First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
Terror in Europe and what's (not) been done about it
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17
Yesterday, on the anniversary of the Brussels terror bombing, an attack occurred.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-photographer-idUSKBN16T1Y5
Five dead including a police officer and the suspect with 40+ injured. Suspect was known to MI5 as an extremist threat.
A few days before that in Orly, France
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-orly-airport-attack-20170320-story.html
Today in Belgium
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39369202
Today in London, probably just a scare I hope but it just shows how jumpy these attacks have made people
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/old-street-suspicious-package-evacuate-met-police-a7645981.html

In both the Westminster and Orly attacks the suspects were known to intelligence services. Why is it that these men were free to commit these acts of terror? These aren't the first known extremists to go on to commit terror attacks either.

Update: 8 arrested during overnight raids at six different locations in connection with the Westminster attack
http://abcnews.go.com/International/firearms-incident-reported-uk-houses-parliament/story?id=46300284
No further details about their identities or connection but I can imagine it was a gang/extremist group
I recall similar raids after Brussels, Bataclan and Nice attacks
Why is it these raids don't happen BEFORE the attacks???

Also just learned an American celebrating his 25th wedding anniversary was killed in the Westminster attack. Thanks to the incompetence of MI5 and whatever other intelligence groups who knew about the suspect and his buddies.

12115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 3/23/17
This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening. But yeah, people in general should get treated way more like threats if they are almost certainly thought of as threats.
30000 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
84 / F / Bite the pillow.
Offline
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17


Data via the Global Terrorism Database: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/
Chart via Quartz: https://www.theatlas.com/charts/NkXIQaa7l
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17

octorockandroll wrote:

This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening. But yeah, people in general should get treated way more like threats if they are almost certainly thought of as threats.


Oh yeah I forgot about Omar. He should not have been free to walk American streets in the first place. Thankfully he chose to use a gun rather than steal a semi and kill almost twice the amount of people.


Hairbelly wrote:



Data via the Global Terrorism Database: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/



>all that red in central and south america
9235 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Palm Coast, Florida
Offline
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17

octorockandroll wrote:

This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening.


Why did you bring up guns like they are the problem?
12115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17

MonoDreams wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening.


Why did you bring up guns like they are the problem?


Why did you twist my words to make me say guns are the problem when I clearly said that the lack of enforcement on people who are seriously suspected of being terrorists was the problem?
Posted 3/23/17
Looks like Germany has a bit of a solution.
http://kucb.org/post/first-germany-deports-native-born-terrorism-suspects

Two men who were born in Germany but don't have German citizenship will be deported to countries in North Africa, where their parents immigrated from, over suspicions that they were planning a terrorist attack. German officials say it's the first time the government is making such a move.

A federal judge has rejected the men's bid to avoid deportation. Police arrested the suspects, ages 22 and 27, in the city of Göttingen in a massive raid that involved 11 apartments and some 450 agents on Feb. 9. The raid turned up multiple black Islamic State flags and a range of weapons, including a machete to what looked to be replica flint-lock pistols.

*they are actually cap and ball pistols

Now if they'd only consistently do this while strengthening EU borders they may be on to something.
14725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 5/24/17

Amyas_Leigh wrote:
Why is it these raids don't happen BEFORE the attacks???


Due process? I mean, I can see an argument for turning them away at the border if you identify them as a threat, but once you grant them any rights of your nation they should not be infringed upon until an actual crime (not a thought crime) is committed.
1886 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Shanghai China
Offline
Posted 3/23/17 , edited 3/23/17
Due process means someone probably was using a windows 10 pc Facebook YouTube or twitter and then the police where able to put the pieces of the puzzle together yet one more reason why social media should be banned in the usa especially after that rape video on Facebook. bottom line is if your going to commit a crime don't use social media. This is why I keep saying religion has to go it causes nothing but problems and honestly anyone that believes in religion in my eyes are afraid to die unlike most people I am not as I died once already and honestly I cant wait to go back its a million times better than anything I seen here on earth and yes I am a NDE survivor
25774 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 3/23/17
Just resettle refugees in their home countries. You can still send them money and soldiers to keep them safe and will have less risk to your own country's civilians.
238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 3/23/17

MonoDreams wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening.


Why did you bring up guns like they are the problem?



Come on now... You're just being antagonistic.
I don't even like Octorockandroll but there was literally nothing wrong with what he said.
He did not claim guns are the only reason people die. He said there is a problem with allowing someone who is identified as a threat, to buy a weapon.
100% correct statement.

Pick and choose your battles, buddy.
24288 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 3/23/17

MonoDreams wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

This is hardly a European problem, though it is undeniably a problem nonetheless. As I recall, the Orlando Nightclub shooter also was identified as a threat when he committed his crime and even when he legally purchased his weapons. In the USA you can still legally buy weapons despite being on the FBI's watchlist and they too ought to be a bit more proactive in how they prevent this kind of shit from happening.


Why did you bring up guns like they are the problem?


I am not sure he is saying he is, rather then the lack of FBI coordination to ensure that people who are under serious investigation and are considered threats at the time are not allowed to buy weapons. It is the equivalent of convicted child molestors not being allowed within a certain distance from schools.

My main problem is, did they identify as a threat through ways that should not be lawful? This might be why they did not peg him from buying a gun, to save their own asses. In any case, why investigate, and should it be allowed?
Posted 3/23/17

GreatLordBalzak wrote:


Due process? I mean, I can see an argument for turning them away at the border if you identify them as a threat, but once you grant them any rights of your nation they should not be infringed upon until an actual crime (not a thought crime) is committed.


European nations have no problem imprisoning people for thought crimes. Mostly only when it comes to natives though. Also given the fact that people get arrested in raids after these events that had no real connection other than sharing views with the suspects, I think its not so much due process stopping these people from being arrested before they take action on their plans, but fear of public perception.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


I am not sure he is saying he is, rather then the lack of FBI coordination to ensure that people who are under serious investigation and are considered threats at the time are not allowed to buy weapons. It is the equivalent of convicted child molestors not being allowed within a certain distance from schools.


Are we also going to monitor these threats to make sure they don't get within 1000 feet of a semi truck or other heavy duty 'assault' vehicle? If you're going to do away with the Bill of Rights, you may as well just have them locked up and water boarded in an off shore prison.
14725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 3/23/17

Amyas_Leigh wrote:

European nations have no problem imprisoning people for thought crimes. Mostly only when it comes to natives though. Also given the fact that people get arrested in raids after these events that had no real connection other than sharing views with the suspects, I think its not so much due process stopping these people from being arrested before they take action on their plans, but fear of public perception.


I don't like judging people on the assumption of their intent. If even one innocent is raided that is too much. I think they did the just thing by not taking preemptive action, even if their motivations weren't so noble. As for raiding the other suspects, did they retrieve evidence of conspiracy from the perpetrator? If not I agree those raids weren't justified.

We will soon find out I suppose... Did they strike with evidence or did they merely strike while the public was out for blood?
17434 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 3/23/17

Amyas_Leigh wrote:


GreatLordBalzak wrote:


Due process? I mean, I can see an argument for turning them away at the border if you identify them as a threat, but once you grant them any rights of your nation they should not be infringed upon until an actual crime (not a thought crime) is committed.


European nations have no problem imprisoning people for thought crimes. Mostly only when it comes to natives though. Also given the fact that people get arrested in raids after these events that had no real connection other than sharing views with the suspects, I think its not so much due process stopping these people from being arrested before they take action on their plans, but fear of public perception.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


I am not sure he is saying he is, rather then the lack of FBI coordination to ensure that people who are under serious investigation and are considered threats at the time are not allowed to buy weapons. It is the equivalent of convicted child molestors not being allowed within a certain distance from schools.


Are we also going to monitor these threats to make sure they don't get within 1000 feet of a semi truck or other heavy duty 'assault' vehicle? If you're going to do away with the Bill of Rights, you may as well just have them locked up and water boarded in an off shore prison.


Maybe it's best to prevent some people from being able to legally obtain ways to kill others easily be it gun, car or knife depending on the severity of the danger they seem willing to go to. Heavy machinery is a very dangerous thing that's why you have various different licenses guns should be handled the same along with knives and swords. It's not so much to take freedom away from them as it is to compromise part of their freedom to protect others around them sure they'll use illegal means before that argument arises and there is no real way to combat that effectively but there is no need to make it easy for people who have shown the consideration to kill people particularly on mass to carry it out if you have evidence to show they intend to do these things why shouldn't some of the rights be removed from them and some rights doesn't mean torturing them is acceptable innocents should be protected but it can't turn in to a witch hunt either sure it will be very hard to do but careful steps should be taken not to make normal peoples lives hard and condemn average people who aren't actually contemplating slaughtering people. I'm not saying I have the answers I just couldn't not say anything after you said " If you're going to do away with the Bill of Rights, you may as well just have them locked up and water boarded in an off shore prison." because to me that's quite a jump to make in my opinion... sorry if I caused offence but it's better regretting the things you said than the things you never in my opinion leading to this lengthy message.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.