Europe submits voluntarily

[angelo]

The sooner people and their government in the West admit that Islam is at war with the West, the better it will be for everyone. The screening of any migration from Islamic countries is a priority!

What is "Islam" in this? How is Islam at war with the West? Yesterday I went to my local corner shop and bought some eggs and milk. The Muslim shopkeeper didn't shoot me. Why didn't he shoot me? Doesn't that prove that Islam is not at war with the West?

Not all moslems are terrorists, but practically all terrorists are moslems!

 

[DrZoidberg]

What is "Islam" in this? How is Islam at war with the West? Yesterday I went to my local corner shop and bought some eggs and milk. The Muslim shopkeeper didn't shoot me. Why didn't he shoot me? Doesn't that prove that Islam is not at war with the West?

Not all moslems are terrorists, but practically all terrorists are moslems!

I did a quick check just in case... yup... you're nuts. In USA about 6% of all terrorist attacks the last 30 years have been Islamic. The same number for Europe is 2%. It's not even more serious in numbers of dead. There's just no way to twist those numbers around to make them work for you.

We just pay more attention to Islamic terrorism. The reality is that militant Islam is just yet another group in the pile of militant groups causing trouble. They are not the most serious or most dangerous. We also know, due to the large numbers of Muslims, living in the west that most Muslims are not militant.

So I'm not sure where you get your numbers from? Is it Jihadwatch possibly? Ie, all they print is lies.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Not all moslems are terrorists, but practically all terrorists are moslems!

I did a quick check just in case... yup... you're nuts. In USA about 6% of all terrorist attacks the last 30 years have been Islamic. The same number for Europe is 2%. It's not even more serious in numbers of dead. There's just no way to twist those numbers around to make them work for you.

We just pay more attention to Islamic terrorism. The reality is that militant Islam is just yet another group in the pile of militant groups causing trouble. They are not the most serious or most dangerous. We also know, due to the large numbers of Muslims, living in the west that most Muslims are not militant.

So I'm not sure where you get your numbers from? Is it Jihadwatch possibly? Ie, all they print is lies.

I read these figures somewhere was it the FBI files. I'm too lazy to find these today. I Understand the Jewish Defence League committed more attacks than Jihadis (7% vs 6%.

The extent of the damage may give a different view but these figures are not in dispute. If just a handful of Muslims commit attacks than an extra million pouring into Europe would suggest a bigger handful of likely attacks. The same applies when you get several thousand British football supporters entering a European country.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I did a quick check just in case... yup... you're nuts. In USA about 6% of all terrorist attacks the last 30 years have been Islamic. The same number for Europe is 2%. It's not even more serious in numbers of dead. There's just no way to twist those numbers around to make them work for you.

We just pay more attention to Islamic terrorism. The reality is that militant Islam is just yet another group in the pile of militant groups causing trouble. They are not the most serious or most dangerous. We also know, due to the large numbers of Muslims, living in the west that most Muslims are not militant.

So I'm not sure where you get your numbers from? Is it Jihadwatch possibly? Ie, all they print is lies.

I read these figures somewhere was it the FBI files. I'm too lazy to find these today. I Understand the Jewish Defence League committed more attacks than Jihadis (7% vs 6%.

The extent of the damage may give a different view but these figures are not in dispute. If just a handful of Muslims commit attacks than an extra million pouring into Europe would suggest a bigger handful of likely attacks. The same applies when you get several thousand British football supporters entering a European country.

The problem is the mayhem caused by communist (and atheistic) terrorists in the 70'ies and 80'ies. Today's Muslim terrorists come across as girl scouts in comparison. Add to that all manner of separatist movements (who since then has calmed down). Nominally motivated by religion. But to anybody paying attention religion was not the motivator. IRA for instance. We don't even have the fraction of terror attacks we had back then.

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

 

[4321lynx]

I read these figures somewhere was it the FBI files. I'm too lazy to find these today. I Understand the Jewish Defence League committed more attacks than Jihadis (7% vs 6%.

The extent of the damage may give a different view but these figures are not in dispute. If just a handful of Muslims commit attacks than an extra million pouring into Europe would suggest a bigger handful of likely attacks. The same applies when you get several thousand British football supporters entering a European country.

The problem is the mayhem caused by communist (and atheistic) terrorists in the 70'ies and 80'ies. Today's Muslim terrorists come across as girl scouts in comparison. Add to that all manner of separatist movements (who since then has calmed down). Nominally motivated by religion. But to anybody paying attention religion was not the motivator. IRA for instance. We don't even have the fraction of terror attacks we had back then.

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

Are you using the figures for the 70's. 80's & 90's to inflate the statistics of non-muslim terrorists? How about telling us the figures limited to the 21st century, and quoting your sources for those?

 

[DrZoidberg]

The problem is the mayhem caused by communist (and atheistic) terrorists in the 70'ies and 80'ies. Today's Muslim terrorists come across as girl scouts in comparison. Add to that all manner of separatist movements (who since then has calmed down). Nominally motivated by religion. But to anybody paying attention religion was not the motivator. IRA for instance. We don't even have the fraction of terror attacks we had back then.

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

Are you using the figures for the 70's. 80's & 90's to inflate the statistics of non-muslim terrorists? How about telling us the figures limited to the 21st century, and quoting your sources for those?

I just did a standard googling. I'm sure you can find the same numbers if you made some effort. The most common source cited is FBI.

Look, terrorism goes in trends. During certain periods one thing is the tits to kill for. At other times another. These kinds of causes attract angry young men (and some women) who then go on to do mischief. Today Islam is a trendy terror cause. We know terror-trends work like this. And it would be unfair, not to take the long picture. In 20 years I'm sure it'll be Pokemon Go fans killing for peace, or some other equally retarded cause.

But even if we just take recent years, the Muslims still don't come out on top (for terror attacks in the west). We just don't have enough Muslims to threaten, pretty much, all other violent special interest groups, including Jews.

 

[TSwizzle]

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

Man up ? What the fuck does that even mean ? 84 people killed in Nice by a muslim terrorist and we should man up ? What is the number of dead people that should be reached before we can show some concern ?

You really are just trolling now, poorly it has to be said.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The problem is the mayhem caused by communist (and atheistic) terrorists in the 70'ies and 80'ies. Today's Muslim terrorists come across as girl scouts in comparison. Add to that all manner of separatist movements (who since then has calmed down). Nominally motivated by religion. But to anybody paying attention religion was not the motivator. IRA for instance. We don't even have the fraction of terror attacks we had back then.

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

Are you using the figures for the 70's. 80's & 90's to inflate the statistics of non-muslim terrorists? How about telling us the figures limited to the 21st century, and quoting your sources for those?

I checked these figures which I read a few years ago Actually they are from 1980 to 2005 so now out of date which you can find here

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05#terror_05sum

I also mentioned that the research once updated should also show the extent of damage. For instance if 5 attacks by the KKK kill 4 people and 1 attack by an Islamist group kills 10, then that would give some balance.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The fact that we lose it so completely over the, by comparison, few attacks just goes to show how we're going soft. Man up!

Man up ? What the fuck does that even mean ? 84 people killed in Nice by a muslim terrorist and we should man up ? What is the number of dead people that should be reached before we can show some concern ?

You really are just trolling now, poorly it has to be said.

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

 

[TSwizzle]

Man up ? What the fuck does that even mean ? 84 people killed in Nice by a muslim terrorist and we should man up ? What is the number of dead people that should be reached before we can show some concern ?

You really are just trolling now, poorly it has to be said.

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

What a load of cobblers.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

What a load of cobblers.

This is what I'm talking about. No sense of proportion or reasonableness. Just all out fear mongering that goes right against all available data.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

What a load of cobblers.

This is what I'm talking about. No sense of proportion or reasonableness. Just all out fear mongering that goes right against all available data.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This only proves that terrorists don't always need guns to cause terror! Sometimes it's jet aircraft or as in this case, a truck!
Maybe someone ought to tell that to Obama.

This is something we should have learnt in 9.11. While difficult to control better road barriers and security are necessary. As a security rule, expect the unexpected.
Security in Europe can be very lax. They hardly look at the passports and in some cases just look at the cover and not always the person. They are clearing crowds fast. I bet if someone entered the French border from Belgium and often from Britain, and stuck his pecker out when he is supposed to show his ID, he would be let through. I must admit I haven't tried that one yet.

They've long been casual.

1982, we were doing a land crossing from East Berlin to West Berlin. It took ages to get out of East Berlin, the border guards on the west simply waved us through. They could at least see that we had just cleared East Berlin's immigration, though.

The champion of casual I have encountered, though: Singapore, 1982. We managed to get in and out without our passports being opened. Arriving we had a hunt on the plane for a lost item, we were late to the immigration checkpoint. They were standing around talking, they saw US passports and simply waved us through. Departing the idiot taxi driver took us to the cable car station rather than the train station. As there is only one train station in Singapore the outgoing border post is in the station rather than the train stopping at the border. Due to the idiot taxi driver we were running late, as we got to the front of the line our train was rolling, the guard saw US passports and waved us through. (The train was moving slowly, we were able to get on just before running out of platform.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not all moslems are terrorists, but practically all terrorists are moslems!

I did a quick check just in case... yup... you're nuts. In USA about 6% of all terrorist attacks the last 30 years have been Islamic. The same number for Europe is 2%. It's not even more serious in numbers of dead. There's just no way to twist those numbers around to make them work for you.

We just pay more attention to Islamic terrorism. The reality is that militant Islam is just yet another group in the pile of militant groups causing trouble. They are not the most serious or most dangerous. We also know, due to the large numbers of Muslims, living in the west that most Muslims are not militant.

So I'm not sure where you get your numbers from? Is it Jihadwatch possibly? Ie, all they print is lies.

If you look at attacks that killed someone vs simple harassment actions I think his numbers are right.

And lets look at your numbers for the US--we have nearly 3k dead due to Islamists. Where are the 50k dead from other terrorists???

 

[Trausti]

Man up ? What the fuck does that even mean ? 84 people killed in Nice by a muslim terrorist and we should man up ? What is the number of dead people that should be reached before we can show some concern ?

You really are just trolling now, poorly it has to be said.

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

Peaceful. Depending on the proportion of the population that is X. Define X.

 

[Trausti]

nm

 

[Trausti]

"Oh shut up, silly woman," said the reptile with a grin
"You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in"

"The attacker appears to have been a 17-year-old Afghan who has been living in Ochsenfurt for some time," Herrmann said.
"He suddenly attacked passengers with a knife and an axe, critically injuring several. Some of them may now be fighting for their lives."
The Afghan national reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar" before launching the attack, wielding a knife and axe.

http://www.dw.com/en/several-injured-in-attack-on-train-near-w%C3%BCrzburg-southern-germany/a-19408848

 

[DrZoidberg]

This only proves that terrorists don't always need guns to cause terror! Sometimes it's jet aircraft or as in this case, a truck!
Maybe someone ought to tell that to Obama.

This is something we should have learnt in 9.11. While difficult to control better road barriers and security are necessary. As a security rule, expect the unexpected.
Security in Europe can be very lax. They hardly look at the passports and in some cases just look at the cover and not always the person. They are clearing crowds fast. I bet if someone entered the French border from Belgium and often from Britain, and stuck his pecker out when he is supposed to show his ID, he would be let through. I must admit I haven't tried that one yet.

All studies show that passport controls and border checks are worthless. This are security theater. They only exist to make you feel safer when boarding planes. Also to make you feel that your government is doing something.

The reality is that anybody can easily commit any terrorist attack. There's just no stopping it.

The police is completely and utterly dependent on defectors and informers within the militant Islamic community to foil plots. Without these guys the cops wouldn't be able to stop a single one.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's the complete lack of proportion. We don't understand that only 84 dead is a historically low number. That's not to say that each of those lives wasn't a tragedy. What I'm saying is that the world is more peaceful than its ever been before and people are behaving as if civilisation is about to end. It's bizarre.

Peaceful. Depending on the proportion of the population that is X. Define X.

Lol. Compare with the same period in the 70'ies. All the colonial possessions had folded, handed over to incompetent governments sparking an unprecedented wave of terrorism/freedom fighting attacks. Before that colonial offices were targeted. The further back you go, the west has been more peaceful since the 18'th century.

It's more peaceful everywhere today than it used to be.

 

[Bomb#20]

I did a quick check just in case... yup... you're nuts. In USA about 6% of all terrorist attacks the last 30 years have been Islamic. The same number for Europe is 2%. It's not even more serious in numbers of dead. There's just no way to twist those numbers around to make them work for you.

We just pay more attention to Islamic terrorism. The reality is that militant Islam is just yet another group in the pile of militant groups causing trouble. They are not the most serious or most dangerous. We also know, due to the large numbers of Muslims, living in the west that most Muslims are not militant.

So I'm not sure where you get your numbers from? Is it Jihadwatch possibly? Ie, all they print is lies.

I read these figures somewhere was it the FBI files. I'm too lazy to find these today. I Understand the Jewish Defence League committed more attacks than Jihadis (7% vs 6%.

The extent of the damage may give a different view but these figures are not in dispute.

Of course they're in dispute -- any number of people have pointed out errors and omissions in the FBI database. But the more serious problem is that the FBI uses asinine criteria to decide what is and isn't "terrorism". They're counting bank robberies and vandalism as terrorist attacks, for chrissakes! If we count only the attacks from 1980 to 2005 that killed somebody, Islamists were responsible for not 6% but 24%. And if we're counting murders and not just attacks, Islamists murdered about 3,000 people in America during that period; the Jewish Defense League murdered 3.

The widely circulated claim that Islamic extremists are responsible for 6% and Jewish extremists for 7% is a textbook case of "Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics". It seems to trace to a propaganda site called "loonwatch". The only reason anyone would believe their misdirection is because they're telling him what he already wants to believe.