millions of non-Muslims marching during the 70s and 80s to oppose the terrorism being carried out in Europe in their name. You know when terrorism was at its height in Europe as opposed to today? Maybe I missed that though.

http://www.datagraver.com/thumbs/1300x1300r/2016-12/terror20161220-i2.png

Or the global protests by straight folk against the murders of LGBTI people across the world?

https://76crimes.com/100s-die-in-homophobic-anti-gay-attacks-statistics-updates/

If I assume you are not LGBTI then what are you doing about this? After all its you and people like you who have to change.

 

[McHrozni]

But then go on to blame Muslims and tell Muslims they need to do something about it.

Blame really isn't the right word. Muslims are the only ones who can do the one thing that would really make a change for the better. No one else can.

What is the logical thing to do in such a case, according to you? Well, I think pressuring the people who can make a change to make a change seems like a pretty good idea to me. Can you make a case for this being a bad course of action?

Normal everyday Muslims are doing exactly what you ask everyday by going about their business in a normal everyday peaceful way. I'm not sure exactly what more you expect of them.

I described one thing in the post directly above yours. The long paragraph, with 274 words. Will you manage?

I don't remember the millions of non-Muslims marching during the 70s and 80s to oppose the terrorism being carried out in Europe in their name. You know when terrorism was at its height in Europe as opposed to today? Maybe I missed that though.

There are so many differences between the two it boggles my mind you can bring it up. The vast majority of terrorism in that time was national in nature, the largest single contributor was Northern Ireland, where terrorist goals could be entertained with a peace process. The second largest contributor was Basque terrorism, which also ended with a peace treaty. No such equivalent exists with Islamic terrorism. Pre-1990s terrorism in Europe was eliminated through a peace process, because there were people you could talk to, who had legitimate grievances. There are no such equivalents with Muslims, so it will not work.

Or the global protests by straight folk against the murders of LGBTI people across the world?

https://76crimes.com/100s-die-in-hom...stics-updates/

If I assume you are not LGBTI then what are you doing about this? After all its you and people like you who have to change.

If you want to say that you'll have to agree with my proposal about Muslims first. Do you agree with it or do you still dispute it?
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Chose one.

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Blame really isn't the right word. Muslims are the only ones who can do the one thing that would really make a change for the better. No one else can.

What is the logical thing to do in such a case, according to you? Well, I think pressuring the people who can make a change to make a change seems like a pretty good idea to me. Can you make a case for this being a bad course of action?



I described one thing in the post directly above yours. The long paragraph, with 274 words. Will you manage?



There are so many differences between the two it boggles my mind you can bring it up. The vast majority of terrorism in that time was national in nature, the largest single contributor was Northern Ireland, where terrorist goals could be entertained with a peace process. The second largest contributor was Basque terrorism, which also ended with a peace treaty. No such equivalent exists with Islamic terrorism. Pre-1990s terrorism in Europe was eliminated through a peace process, because there were people you could talk to, who had legitimate grievances. There are no such equivalents with Muslims, so it will not work.



If you want to say that you'll have to agree with my proposal about Muslims first. Do you agree with it or do you still dispute it?
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Chose one.

McHrozni

Do you mean this kind of thing?

http://www.mintpressnews.com/media-blackout-millions-muslims-march-isis-iraq/222443/

Or this kind of thing?


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-uk-to-reject-isis-and-islamic-a7191306.html

What else are they not doing I can link to for you?

 

[McHrozni]

Do you mean this kind of thing?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-uk-to-reject-isis-and-islamic-a7191306.html

Yes, this sort of thing, but on a scale that is worth something. If you make it a worldwide thing, as this one was, you really need at least two, preferably three zeroes behind the number of attendees to suffice by now. If it was 300,000,000 Muslims marching against ISIS worldwide, I would be impressed by their efforts, and they would truly make a difference in a couple of days. 30,000,000 Muslims from worldwide would make a small but measurable dent that could be used for further work. 3,000,000 Muslims from the world over would be worthy of a mention, but too little to do much in itself. 300,000 Muslims from worldwide ... a passing note, at best.

30,000 Muslims from all over the world in UK is the best effort they show? Sick joke, nothing more. You can get more people to cheer a football game from a single city.

This might suffice (but not impress) 10 years ago and it would impress about 20 years ago, for example as a response to bombings of US embassies in Africa. Now we're talking about a whole lot larger effort to even make a slight dent in the problem. I did say the problem is increasing with time, didn't I? The larger the problem the larger the effort needed to fix it. If this were a weekly thing, on this scale, it might become worth something within a few years, but being done once? A drop in the ocean, nothing more.

Or this kind of thing?

http://www.mintpressnews.com/media-blackout-millions-muslims-march-isis-iraq/222443/

No, not this kind of thing at all.

This is a Shia march against ISIS, who considers them heretics and attacks them first and foremost. They march against the people who would kill them and their families, there is no rejection of problematic teachings of Islam at all. Opposition to ISIS is welcome, but this doesn't do anything at all to solve the problems.

Note: I swapped your links by accident, your first link is my second and vice versa.

What else are they not doing I can link to for you?

Agreeing on which Hadiths are real and which ones are fake and need to be purged from record would be a good start ... but you probably can't link that. Agreeing on a common interpretation of the Koran and other holy texts would also be a rather urgent thing to do, but I also doubt you can link to that. Agreeing on a common arbiter in theological questions of the magnitude "is peaceful coexistence with the unbelievers acceptable or not" would also be rather necessary, but you probably can't link that, either.

You know, the sort of thing other religions take for granted, but are entirely missing from Islam. Huge rallies against wackos are just something there is no excuse not to do. These other issues are immersed in difficulty. Urgent yes, necessary certainly, but also incredibly difficult to carry out. Vast rallies are downright trivial in comparison.

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Yes, this sort of thing, but on a scale that is worth something. If you make it a worldwide thing, as this one was, you really need at least two, preferably three zeroes behind the number of attendees to suffice by now. If it was 300,000,000 Muslims marching against ISIS worldwide, I would be impressed by their efforts, and they would truly make a difference in a couple of days. 30,000,000 Muslims from worldwide would make a small but measurable dent that could be used for further work. 3,000,000 Muslims from the world over would be worthy of a mention, but too little to do much in itself. 300,000 Muslims from worldwide ... a passing note, at best.

30,000 Muslims from all over the world in UK is the best effort they show? Sick joke, nothing more. You can get more people to cheer a football game from a single city.

This might suffice (but not impress) 10 years ago and it would impress about 20 years ago, for example as a response to bombings of US embassies in Africa. It would be fantastic if this was the response to Munich massacre of 1972, which is one of the most depraved moments in all Islamic terrorist history. Now we're talking about a whole lot larger effort to even make a slight dent in the problem. I did say the problem is increasing with time, didn't I? The larger the problem the larger the effort needed to fix it. If this were a weekly thing, at this scale, it might become worth something within a few years, but this? A drop in the ocean, nothing more.



No, not this kind of thing at all.

This is a Shia march against ISIS, who considers them heretics and attacks them first and foremost. They march against the people who would kill them and their families, there is no rejection of problematic teachings of Islam at all.

Note: I swapped your links by accident, your first link is my second and vice versa.

McHrozni

In other words nothing they do is enough to cleanse them of their collective guilt for things they havent done.

300000000 people might be enough for you? So just a hundred times the number that go to the hajj? It would be funny if you werent actually serious. So its just pathetic really.

What are you personally doing to play your part? Pointing the finger and pushing decent people away? Keep persecuting them till they love us enough?

 

[McHrozni]

In other words nothing they do is enough to cleanse them of their collective guilt for things they havent done.

It's kind of funny when the post you quote proves you wrong, you know?

Furthermore it's not about guilt at all. It's about making sure terrorists lose. If the response to terrorist attacks were as I described further terrorist attacks would bring non-crazy Muslims and non-Muslims together and drive a wedge between crazy Muslims and non-crazy Muslims. Right now, due in no small part to a lackluster (and sometimes outrageous) response by Muslim community at large terrorist attacks drive a wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims, as is their intent. If you have a different proposals of how to achieve that (preferably one that is easier and/or more effective) now would be the time to speak.

Or you don't actually have any proposal for that and just attack my proposals out of spite?

300,000,000 people might be enough for you? So just a hundred times the number that go to the hajj?

Yep, although that's the number of people that would make an important change from a single one-day event, that wouldn't even have to be held in one place. All over the world is fine, most participants could do it in their home towns or towns close to their home, no large migration is needed or anything. Smaller numbers done regularly can work too, as I've described, so don't pretend 300,000,000 people is some sort of minimum or anything. It's just a number I can say for sure would make an important difference by itself, in a one time event.

What are you personally doing to play your part? Pointing the finger and pushing decent people away? Keep persecuting them till they love us enough?

Telling them that whenever and wherever I can.

What is your proposal? You're all over my proposal without ever giving a rational case for it, but are never quite able to come up with a proposal of your own - other than what was already tried and failed, I guess.

McHrozni

 

[A'isha]

Searchable database of instances where Muslims have condemned wrongdoings done in the name of Islam. Inspired by this tweet.

 

[McHrozni]

Searchable database of instances where Muslims have condemned wrongdoings done in the name of Islam. Inspired by this tweet.

If the first six instances are any indication they are few and far between indeed. A condemnation of Orlando shooting is fifth on the list, making about one condemnation a month an apparent average (in a very unscientific way).

That is ... pretty horrible. One condemnation an hour of terror attacks in the West alone would be the bare minimum for this to have any value whatsoever. One attack a minute would be the bare bones if it's worldwide.

I realize it's done manually and probably not a complete list, but still - let's not kid ourselves Muslims are in the correct order of magnitude with this. Two more would be the bare minimum for this to be worthy of any attention whatsoever and three to four for it to be an effective tool against terrorism.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

Pre-1990s terrorism in Europe was eliminated through a peace process, because there were people you could talk to, who had legitimate grievances. There are no such equivalents with Muslims, so it will not work.

That's because what would be necessary would be a peace between Israel and its neighbours. But there can be no such peace, because like the Muslim extremists, Zionism also possesses an ideology that precludes such a concession, that would be existentially damaging to the Israeli state, and catastrophic for the ideology that animates it.

But we'll soon see. The present Israeli administration is committed to annexations and settlements, and the only curb on the enthusiasm of its leaders has traditionally been the disapproval of its hegemon, the USA. But now the USA has a president who approves of these excesses, and has appointed an ambassador with similar predispositions.

Can reasonable and peaceful elements in Israel prevail against this political tendency? I hope so, but I fear not. Can reasonable citizens of Muslim countries prevail against the religious madmen who are taking advantage of rightful indignation about the treatment of Arab countries by the West and Israel? I hops so, but I fear not.

In the meantime it is for the Westen countries whose innocent populations are the victims in this contest of ideologies, to treat such outrages as what they are: murderous acts whose perpetrators must be found and brought to justice. Not religious representatives, or political activists of any kind. Otherwise these criminals will seek to spread the responsibility for their crimes to involve religious or political movements who have not perpetrated them, and are not answerable for them.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It's kind of funny when the post you quote proves you wrong, you know?

Furthermore it's not about guilt at all. It's about making sure terrorists lose. If the response to terrorist attacks were as I described further terrorist attacks would bring non-crazy Muslims and non-Muslims together and drive a wedge between crazy Muslims and non-crazy Muslims. Right now, due in no small part to a lackluster (and sometimes outrageous) response by Muslim community at large terrorist attacks drive a wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims, as is their intent. If you have a different proposals of how to achieve that (preferably one that is easier and/or more effective) now would be the time to speak.

Or you don't actually have any proposal for that and just attack my proposals out of spite?



Yep, although that's the number of people that would make an important change from a single one-day event, that wouldn't even have to be held in one place. All over the world is fine, most participants could do it in their home towns or towns close to their home, no large migration is needed or anything. Smaller numbers done regularly can work too, as I've described, so don't pretend 300,000,000 people is some sort of minimum or anything. It's just a number I can say for sure would make an important difference by itself, in a one time event.



Telling them that whenever and wherever I can.

What is your proposal? You're all over my proposal without ever giving a rational case for it, but are never quite able to come up with a proposal of your own - other than what was already tried and failed, I guess.

McHrozni

When people set impossible targets for things its not evidence of their willingness to change their view its evidence of their dishonesty. You've embarassed yourself with the 300 million thing there.

Why would anyone Muslim or otherwise listen to such nonsense? Unless they are Tommy Robinson or other Self proclaimed non bigots?

 

[A'isha]

If the first six instances are any indication they are few and far between indeed. A condemnation of Orlando shooting is fifth on the list, making about one condemnation a month an apparent average (in a very unscientific way).

It's not a chronological list (that's why the condemnation you point out, by Harris Zafar, is followed by nine other condemnations of various other things from just him).

If you search the database for Orlando, for instance, you will find a whole lot of sourced condemnations of that single attack specifically (I stopped counting at 120, and hadn't reached the end of the list).

EDIT: I figured out that the search results display 30 to a page, and there are 17 pages of results for "2016 Orlando nightclub mass shooting", for a total of around 510 separate, sourced condemnations in the database for that single attack alone.

 

[Craig B]

When people set impossible targets for things its not evidence of their willingness to change their view its evidence of their dishonesty. You've embarassed yourself with the 300 million thing there.

Why would anyone Muslim or otherwise listen to such nonsense? Unless they are Tommy Robinson or other Self proclaimed non bigots?

There are several thousand Jews residing in or near this city. Unless they stop being lacklustre, get their act together and have a big demo in George Square denouncing the Torah, and the flaws in their religion, I will hold them, each and every one, personally responsible for the illegal settlements on the West Bank, and the mass expulsion of the population of annexed Golan, and usurpation of its lands.

I want to see thousands of them out, with banners, by the way. Otherwise I'm not going to take seriously any protestations of peaceable intentions made by any member of that ethnic or religious community.

Actually, no. All that would be unjust, absurd, and provocative, wouldn't it?