I didn't describe any scenario
People coming in means anybody coming via all possible means.
Terror attack in Vienna??
- Thread starter Blackwidow
- Start date
People coming in means anybody coming via all possible means.
I agree in principle but I'm sure he wasn't considered a 'threat' anymore when he was let out. There's simply no way you can look into people like this.
Let him go there (Syria in this case) and prevent him from returning would be the simple solution.
But that's all just fighting the symptoms. We need to rot out the core of all these problems and those lie so deep it will be a major major task.
I didn't describe any scenario
People coming in means anybody coming via all possible means.
Are you seriously going to pretend you didn't describe a scenario? I will bold the several points that you made.
First in this post you never talk about people entering the territory illegally and secondly no country has control of which illegals are entering the country which is why they are described as illegal. Since you later suggested that you were talking about people without documentations, your second point makes no sense because again they are illegals, considered as such and not let free to roam around when caught. Which brings us to the actual problem in your post, you weren't talking about illegals, you were talking about people that enter the territory legally from exotic countries otherwise you wouldn't insinuate that a decision was made and that some people had genuine reasons to migrate, also it's important to remember that the recent rise of the far rights in Europe have mainly targetted eastern europeans with Polish and Roms as the main groups, sub-saharian africans and jews, far rights in Europe have risen due to economic hardship which is why everything that seems foreign or wealthy is targetted.
Any update on whether there are still attackers on the run?
I thought you had misread what i wrote, but with that bolded part i think you just haven't seen how the migration and asylum system actually works in Europe? Once people are processed they are supposed to go to a particular place, but they're Red Cross centres and the like, not prisons, and nobody checks or cares if they actually stay there. Most will run away and try to make their way to whichever country they wish to end up in. I live in an Italian border town that is full of people waiting for an opportunity to cross, some of them have been waiting years, become familiar faces and even end up making a life here. For others it's easy to totally disappear.
Still one or more on the run.
I know exactly how the asylum and migration system work. First an asylum seeker isn't an illegal, it's an asylum seeker until it is determined whether he is a refugee which is a legal status, secondly they are not free to roam around, here I'm talking about legal freedom because unless you only consider physical freedom and thinks that people should be imprisoned without a trial, then we may have a new problem with your points. Now it's true that some administrations lack the means to quickly process asylum seekers which leads to some of them deciding to become illegal residents, the last point being key, when they decide to disappear they become illegals. That last point also negates the idea that it is an accepted situation.
And it's important to remember that this doesn't describe how migration and asylum system actually works in Europe, that's the fringe part that doesn't work and is continuously worked on. Claiming otherwise is why the far rights have actually gained ground by sharing misinformation, the misinformation being that this situation is legally accepted and that Europeans are to be blamed. Now people do not easily become refugees and it often takes at least a year between administrative processing, investigations and interviews to get an answer positive or negative. Europe didn't accept to lose control, Europe has heavy procedures for asylum seekers and migrants which leads many to go on the illegal side of things. And since we are not in Minority Report and every living being doesn't have a chip that allows to know what he will do or where he is at all time some people get through the nets.
Also the large majoirty of immigration concerns economic migrants who are granted visas and are legal residents, it's also fair to mention that among economic migrants a minority are illegals that exploits short term visas and disappear at the end of for example student or tourism visas but again these people aren't accepted which is why the EU area deports hundred of thousands of people every year.
Might have been a single attacker afterall. Fits with most terrorist attacks in the past.
Noteworthy, that a few people with - I guess - a turkish background helped a woman and an injured policeman yesterday. Very brave!
All of what you say is how it's supposed to work, but it doesn't end up actually working like that in most places. If somebody doesn't want asylum (and it's unlikely anybody connected to IS cares) or fails, they can easily disappear. There are thought to be just under 1 million people in Italy alone who have been denied asylum or other protected status, but over 80% of those are still in Europe somewhere.
But the point is, when there's an acceptance that the system cannot keep up, it's an acceptance that people who want to cause and promote harm are able to slip through just as easily.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm sorry to be butting in on your conversation but have you got any source you can provide for the bolded? Those figures seem like utter codswallop.
I agree.
I already addressed the point about illegals but you decided to bring asylum seekers into the conversation, the former are illegals, judged and deported when caught.
I should address the second sentence because I think that it's extremely important for people to understand this. Everything illegal on this planet uses currently established criminal networks, in particular smuggling, whether we are talking about people, weapons or drugs that's how wanted people can move from, for example Syria to Belgium or France, Abaaoud being an example.
It's dangerous to share the idea that there is a systemic acceptance, there is a reality that criminal networks and behaviours won't be eradicated anytime soon, it's silly to pretend otherwise and dangerous from a politic standpoint.
Worldwide there is 4.2m asylum seekers, since 2014 there has been 480k asylum applicants in Italy, so it's quite far from just under 1m. I suspect that there is a mix between asylum seekers and the total amount of illegal immigration in particular from sea which is estimated to be around 1 million and particularly increased since 2014.
https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=7M8g
'Gang-like' is appropriate. A lot of European terrorists are people that had difficult lives, in and out of crime, and then felt they found purpose and acceptance in the extremist community.
Good point. It's the same dynamic that means big terror attacks do not have the same news value. It's not identifiable or 'special' enough. 1 death in a church in France is much more relatable to 'westerns' than 19 deaths in a university in Afghanistan.
Don't bother, he's anti-Islam, you won't get anywhere with him. (See the thread on that beheaded teacher.)
I think that's also a matter of distance. When I read a headline about a terror attack I gasp, but when I hear it is a terror attack in Kabul I give it hardly a minute's thought, whereas if it's in Paris, or Amsterdam, I'm thinking about it for days. This sounds like I'm a horrible person who doesn't give a feck about the people in Kabul, but I think whether we like it or not, if it's not close, we don't care. I suppose it's also a mental coping mechanism, because if you care deeply for all death in the world, your existence will be a depressing one.
I don't remember who said it, but 1 death is a tragedy, a 1000 deaths is a statistic.
Yeah, that's what I meant with relatable. Distance, and historical context. I agree, I didn't think much about the Kabul attack either; although reading that it happened during an Afghanistan-Iran book forum with lots of Iranian publishers and the Iranian ambassador present made it a lot more relatable for me, as it comes closer to my own (past) work. (But still not that much, I must admit.)
Yeah, I think that it has a lot to do with how it relates to yourself. The closer it is and the more you may worry for the safety of friends and family or even yourself.
It's also the fact that we have never been more exposed to information and news regards to suffering around the world than anytime in history and the daily sufferings around the world is never-ending. If we had to process every death like losing our nearest we'd probably all commit suicide. I think we develop a kind of burnout or apathy towards suffering far away from home, because we have to unless we have incredible rescources to help the world.
Thanks for the source, still seems quite a way under 1 million though given that 300,000 people is a lot of people.
This seems a bit more realistic.
I think we need to have a very serious look at why there are so many asylum seekers entering Europe at the moment because at the moment we're simply treating symptoms rather than trying to fix the route cause.
Agree with that
Quality control
No, not really.
Of course, we've always known there is whole world full of barbaric retards outside the civilized West still living in their own Middle Ages. We can't do much about that. A brutal attack on our civilized values like freedom of religion otoh is something our leaders are obliged to protect us from.
Of course 'the beheaded teacher thread', are there more of them or is that the central beheadings thread? Why would anyone be anti-islam? You really don't see the irony, do you?
Have you ever stopped to think there might be a reason these barbaric retards dislike the west? I mean we do sometimes send our divine sky chariots to drop some righteous bombs on their barbaric lands.
We could've just left Sadam alone and not helped sow the seeds for IS to rise. Or not drone strike civilians in Yemen. People tend to dislike watching their family die in fires.
Your post is an idiot on all three counts. I will add that 'barbaric retards' is highly offensive language (but you probably intend it that way), and the beginning of your last point displays a lack of English comprehension (which is fine, but then don't argue in that area). In any case, I expect you to end up arguing that 'it's not racism (religionism?) if it's true', so I'll just take my own advice:
Last edited:
Or various interventions in Afghanistan. The way 'we' left the Middle East and Southern Asia behind. And so on. But he has argued before that colonialism has been a net benefit for these areas, so...
Are there any updates on the actual attack or is it just people doing the usual arguing in here?
No excuses anymore. Get rid.
Dr. Funkenstein is taking a break and is done in this thread.
A break? Are you kidding?
That post displayed blatant ableism, racism and xenophobia. That's literally the perfect trifecta of non-negotiable banning offences!
To be fair, he also has a Geert Wilders tagline now. Which begs the question, is he Dutch?
That just makes it worse.
Who gives a feck the caf recently has exposed a bunch of blatant bigots but no admin is willing to take the matter into hands. Pathetic. I'm not even going to bother reporting posts anymore.
Don't worry, I'm sure he'll use his "break" to reflect on himself and his morals, and will return a completely different character...
Probably a good guess
Nah it's all the Taqiyya @Shamana talks about.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What a nob