Attacks In Germany

The latest attacker, the bomber at the music festival, pledged allegiance to the Islamic State Group in a video.

Joachim Herrmann, Bavaria's interior minister, said: "He expressly announces, in the name of Allah, and testifying his allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, a famous Islamist leader, an act of revenge against the Germans because they're getting in the way of Islam. http://news.sky.com/story/germany-bomber-pledged-allegiance-to-is-10512341




What has happened?

On 18 July, a teenage Afghan refugee hacked at passengers on a train in Wuerzburg with an axe and knife, wounding five. He was shot dead by police.

On 22 July, a German teenager of Iranian heritage shot dead nine people in Munich before shooting himself dead.

On 24 July, a 21-year-old Syrian refugee killed a woman with a machete and wounded five other people as he fled before being arrested.

Later that day, a 27-year-old Syrian whose refugee application had been refused blew himself up outside a bar in Ansbach. Fifteen people were wounded. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36882445

 

Also, RIP to those ten dead.

 

Aaaand Angela doesn't give a shit.
I simply don't know who European politicians are representing anymore (except for Asmo maybe).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/28/merkel-rejects-calls-to-change-germanys-refugee-policy-after-attacks

I think the worst thing for her was her having her holiday interrupted.

 

She needs to change with the times.

 

I think you are projecting things onto her that are completely bogus.

She defending Germany taking in all these refugees of which the majority did nothing wrong does not mean or even indicate in any way that she doesn't give a shit. Simply dubious for concluding it like this. And hard to take serious, really. Are you sure you aren't just putting it like that because you disagree with a country like Germany taking in a lot of syrian refugees? (of which most would never do anything as disturbing as slaying people with an axe and i think you know that as well)

I might be one of the only people (european or not) on here who is vocal about my partiular views on this matter, but that doesn't say much. There are lots of people that roughly agree with me And hey, just being in disagreement about the refugee/immigration problem doesn't mean she doesn't represent those europeans in any way.
On the other hand, I feel like adding, I never felt like she represented me and my views in particular. I'm just a dutch guy (not deutsch but yes, like Merkel european) who prefers that we as a country do as much for these syrian refugees as we can (to state the obvious this does not include radicalized muslims aiming to start trouble here). I applaud other countries doing the same (wether they are Saudi Arabia, Germany or the USA), which does not mean reeling every person in that claims to need refuge just like that at all.
And I don't see Merkel or Hollande wanting that either. Some people just get a bit retarded in their fear of terrorism. They claim to be practical (just stop any refugee from getting in) but it is rather xenophobic and hopeless. In fact they are catering to IS' motives when they argue for not taking in any refugee at all because if they are muslim or arab they are most likely gonna be a problem (simply not the case for the far majority).

 

A bit vague. In what way?

 

This:

“A rejection of the humanitarian stance we took could have led to even worse consequences,” the German chancellor said, adding that the assailants “wanted to undermine our sense of community, our openness and our willingness to help people in need. We firmly reject this.”


IMO - We all want to believe in the best of what mankind can/will do. Times have proven that we must be more guarded than we'd like to be.

 

We must be more guarded and that is what Merkel (and Hollande for that matter) are advocating as well. It just shouldn't be at the expense of desperate people with no dubious motive at all. I don't see what is wrong with that. What's wrong is if we give in to this terrorism and its ultimate goal (like you said yourself is one of the most important things NOT to do), and trade in our values (to put it short and simply and use those leaders own words) for a non solution and a false sense of security.

 

We despise ISIS for their lack of humanity. If Europe seals it's borders against genuine refugees displaced by war, we play to their agenda.

 

No doubt it's a tricky tight wire to walk.

 

It is often put so black and white, it almost reeks of extremism on itself

We DO need to be more on our guard and we definitely should stop illegal refugees from crossing the border illegally (for one). I thought there was a procedure after this deal with Turkey that was supposed to deal with that: these illegal syrians (or afghans/iraqis) are put on a plane back to Turkey. For every illegal refugee send back we allow a legal one in.
It's not like when these european leaders say it shouldn't be at the cost of our values and at the cost of genuine refugees that they mean nothing will change or be improved. It's nuts to put it like that. It seems everyone who is worried and has a rigid conclusion is arguing at whatever cost (even truth) to try to get it through to people that have an opposite way of dealing with it.

 

Yeah, I don't agree with a country like Germany taking a lot of Syrian refugees. Nice job, Sherlock. That was so hard to conclude.


Merkel and Hollande are probably just minions though, and there's an agenda to all of this, for sure.
All I hear is empty words with very little meaning when they speak...


For the sake of preserving values and helping people? For that sense of community? So that we prove that we are not like ISIS, given their lack of humanity, as some say it?
We are not like ISIS, but we don't have to be idiots about this either.

Muslims and Arabs ARE a potential risk. A huge risk. For Gods sake, that one guy was just denied asylum, and all of a sudden he even knows how to make a bomb.

 

But you're doing the same though?

 

I'm not advocating an open door to everyone - just to genuine refugees in numbers that can be accommodated.

Clearly we have to find ways to increase security, that doesn't mean we have to give up our humanitarian values.

 

Right.

 

Another crimmigrant in Europe spreading peace, attacking an old man.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/priest-belgium-stabbed-by-asylum-8535440

Welcome, willkommen

 

A religion of peace. Fundamentalism is spreading like a plague and i fear no place will be untouched. And I don't know the solution for this...

 

Japan and a lot of other asian countries are rather xenophobic. I dont see why thats a bad thing, One of the enjoyable parts of visiting those places

I dont see how it makes much of a difference either way.

Russia, China, plenty of countries in the world (outside Europe) that arent letting them in, theyll just get along fine, and not only that, no one seems to be condeming them for not doing so.

Germany is supposed to give a shit, if they dont the Chancellor gets it in the media, China doesnt give a shit and no one says anything


????

 

Stability, peace and education. But you shouldn't confuse terrorist attacks from fundamentalist extremists with the general religion of peace. These extremists pervert the mainstream religion.

 

Yeah, anybody who dares to welcome a refugee from the same country and with the same religion as a terrorist is an extreme idiot. Our society will fall because of sheltering and welcoming such victims. Close the border for every stranger in need and we will live blisfully ever after and no terrorist attack will ever happen on EU soil again