Germans warn of terrorists among refugees
Fox News reports that German federal security agencies are warning of terrorists that have been smuggled into their country disguised as refugees;
The announcement comes after Berlin police arrested three Thursday in an investigation of four Algerian men who are suspected of planning terror attacks in Germany and having ISIS ties.
“We have seen repeatedly that terrorists are being smuggled in disguised or camouflaged as refugees,” said Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution….
No? Seriously?
German authorities believe the four men who were investigated Thursday had contacts with ISIS and that at least one of them had received military training in Syria. The arrests were made in Berlin at a refugee home and were based on existing warrants in other cases.
Who would have thought that allowing hundreds of thousands of military-aged men would be a problem? Well, who besides anyone with half a brain.
Category: Terror War
It’s racism! Oh, uh…. And uh …. Hatred of widows and children. Uh, and racism too. Yeah that’s what it is.
Duh…
An absolutely astounding conclusion to draw from evidence impossible to avoid. How large are those blinders they wear to deny the obvious?
Terrorists amongst the fleeing hordes? Really?
They just figured that out, huh? I wondered how long it would take.
But we need not be concerned, people! Our nations’s Fearless Leader and his minions assure us that they have this “under control”!
All those “refugees” we’re admitting are being thoroughly vetted! Why, they’re being almost as thoroughly vetted as foreign-born spouses of US citizens are before they’re allowed entry into the US!
(I hope that the fact that the above was sarcasm is obvious.)
Danke schoen, Kapitan Obvious!
Oder soll ich schreiben “Kapitan Klar?”
While it’s obvious, it’s also significant that the head of German domestic security is saying this publicly. Until recently, the German government has been an advocate of essentially unlimited “refugee” admission and has denied the fact that such unlimited admission is problematic. The fact that someone this high in the German government is now publicly confirming that there is a problem is a good first step in addressing the problem.
The next logical step is to dramatically limit the inflow of unvetted refugees. Let’s see if they do so.
And let’s see if our clueless government in DC learns from Germany’s mistake.
I would say that most of these high ranking officials are really reacting to the seriously pissed off German populace. I haven’t seen much movement towards action. If Merkel has any intelligence, which I know she does, she knows the odds are she will be booted out as Kanzlerin in the next election cycle. Hopefully, she’ll also be booted out of the Bundestag.
‘if our clueless government in DC learns’ – – Hondo, you are such a funny guy!
In the words of the little kid from Angels in the Outfield: “Hey – it could happen!”
But, yeah – until Jan 2017 (and maybe later), I’m not holding my breath.
You mean the German Government sounded like Øbama? Shock!!
Hell, Obama just said that “Islam has always been a part of America”. He also stated that Muslims “built the very fabric of our nation”. Much like his statements on the economy, his statements lack proof.
Those words don’t sound much like the words of someone that’s waking up.
File this one under, “NO SHIT, SHERLOCK!”
Or “KEINE SCHEIßE, HERR SHERLOCK!”
We knew this. It is the world in which we live. It does not justify the anti-immigrant rhetoric nor does it justify the excessive fear mongering over the issue. The threat terrorism poses is low.
The threat of terror is everywhere in the US and almost everywhere in the US it is exaggerated. People live their lives everyday in the US under much greater threats. A victim of violent crime, being hit by a car, being in a car accident, having a fatal workplace accident, reaction to meds, natural disaster, disease and viral threats, firearm accidents, being killed by a toddler, being killed by a pet, a cow, lightning, an elevator…
All much more likely to kill an American than terrorism.
So the constant fear mongering over terrorism and buying into the terror threat political rhetoric only serves to increase the scope and depth of the domestic surveillance state, undermine the American public’s expectation of privacy and personal freedom, and fan an ignorant and potentially violent social backlash based on racial/ethnic prejudices and religious intolerance.
Notice the use of the phrase above “potentially violent”. That’s the real issue that Progs like Lars will always be concerned about-not the actual violence by Muslims-but the always looming, but never quite materializing, backlash by the great unwashed, who (unfortunately in the eyes of the Progs), actually populate this great country and are the only real enemy in the eyes of the Prigs-their domestic political enemy.
…only real enemy in the eyes of the Progs…
Actually, “Prig” fits them, too.
I prefer using the term “Proglodyte” to describe them.
▲▲▲ Like ▲▲▲
Not sure why you are trying to spin my position that way…
but the fact is there is a violent backlash against Muslims and groups that are mistaken as Muslims (such as Sikhs) and some are being killed. Many hospitalized.
The fear of Muslims and the backlash against Muslims is ignorant and unjustified.
I just used your own words about potential violence-that’s what you were concerned enough to comment on-not the actual violence by Muslims. What seems to get you fired up is not violence by Muslims, but the fact that your countrymen might notice.
Taylor is an inveterate fucking liar. Every time a Muslim commits an act of terror fucking liars like him and BODAPREZ run out and tell us all that there’s some huge anti-muslim backlash or it might happen and yet it NEVER materializes. Fuck you Taylor you vacuous, insipid, pile of prog shit. But you never hear him and his ilk ever fret or defend Jews….
According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports: Hate Crime Statistics, 2014, there were 1,140 victims of anti-religious hate crimes in the U.S. in 2014. “Of the 1,140 victims of anti-religious hate crimes: 56.8 percent [56.8%] were victims of crimes motivated by their offenders’ anti-Jewish bias.” That amounts to approximately 647.52 instances where Jewish individuals, businesses or institutions were targeted.
A mere “16.1 percent [16.1%] were victims of anti-Islamic (Muslim) bias,” amounting to approximately 183.54 instances where Muslim individuals, businesses or institutions were targeted.
That does not disprove what I said. I knew those statistics. And the anti-Muslim backlash has generally on the rise over time.
A Muslin in America is hundreds of times more likely to be a victim of hate crime than anyone else in America is likely to be a victim of terrorism committed by a Muslim.
There has been no “rise” and there has been no “backlash”. And you are the most disingenuous POS on this board. Why don’t we look at the number of Americans killed by Muslim terrorists in the past 20 years and then look at the number of actual Muslims killed in hate crimes, (hint the number is nearly ZERO). Non-Muslim Americans are hundreds of times more likely to be killed by a Muslim than a Muslim is to be killed by a Non-Muslim American.
There has been a rise and there is a backlash. You just don’t care because it does not effect you personally.
Muslims are a tiny fraction of the population. Less than half the size of the Jewish population. Those figures are closer when you account for that.
And not all the hate crimes against Muslims are classified as anti-religious crimes. Some are classified based on ethnicity since that is how they were profiled by the attacker.
And your ridiculous anger over my post completely misses a significant part of my message:
The threat of terrorism is exaggerated. And you are promoting a political rhetoric that is contributing to the expansion of police state powers and undermining the freedom and rights of Americans, as well as negatively shaping the expectation of freedom and privacy by the population, potentially for generations.
Your irrational fear mongering is a much greater threat to our way of life than terrorism.
All much more likely to kill an American than terrorism. – per Lars.
So, basically, those 14 people who were killed in San Bernardino at their Christmas party weren’t killed by terrorists or Muslims.
I’m amazed at the slender grasp you have on reality, trout-sniffer. You are SO out of your depth. Who helps you get dressed in the morning?
You want fries with that?
They were.
You don’t know me, Commissar.
Everything is fear mongering, right? This is the cloak in which the left shields itself in when they don’t like the narrative. You presume to know what does and doesn’t affect me but I’m unsurprised having read your lengthy SJW diatribes on here for some time. I’m promoting a political rhetoric? I’m contributing to the expansion of police state powers? Really? How so? By pointing out inconvenient statistics or challenging your apples to oranges comparison tactics? You are either the most committed leftist on this board or the most epic of trolls. I haven’t decided yet which one it is.
“Both” works for me, MK75G.
They left also likes to accuse you of negativity and when all else fails, you’re accused of being a racist.
This is especially strange when you’re trying to convey something with numerical quantification. Numbers are racist?
Put them on the south side of Chicago for three days and nights. The gangs are getting ambitious down there. Now they’re killing people for simply living in a specific neighborhood.
Commissar does not know me.
‘Affect’
Do you have a link to your stats as proof?
Since my sources tend to be nitpicked or dismissed I recommend Googling the phrase:
“has there been a rise in hate crimes against muslims”
And deciding if you agree with any of the sources offered.
So in other words, no. You pulled your own figures out of your ass. Next time do the same with your head.
Exactly….
From the Google search he recommended (top 3):
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/us/politics/crimes-against-muslim-americans-and-mosques-rise-sharply.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hate-attacks-muslims-u-s-spike-after-recent-acts-terrorism-n482456
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/anti-muslim-attacks-after-san-bernardino
Lars – here is a recent news article and the FBI’s own website about hate crimes:
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/fbi-us-jews-targeted-57-anti-religious-hate-crimes-muslims-targeted-16
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2014/topic-pages/victims_final
“Religious bias
Of the 1,140 victims of anti-religious hate crimes:
56.8 percent were victims of crimes motivated by their offenders’ anti-Jewish bias.
16.1 percent were victims of anti-Islamic (Muslim) bias.
6.2 percent were victims of bias against groups of individuals of varying religions (anti-multiple religions, group).
6.1 percent were victims of anti-Catholic bias.
2.5 percent were victims of anti-Protestant bias.
1.2 percent were victims of anti-Atheist/Agnostic bias.
11.0 percent were victims of bias against other religions (anti-other religion). (Based on Table 1.)”
The stats are from crimes reported in 2014
He already knew that Doc, he just mad a tacit decision to ignore those facts when he posted his drivel. It’s what he does. Facts don’t support Lars; ignore them. When asked for facts refuse to give them citing bias against your sources. The dude is an INVETERATE LIAR….’nuff said.
Doc, the problem I have with the vast majority of the supposed bias crimes that you linked to is multi fold. For clarification, unlike Lars, I don’t ascribe any notion as to whether or not you believe these links to be proof of anything.
1. Most of them are not demonstrably provable. Someone claims rocks were thrown at their car or someone shot at them but there is no actual evidence to support that just a claim made by CAIR, an organization with ties to Islamic terrorism.
2. There is no follow up to provide evidence that indeed these incidents were found to be true. Were there a couple that were true? Sure. But let’s just admit the reality that there is not some giant backlash of bias crimes against Muslims and the numbers of actual demonstrably true incidents of bias bear that out.
3. There are as many instances of false bias crimes that have been committed by Muslim activists to support their phony narrative that there is a huge backlash against them and that they are victims.
MK75 – I’m with you on that. Data provided by the FBI can be “cherry picked” and interpreted by anyone to show anything.
Speaking of CAIR, I look at the as being the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton of the Muslim “community”. Anytime there is an incident, they are usually the first group in from of the reporters crying “injustice” or “hate”.
MK75Gunner: well, you really need to normalize the statistics before that comparison is valid. Doing so accounts for the fact that the two groups are of different sizes.
Pew Research says that 1.9% of the US population is Jewish, while only 0.9% of the US population is Muslim. That means that one should expect approximately 2.11 times as many hate crimes against those of Jewish faith than against those of Muslim faith.
Under those condition, that means that if the rate of hate crimes committed against both groups were equal, we’d expect about 387 hate crimes to be committed against those of Jewish faith.
However, the actual number was around 647. Obviously, this implies that the rate of hate crimes committed against those of Jewish faith is higher than the rate of hate crimes committed against those of Muslim faith.
Commissar does not know me.
Nobody is spinning your position. That is your position, dickwad.
HEY LARS! Tell me JUST HOW MANY of the 9/11 hijackers and ISIS members were/are NOT muslims, o thin-skinned attention-whoring poodle-dick of a Proglodyte?
Taylor, if you actually knew what the bloody Hell you were talking about, that would be different. But you don’t. You do not know your ass from a sump pump.
SIKHKS ARE NOT MUSLIMS. They have NEVER been Muslims. You are a FUCKING MORON when you say such things.
A Sikh is a follower of Sikhism, a monotheistic religion which originated during the 15th century in the Punjab region of the Indian subcontinent. The term “Sikh” has its origin in the Sanskrit words शिष्य (śiṣya; disciple, student) or शिक्ष (śikṣa; instruction).A Sikh, according to Article I of the Sikh Rehat Maryada (the Sikh code of conduct), is “any human being who faithfully believes in One Immortal Being; ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh; Guru Granth Sahib; the teachings of the ten Gurus and the baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru”.
“Sikh” properly refers to adherents of Sikhism as a religion, not an ethnic group. However, because Sikhism has seldom sought converts, most Sikhs share strong ethno-religious ties. Many countries, such as the United Kingdom, therefore recognize Sikh as a designated ethnicity on their censuses. The American non-profit organization United Sikhs has fought to have Sikh included on the U.S. census as well, arguing that Sikhs “self-identify as an ‘ethnic minority'” and believe “that they are more than just a religion”. Source – Wiki (for a quickie)
SIKHISM IS NOT ISLAM, YOU ASSHOLE.
You have just proved to the entire world, once again, that you are nothing more than a self-serving, ignorant, pompous ass with a brain smaller than just ONE of Valerie Perrine’s boobs.
While it is true that all of those other things you mention could occur, they are also (1) an unavoidable part of life in the US, and (2) something regarding which an individual can reduce their risk, albeit perhaps incompletely.
In contrast, being killed in an attack by a terrorist admitted as a “refugee” is not an unavoidable part of life in the US. It is also not something for which an individual can reasonably reduce the risk by individual action. However, the US government can control it by either (1) admitting no refugees whatsoever, or (2) admitting only thoroughly vetted refugees vice doing the half-assed job of “refugee” verification done today.
In short: you’re comparing risks that are accepted as a normal part of life and can be controlled by an individual through their actions with one that is beyond their control, but which can be controlled by government action. In effect, you’re comparing apples and oranges – again.
We accept these risks as a normal part of life because life has risks.
We could significantly reduce many of these risks through policy.
But Americans argue against it because some would require unacceptable costs (safer highway infrastructure and design), or infringement on personal liberty (gun control). And in many cases they are right to argue against it. (Though I think universal access to healthcare particularly for potentially transmutable conditions is a national security imperative at this point.)
Yet we are willing to accept ridiculous costs and infringement on personal liberty due to the exaggerated threat of terrorism.
It makes no sense. The rhetoric and the fear is exaggerated to the point of bullshit. terrorism is a very low probability threat. Your morning shower or commute EACH both much more likely to kill you than terrorism. Choking on your breakfast is a greater threat.
*transmittable.
Hey Lars “Poodle Dick” Taylor, THIS pretty well sums up my thoughts about your cranial flatulence and mental diarrhea every time you post:
OK, look, Lars, you poodle, you really do need to back up your silly statement with some actual statistics and data – stuff like that.
For instance, you said more likely to be killed by a cow than a terrorist. The only way I can be killed by a cow is if a whole carcass falls on me at the butcher shop and since I don’t shop for beef at butcher shops, that possibility is ZIP.
Your dismissal of the possibility of my being killed by a terrorist here in this country is statistically higher than my being killed by a cow, because I shop at exactly the kinds of places that terrorists love: stores with big, open spaces and lots of goods on shelves and racks and in bins. And my local Wal-Mart doesn’t keep dead cows in the back behind the meat bins, but a group of terrorists could easily wander in from the parking lot, pushing a grocery cart that someone left in the collection aisle, and once they get inside, disperse to their various shooting points and start shooting.
That’s what happened in Nairobi last year, in case you were asleep at the switch. And entire shopping mall full of people became a killing field.
And yes, those were terrorist that shot and killed them.
I strongly suggest that if you are going to continue to post such asinine statements, you think twice, thrice and maybe FOUR OR FIFTY times before you click the ‘post’ button. Your logic stinks like like a dead cow rotting in the sun.
Damn! Proof it before clicking!
You want fries with that, poodle?
Excuse me, but where above did I advocate any restriction on the existing liberty or personal freedom of current US citizens or residents? I’ll answer for you: I did not. You’re obfuscating again with non sequiturs.
Non-residents seeking entry into the US aren’t subject to US law, nor do they have rights as US citizens or residents. Why? Because they are neither.
The US population has the right to DEMAND that the US government do its best to ensure that it does not raise the risk to current US citizens and residents by admitting those who cannot conclusively demonstrate they deserve admission. We should also demand that the government err on the side of caution when making such decisions.
Why? Ask those who were wounded in San Bernardino – and the surviving family members of those killed in that terrorist attack.
No non-citizen has any “right” to enter another nation. Deciding whether they are permitted to do so or not is the absolute right of the nation to which they are requesting entry.
Don’t try and muddy the waters of Lars’ lies and bullshit…
The narrative says that if you oppose any aspect of Prog theology you must be advocating for something terrible Hondo, all praise the holy narrative.
Screw the memory and works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao – and the horses they rode in on. Plus the memory and works of their true believers. Ditto for their followers and intellectual descendants.
Does that make my position on “Progressive” theology clear enough?
I think you meant to put “”‘s around the word intellectuals.
😉
No. I’m not using the word sarcastically above.
Today’s progressives are the intellectual descendants of Marx/Engels/Lenin/Stalin/Mao/other early Communist theoreticians. Their current theories and proposed policies are based on and extend those of Marx, Engels, Lenin, et al. They thus can be termed the intellectual descendants of those bastards.
The fact that their theories and proposed policies are bullsh!t and have been demonstrated to be not only wrong, but evil and counterproductive is a different issue entirely. Ditto the fact that many of those intellectual descendants are idiots with no concept of or ability to perceive reality, no ability to think for themselves, and not enough common sense to pour p!ss out of a boot.
The most commonly assigned author on college campuses continues to be Karl Marx (and has been since the 1990s). Despite the well established history of misery and disaster his ideas have have brought about, our “great thinkers” (most of whom are publicly subsidized in one way or another) seem to think that they will be the ones to get it right this time. And those are the people that Lars assures us are who we should be listening to in how we decide to govern our country. I’m buying more ammo.
Ah, there you go. The ability to think critically, to use one’s mind, to consider alternative points of view dispassionately, is lost to those who sup from the plate of marxism/progressivism. It has always been so. The descendants, as you call them, presume that the lens through which they view of the world, from government and economic systems, to personal relationships and the workplace, is the correct one, rooted in conflict and control. They alternatively pity those of us who hold contrary views as mindless dolts or slaves to the system, or they despise us for persisting in holding fast to those views, despite their best efforts to enlighten us. To those they pity, they offer the nanny state, and to those they despise, they present the jackboot.
Would amend your statement, Hondo, in one detail only: visitors to the US are indeed subject to US law. Unless they have diplomatic immunity, all visitors must obey traffic laws and are subject to prosecution for violating other laws as well. They are not, however, afforded rights because they are not citizens, although as a society we tend to grant them anyway just because we are good hosts. Huge dif being what is required vs what we feel culturally is a nice way to treat our guests.
No argument that non-citizens in the US or its possessions are subject to US law, OWB. However, I was speaking above of non-citizens seeking entry to the US who had not yet been granted admission.
I don’t believe that US legal jurisdiction in general applies to non-US citizens who are not physically present in the US or US possessions.
Certainly agree, Hondo.
The message the US seems to now be sending is that those folks do not need to follow US law to get here so it is entirely justified (in their minds) that they don’t need to follow our law once they get here.
Yep. That indeed compounds the problem – and not only with respect to terrorism.
When people know that enforcement of the law is at best sporadic if not capricious, there is less respect for the law overall – and less likelihood it will be followed.
As I said last night, Lars, you are a walking, talking caricature of the very worst liberal stereotypes. Seth McFarlane and Rush Limbaugh couldn’t concoct a better example of a strawman than you. By the way, I got a real kick out of your “spectator to your own irrelevance” line last night. Project much? Unlike you, I don’t have a comically-exaggerated notion of my own importance. I’m aware that I am easily replaced, and I’m okay with that, whereas you seem convinced that you’re the Essential Man wherever you go (do you even have a job?). So that one pretty much bounced right off. As for my ideology, I doubt you actually know what it is, since you demonstrably suck at paying attention. And I have never claimed to be especially smart. I’m just smarter than you. That’s hardly a source of bragging rights, though, since you’re a fucking idiot.
Terrorism=no big deal
Highly classified material stolen by foreign adversaries=no big deal
Intelligence officers and assets identities compromised= no big deal
Obama death threats up 400%=big big big big fucking deal. So big I had to make that fucking statistic up. You bunch of racist, sexist, xenophobes disgust me.
All hail Lars. All hail Lars.
L. Taylor, here’s why people are scared of terrorism. It’s successful at causing terror. Various crimes don’t kill so many people in such a short time and cause as much terror as terrorist actions.
Risk is comprised of two parts. There’s the odds of something happening, which is what you’re fixated on. And then there’s how bad it will be when the long shot hits. That’s what you don’t get.
Here, here^^^^
Bingo. For a particular event, the risk associated with that event = (probability of event occurrence) x (consequence of event occurrence). That’s straight out of “elementary risk management”.
You do NOT ignore a potential event that has catastrophic consequences – ever. Doing so is monumentally stupid, because by definition catastrophic consequences are those that are unacceptable and therefore must be prevented if at all possible. That’s true even when a given event causing catastrophic consequences has only a very small probability of happening.
When an event has catastrophic consequences, you either prevent it or mitigate the consequences by other means. And when the consequences of an event are known to be catastrophic and they cannot be mitigated by other means, then extreme measures are warranted to minimize the chances of that event happening.
The American public considers a terrorist attack on US soil causing mass casualties to be “catastrophic” – because it is. They therefore expect Federal/state/local governments to do anything reasonably possible to prevent them.
Studies have shown that radical Muslims are less likely to commit a violent crime if they are shot in the face.
There are those among us that are less than completely human. If I see a towel wrapped man in a dress flying around on a winged horse with a human head I am taking him out.
Please report any sightings as I got dibs on that bitch.
I might keep the horse.
Got carrots?
Hmmm…but it has a human head. Them ragheads love Skittles maybe Horse is fond of them too.
A horse is a horse, of course, of course, And no one can talk to a horse of course. That is, of course, unless the horse is the famous…Barack.
Wait, I have heard that name somewhere. Muhammad named his horse Barack? Oh bama !
I thought “Barack” meant “Horse’s ASS” in Arabic!
But, the President told us that Islam was a religion of peace. Why would terrorists pretend to be peaceful Islamic refugees in order to spread their terrorism?
Once again, Lars is monopolizing the conversation, because it’s all about him, you know.
Methinks he’s off his meds and on an attention-craving spree like a hungry fat boy at an all you can eat buffet. I don’t think he’ll ever realize that he and his shit are about as welcome here as a rattlesnake at a square dance!
That is flat bullshit. The number of my posts on this thread is far less than many posters. And a number were responses.
Actually, Lars the trout-sniffing poodle is suffering from a prolonged bout with Equatorial New Guinean Furry Taint Syndrome.
It’s gone to his head.
Ignoring the dickhead for a moment.
The German government has zero obligation to foreign refugees, though they certainly can choose to try to help out of the goodness of their Teutonic hearts. Their only obligation is to the safety and security of their own citizens. If they cannot positively ensure that they are not letting wolves in with the sheep, the prudent thing to do is not let any in. That sucks for the refugees, but they are not (or at least shouldn’t be) Germany’s problem. This doesn’t just apply to terrorism, but also to any other problem the refugees bring with them, such as crime, overcrowding, or the drain on resources. Replace Germany with any other country, including ours, and the same applies.
There is no “fundamental right to migrate.” There is, however, a fundamental right of every nation to protect its people by securing its borders as it sees fit. That can mean anything from cavity searches at the POE to minefields and shoot-on-sight orders. Open borders sound great to the kumbaya crowd, but in practice they don’t work so well when large numbers of people want to kill you.
I am not a heartless bastard. I feel for the innocent people caught up in this. I have less sympathy for the men who could stay and do something about the problem, but still. The thing is, I will not risk the safety of my family on their account. Will I donate money? Sure. Will I let them in my house? Fuck no!
Absolutely, TOW!
Nope…
It is written in the German Constitution (article 16a) that refugees have the right for an asylum in Germany. Circumstances and eligibilityare to be determined in-country. This is also a “base right” in the constitution and therefor has special protective status against changes.
This and the fact that Germany ratified the UN refugee act of 1951 is the reason of the “there is no cap” (asylum seeking)migration.
The Dublin agreement in the EU made it virtually impossible for a large scale migration into Germany – because it is no border country of the EU. Under the Dublin agreement a Migrant/Refugee has to register and apply for asylum/visa in the first country he enters the EU. That was the main reason for border countries along the refugee route were about to collapse, because those relatively small countries were simply overwhelmed by the sheer mass of people. Germany then called for a temporary pause from the Dublin agreement so that itself and other central european countries could deal with migrants and support the smaller border countries. Thats what an alliance is all about – helping each other.
Yeah it is an unsettling situation for Germany and other countries, but playing by their own rules (read constitution) it is kind of the only way
Several prominent American jurists when talking about rights guaranteed by the US Constitution have used words to the effect of “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” But perhaps Jefferson put it best:
As a people the Germans are anything but stupid. They too understand the truth of the above statements.
Ok Hondo, but the question there is: a) how much in advance or in anticipation of “a danger” (a real one) do you actually change your constitution and rip basic rights from it in order for some sort of “safety”? I know there is no definitive answer to this, but I kind of like it, when politicians actually calm the fuck down and don´t quickly change a good and running system in favour of public appreciation Although I enjoy good old quotes from US history – I just have to remind you that things are quite different over the pond here. Politics work differently here (thank god) and so is the thought process of the people. The latter does give direction to way politicians act. And here comes the strange thing (especially for the US it seems). General acceptance of this policy is actually really really high. Germany and is citizens are weird. We are grumpy all the time and tend to demonize and upscale every problem in the media and or when asked be very emotional and insecure about things – but when it comes to actually making democratic decisions or actually handling problems we are german after all. Pragmatic.Effective.Thoughtful. So while everyone is complaining about outbursts of violence, harassment and the ongoing flood of migrants people actually think its for good. When asked about those 100 alleged sexual harassments on new years eve or the migrant on migrant clashes in the camps all will praise their disappointment and anger about this – but then looking from those minor numbers to those massive ones we are actually helping and weighing the danger in – to the conclusion that it´s actually the price we have to pay for doing something good / or basic human. So yeah – that´s that. I guess at the end of the day no one is fan of letting potential terrorists in and putting the life of germans or anyone for that matter here at danger. But at the end of the day it seems that Germans are willing to sacrifice a bit of safety… Read more »
How much is indeed the key question, in several respects. How much in advance is only one of them. “How much change to accommodate the newcomers are we willing to accept” is another. “How much are the newcomers willing to change to assimilate” is a third. There are many others.
With respect to the German constitution, only the Germans themselves can answer that question. IMO guaranteeing any right of asylum without qualification or allowance for proper vetting is absurd. But if that’s what Germany wants, and is willing to accept the consequences, then that is what Germany will get.
The key question is what will happen when those consequences include recent “asylum seekers” demanding fundamental changes in German society because they find some common and heretofore accepted behaviors “offensive”. Somehow, I don’t see that being particularly palatable to most Germans. But I could be wrong.
Don’t say that can’t happen. I seem to recall press reports of calls by some recent “refugees” in Germany for an end to Oktoberfest because they found it “offensive”.
Simplest view of Muslim refugees I have heard:
1) You have a large bowl
2) in that bowl are 10,000 M&Ms
3) 10 of those M&Ms are laced with a highly deadly poison
Just how many M&Ms are you going to eat?
When people develop a malignant cancer, who among us points out to them that they have a greater statistical risk of dying from heart disease? I hope that the answer is zero, but you never know with some folks. One type of accident may cause more deaths than another each year but what solace is that to the grieving families? None. What’s more, terrorism is intentional, deliberate and it feeds on itself; that is, successful attacks breed additional attacks or attempts. Thus, stopping it wherever it appears in everyone’s best interest. Ignoring it or dismissing it as statistically insignificant is a grievous mistake. Doing so only emboldens others. Accidents? Not so much. If a thunderstorm rolls in and a person seeks shelter against a metal fence or holds an umbrella over his head, we’re sorry to hear that he was struck by lightning but also add something along the lines of, “What a dumb shit.” There WAS something the individual could have done to avoid being struck. The same is true of many other deaths by accident, whether it be driving recklessly or looking down a barrel to see if it’s clear. Try avoiding terrorists attacks or at least try telling the families of the victims of the WTC and Boston Marathon attacks that, statistically, their murdered loved ones beat the odds.
Beautiful! I’m going to remember to use that same line of reasoning.
(MASSIVE LIKE)
Yep. Some risks are reasonably avoidable; others are not. Terrorist acts target common things (places of business, public places, gatherings, etc . . . ). In a free society, “avoiding terrorist acts via individual actions” thus generally falls in the “not reasonably avoidable” category.
The consequences of a successful terrorist attack also cannot be reasonably mitigated. Therefore, minimization of the probability of occurrence – and thus making them exceedingly rare, if not preventing them entirely – is the only viable option.
Had there been any doubt, prior to now, all has been confirmed. Lars, you are just a worthless antagonistic piece of shit. Without further delay, this was made JUST for YOU asshole:
THIS pretty well sums up MY thoughts about Commissar’s cranial diarrhea that he gushes all over the place:
Oh, but when you cough up the numbers, the data, the real-world statistics, and don’t spout socio-political narrative with no backup, you yank the support right out from under Lars the trout-sniffing poodle. And he subsequently retreats to his burrow, to lick his wounds and dredge up more hogwash, the politest term for whatever he says.
Pray, continue to bring forth the facts and statistics in plenty, people.
The best way to overcome bullshit is using the TRUTH.
It’s my opinion that he spends a LOT of time alone because he’s just as antisocial in real life as he is here and he comes here craving attention like a junkie does a “fix”.
Lars is a political hack. Plain and simple.
Whenever someone invokes statistics, I usually cringe. We’ve all heard the famous line, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” Most folks attribute that to Twain, but he actually was quoting Benjamin Disraeli. My point is that the line rang true in their day, and it rings true in ours. How many times do we see stats and know, intuitively, that the conclusions drawn from them just can’t be right? Madison Avenue loves stats, and 9 out of 10 doctors agree! Sure, stats are useful, but most of us have neither the time nor inclination to pore over them to ferret out the errors or the erroneous and unsupported conclusions drawn from them. So, we either accept them—and that’s a wonderful thing to those pushing them—or we dismiss them. Numbers are often exploited, used to influence us to do something, whether it be to alter our point of view regarding terrorism, our eating habits (I bear no grudge against gluten myself) or our perception (what global warming?) Why? Why do they push them? In the interests of truth? No, that can’t be or stats, as well as the correlations and conclusions drawn from them, would not so often be wrong and commonly misused. They are pushed to manipulate us, in the guise of intellectual appeal, to get with the program, to join the cause, support the agenda, or to buy the product. Screw that. I know right. I know wrong. Over the course of my life, that has been enough.
The Germans OUGHT to know, they let the damn things thoroughly infest their turf! Let’s see, so far they’ve demanded an END to celebrating Oktoberfest because the drinking and debauchery “offends” them DESPITE the multitudes of sexual attacks and rapes attributed to them and now there are plenty of accounts of “Vigilantes” that are popping up with the support of German people, I guess they’re “racists and hatemongers” in liberals’ eyes because they’re shit-sick and tired of the vandalism, robberies and rapes done my muzzie “refugees”.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390042/The-fightback-begins-German-vigilante-group-vows-protect-women-migrant-attackers-three-Syrians-arrested-gang-raping-two-teenage-girls.html
Didn’t take long, did it?
I’ve seen Angela Merkel looking so fed up, it’s visible on camera. I think she knows that she made a mistake.
I think her irritation is from the fact that multiculturalism is being proven to be a problem again no matter how hard she wished otherwise.
Here are a couple of more stories, one about the rape of a 10 year old boy and the other about anti-Muslim protests in Europe:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3434708/Iraqi-migrant-raped-10-year-old-boy-swimming-pool-Vienna-told-police-sexual-emergency-hadn-t-sex-months.html
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_EUROPE_ANTI_ISLAM_PROTESTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-02-06-09-43-44
I assume that Europeans should not be upset with the issue of mass immigration with any type of vetting? I wounder what the families of the victims of both Paris attacks think about this?
I wonder how much longer it will be until Commissar comes back to excrete his cranial diarrhea to “enlighten” us in between his sexual fantasies about SP8 Moerk?
so let me get this straight,,,, the Germans, who embraced the refugees and accepted (or excepted, whichever works for you) them into their country, have now found that some of the bad guys are using status as refugees as a cover to sneak into their county, and other to do bad things. They are experiencing this first hand and are attempting warn others of the dangers and Lars says that we are all fear mongers and there is very little chance of them harming us????
Well,, there is little chance of me being bitten by a snake too because I don’t pick them up or play with them.
And there is also very little chance of you being killed by a cow, either, because you are nowhere near a cow or a butcher shop that has beef available.
Unfortunately I have a few cows so there is that danger, but,,, I keep them where they belong and react accordingly to any situation that arises.
This is fact but can be used as an analogy related to the subject.
And sorry about reporting the comment. That was a fat finger mistake and unintentional.
Won’t Lars please think about the children?
Lars,
Aren’t you past due for your appointment for your ground glass enema?
Can I get an “um, duh” from the crowd?
Sure! ummmm…du-u-uh!
I can triple that, if you like
Attention Lars: If King Jonn ever decides to allow us to vote on who gets kicked off the TAH island……….Muthor forker, get your life jacket on!
Have you ever asked yourself if the trout-sniffer has been tested for HPV?
Makes no difference to me. The day he is kicked off the TAH island, I will no longer go into the water for bathing or to take a leak.
More evidence that too many conservatives can move past in-group / out-group bullshit.
Always trying to get rid of people that are different then you.
Nothing I said in this thread justifies the ridiculous fury it generated.
You guys overreact to my posts like a bunch of tiny rat sized yapping dogs reacting to a doorbell.
You are correct to a point; nothing in “this” thread may excuse the vitriol also included in this thread towards you. However, A trend has been set from you on how you post. And risk management dictates that posters here will react when there is a risk that something you post will be; uninformed, made up statistics, unreliable(as you are to stubborn to just admit when you are wrong), as well as, exciting as it is a different POV and occasionally, yes, you do have some thought provoking words. Although, Those seem to be few and far between. Additionally when you say you will do something(try to change the perspective by changing the way you post) and fail to do that(see the post I am replying to), the your credibility begins to wane; if there was any left.
I, personally, find some of the shit you post to be ignorant and I can not understand for the life of me how a supposed combat veteran could view the world that way(not an accusation by the way, I think you are a veteran.) Especially in this thread. The whole topic stemmed around how you deem Islamic terrorism, as basically, not a threat. You, of anybody, should know for the facts that it is a threat. Too make it seem innocuous is curiously, borderline crazy. I believe an Officer of the U.S. Military would be well prepared to handle such things; not blow them off unimportant or very low.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” – Sun Tzu
You’ve hit the nail on the head. It’s not just this thread. Lars poisoned the water a long time ago. He had the opportunity, at the beginning, to enter this community and offer an alternative perspective in a non-offputting way as several others have done. Lars, however, blew that opportunity, about as persistently and thoroughly as such an opportunity can be blown.
Bingo. There are a number of reasonably liberal commenters here who do not act like jerks. They are treated far differently here than is Taylor – for obvious reasons.
At least one of them has also called out Taylor for being a jerk.
LC is the model, a fellow who tends to lean left but whose opinions are well respected.
Yep. Another is Fastjack, if I recall past interactions with him/her correctly (believe they’re male, but I’m not certain and I haven’t asked).
Both support their arguments with facts, are willing to give/take/argue when they feel they’re right, and admit it when they’ve made a mistake. They also don’t pontificate or act like they’re “superior”.
I may disagree with them fairly often, but I respect them nonetheless and can have a civil discussion with them.
Lars – just about every time you post it’s almost like you’re looking to start a fight. Remember this comment you made yesterday on another thread:
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=64189#comment-2794138
“I disagree with some of you points and your interpretation of my intent.
However, I take your point, my conduct on TAH has been a poor representation of a veteran and a poor representation of someone that rose through the ranks to become a commissioned officer.
I have serious anger issues that I am dealing with. And when it started effecting my performance I sought help.
It did not destroy my career, but it would have if I did not get it under control. I walked away and took a knee instead.”
Back off the vitriol…Hell, maybe you just need to back away from visiting TAH until you figure out how to be CONSTRUCTIVE member of this blog. I’d respect you much more if you just came in here and treated EVERYONE with a little more respect than you do.
If you did not read my reply to you yesterday, take a few moments to read it and take it as sound advice from someone that has “been there and done that”:
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=64189#comment-2794244
This is for Lars, the trout-sniffing poodle who is, as I have said before, lazy, sloppy, tiresome and boring, and in addition, frequently flat-out wrong. It is not about getting rid of people who are DIFFERENT. Everyone here differs from everyone else. No one is ‘got rid of’ for being different. We do pound on each other on a regular basis. But not one of us acts like a smug, self-centered asshole quite the way you do, poodle. While you’re trying to sort that out, I will refer you to your statement in which you say ‘groups that are mistaken (such as Sikhs)’ which is couched (meaning written) in a way to imply that Sikhs ARE muslims, and not just mistaken for them. Your only purpose in showing up here is to goad people into paying attention to you, as if you were still 9 and your mom is too busy to do so. If you actually had something useful to say, which happens less than .010% of the time, you’d get less shit from people. You said once you left DU because you couldn’t ‘school’ them to your way of thinking. You didn’t leave. They blocked you. You seem to piss people off everywhere you go. Yes, you do get attention here, but like that 9-year-old repeatedly poking his older sibling to get attention, you get smacked down repeatedly by the bigger sibling and Mommy puts you on the time-out chair. Then YOU get to be the victim, which is completely bogus since your entire goal was to piss people off at you. I’m not going to go to the trouble of posting the statistics on Americans who’ve been killed by terrorists vs. American who’ve been killed by cows, but when you make ridiculous statement like the one I’m referring to, you bring all that smack down on yourself. The best thing you can do is go find some place else to play, like starting your own effing blog. And the response to that will be, ‘well, I just don’t have time.’ Yeah, but you have time to come… Read more »
I’m agree with ph2. This isn’t a healthy environment any longer. You’ve mentioned having anger issues that you’ve sought treatment for in the past. I don’t think that any of the therapist that you’ve seen would condone your involvement in an ongoing negative stimulus such as this has turned into. Regardless of who’s fault it is, you’ve polarized pretty much the entire board against you. If it were me, I would stop and honestly think if maybe I may be mistaken in some of my views or how much I contributed to that sentiment. You don’t seem to be doing that and it brings up a whole other set of questions that are ultimately none of my business. Veteran to veteran, arguing with everyone here isn’t helping you Lars. I truly don’t mean that with any animosity.
If Lars thinks that this place is bad, I’d recommend that he go over to Ace of Spades HQ (the “smart military blog”) and try to get the crowd riled up there. TAH is pretty tame compared to some of the posters and moderators there; they will chew him up and spit him out in no time – that’s if they don’t drop the banhammer of Hell on him first
I’m going to leave this Reuters article here, because Lars is most likely snooping to see if he has any more interest in him.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-coalition-idUKKCN0VA3RE
ISIS/Daesh IS on the rise in Libya. Their goal is to gain a stranglehold in Libya, with access to billions of dollars of oil revenue.
This is not a joke, nor am I making shit up. Anyone with a working brain cell can read that article and see, quite plainly, that even SoS Kerry is saying this in plain English, and that IT IS A THREAT. He has said that WE (meaning western nations) cannot afford to let ISIS/Daesh gain control of that. It is a slippery slope.
The Chicago Tribune has an editorial in the Sunday Nation & World section that goes into greater specific detail.
Now, if these two valid sources are saying, in plain, blunt English, that ISIS/Daesh is a rising threat to the free world, what part of that is so damned difficult for YOU to understand, Taylor?
You seem to have no connection to reality.
THEY ARE NEITHER PLACID, NOR WELCOMING, NOR INTERESTED IN BEING OUR FRIENDS, NOR WILL THEY REST UNTIL OR UNLESS THEY ARE DRIVEN STRAIGHT BACK INTO THE HELL THEY ROSE FROM.
That is the reality of it. Grow the fuck up and deal with it.
Some of us (especially us older farts) do not play well with others. Every post by Lars is an effort to get people talking about, and to him. That’s precisely what he feeds on. In essence, we satisfy his hunger for attention by responding to his gibberish every time he touches a letter key. Over and over he has been reminded he does not fit into this web site and the conversations generated by readers. Yet he persists in pissing people off by challenging all who disagree with his “superior intellect” (by his count). My thought is we take a vote and kick his ass off our island where he can no longer breathe OUR air. Here’s the first vote to remove him. Have a good swim Tinkerbelle.