Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

Of course. As far as the police know, they haven't surrendered to Germany once.

I'm seriously not sure what you're trying to say here.

[Loud Whispers]

It's a mix of an overall better organized police that's not worthless unless and not being a place where there are more guns than citizens.
Meaning that not every lowlife thug can buy or steal a second hand gun.
So far it works pretty well. The EU population would be armed if people didn't feel safe and clamored for access to guns but the way things are most people simply do not feel the need.

Do you think I'm talking about guns? No, Europe is retarded, and it's not because of guns

Yuros want to die

I can think of no other explanation other than a subconscious deathwish and self-loathing held by millions of yuropoors who have zero ability to assess danger

fml it was common news they were coming back home in 2013, yet people laughed at this notion as a conspiracy even when shown clear evidence they were already killing yuros and already had returned home

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

they learn nothing except privilege checking

The fact that these humanoids got spawned in Belgium and then grew there does not mean they are REAL Belgians.

Real Belgians are a social construct and don't exist

[xxseuzxx]

Stop calling them like they are from your countries.
Since they also refuse to behave,refuse to educate their  children,hell they so not even obey your laws they are in no way Europeans, just Arabs,pashtuns and such living in Europe.
Can't say eunuch without saying EU.

[Sheb]

Who laughed at this notion? What to do with returning Jihadis has been discussed ever since they started to return.

[xxseuzxx]

It's a mix of an overall better organized police that's not worthless unless and not being a place where there are more guns than citizens.
Meaning that not every lowlife thug can buy or steal a second hand gun.
So far it works pretty well. The EU population would be armed if people didn't feel safe and clamored for access to guns but the way things are most people simply do not feel the need.

Do you think I'm talking about guns? No, Europe is retarded, and it's not because of guns

Yuros want to die

I can think of no other explanation other than a subconscious deathwish and self-loathing held by millions of yuropoors who have zero ability to assess danger

fml it was common news they were coming back home in 2013, yet people laughed at this notion as a conspiracy even when shown clear evidence they were already killing yuros and already had returned home

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

they learn nothing except privilege checking

The fact that these humanoids got spawned in Belgium and then grew there does not mean they are REAL Belgians.

Real Belgians are a social construct and don't exist

Decades of nanny States, gun control, and welfare mutated them into the spineless hedonistic cowards they are today.
Seriously my family members of my age that remained there are pathetic, frail both physically and mentally.
While the ones that came to the US are gun collecting giants.
The ones at South America are hardened and hard working.
The European guys are just welfare leeches and drunk slackers.

Good,as I can refer to them as EUloi.

[Reelya]

zero ability to assess danger

Ability to assess danger? If we do that objectively, then we would allocate less resources to terrorism, and more resources to fighting the leading causes of death. Terrorism is not a leading cause of death and injury. If we're being rational which is what assessing danger is about, we'd work out the cost-benefit analysis of anti-terror measures. Spending millions to save 1 life is not a good trade-off, because you can spend those millions on something else entirely that will save more lives. So you work out a cost-effective amount of anti-terror spending. Sure some people will still die in occasional attacks, but you saved more lives somewhere else, by being rational and not emotional. That's how you do this logically. But we're not even talking millions here, we're actually talking billions of Euros in terror defense spending against a threat that at most kills a handful of people.

Similarly, people who want legalized guns for self-defense are not rationally assessing danger: the UK has higher assault rates than the USA, but 1/5th the homicide rate. You'd expect the homicide rate to shoot up by a factor of 5 in UK if there was widespread gun availability. So, there would have to be a huge amount of terror attacks in the future in the UK, that just happened to be prevented by legalized guns, to make that equation come out ahead. And inevitably, some cases will happen where they stopped a Muslim guy with guns but had to let him go because carrying guns was now legal, and when he uses those guns in an attack they'll just shrug and say "we did everything we could".

[Shadowlord]

Mass shootings are caused by lax gun control where mentally unstable individuals get access to guns and decide to go out with a bang taking some more successful people with them.
Terrorism is doing something with a planned impact on religion, culture or politics and having loads of guns strewn around just makes those easier to pull off.

Dylan Roof wasn't mentally unstable. He was motivated by a belief in white supremacy, believed that black people were mentally inferior but "slick," and wanted to spark a civil war - certainly a planned impact on politics. He went into a historic black church, sat with a prayer group who welcomed him, and then killed them. His attack definitely had an impact on religion, culture, or politics.
Would you not call him a terrorist still? What about the San Bernardino shooters? If you call them terrorists, what differentiates them? If it's just that they were inspired by ISIS, consider: believing in an ideology which is abhorrent and incomprehensible to you does not make someone mentally unstable, and sticking them in that box just leaves you incapable of understanding and predicting the behavior of similar individuals in the future.

(I could name more, if you need more examples. I mean, on the one hand, naming them gives them notoriety, which some in the media says we should avoid so as to not encourage future mass-shooters who are motivated by that (while the rest of the media does it anyways), but on the other hand, you can't learn anything from the past by ignoring it)
(I'd name Breivik but you probably already consider him a terrorist)

P.S. I agree with Reelya.

[martinuzz]

Hmm, apparently there is confusion now whether Erdogan said he extradited the perpetrator to Belgium, or the Netherlands, june last year.
Dutch newspaper reports that the AFP press agency still says he said Belgium, but that Erdogan said he said the Netherlands, and that both Dutch and Belgian intelligence services received information.
It probably was Belgium though, why would a Belgian national be extradited to the Netherlands?

The Dutch ministry of Justice stated they will go try and find out if it's true what Erdogan says.

[smjjames]

While I don't view the Belgians as lazy and drunk like xxseuzxx does, I do agree that Belgium has a really serious problem going on, I mean, the guy stayed there for three freaking months and apparently the Belgian intelligence services are incompetent as all hell. One US intel official even had choice words for the Belgian intel services: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/22/u-s-officials-bash-shitty-belgian-security-forces.html

But really, the problem with Belgium goes deeper than just incompetent intel services and lies in the broken government of Belgium.

Not sure if I saw some rumor or chatter (or maybe it was the usual talk) of France wanting to annex the Wallonian part of Belgium. Not that I'd advocate them doing it by force obviously.

[martinuzz]

I don't think the nationalist Flemish part of Belgians would object to that. They have wanted to get rid of the poorer Wallonia region for ages.

[Pancaek]

Just popped in to this thread to see what was going on here and get some international news links. But apparently it boils down to that I'm a coward, weakling, welfare leech, slacker, etc.

Neat.

[Sheb]

I'll die on a barricade before letting the French take over my country. Or well, at least not be happy about it.

[Loud Whispers]

Who laughed at this notion? What to do with returning Jihadis has been discussed ever since they started to return.

Old Europol thread

I will nab quotes if I'm bored enough and must

I'M ANGRY

ABOUT

QUOTES

Seriously when I brought this up people weren't arguing over what to do with them, they were arguing whether they existed and denied their existence even when they were clearly shown to already be here. This is beyond Ostrich in the sand, this is just strait up some Yuri denialist bullshit

Ability to assess danger? If we do that objectively, then we would allocate less resources to terrorism, and more resources to fighting the leading causes of death.

Hahaha this is what I'm talking about, zero ability to assess danger

Dylan Roof wasn't mentally unstable. He was motivated by a belief in white supremacy, believed that black people were mentally inferior but "slick," and wanted to spark a civil war - certainly a planned impact on politics. He went into a historic black church, sat with a prayer group who welcomed him, and then killed them. His attack definitely had an impact on religion, culture, or politics.
Would you not call him a terrorist still? What about the San Bernardino shooters? If you call them terrorists, what differentiates them? If it's just that they were inspired by ISIS, consider: believing in an ideology which is abhorrent and incomprehensible to you does not make someone mentally unstable, and sticking them in that box just leaves you incapable of understanding and predicting the behavior of similar individuals in the future.

Yo consider your homosexual black murderer who killed two white people on live television in the hopes of sparking a race war

His motivations were the same, he was nonetheless completely batshit insane because he was insane. Sane people killing for ideology is different from insane people killing for ideology, because they are insane and do not understand what they are doing as someone normal deliberately doing so can
It's pretty much just a semantic thing since the overlap is real and you only really need to specify terrorism on practical grounds of fighting organized movements that want to inflict as much economic and political damage as possible upon the state as possible. Your psycho mass murder wants to kill loads of people because x, your terrorist wants to achieve x and will do whatever strategy seems likely to succeed in x and treats loads of people as acceptable targets to kill. Then there are also legal ramifications, as your mentally ill terrorist gets different treatment from just a plain terrorist, hence why the Russians wanted to determine whether the beheader of peace was mentally sound before proceeding to judicial shit

I'll die on a barricade before letting the French take over my country. Or well, at least not be happy about it.

Lol it's not the French taking over your country

[Shadowlord]

That just supports my point - Mental stability or instability just has no relation to whether an act is a mass shooting or terrorism. (Were you trying to get me to argue against myself?)

[Sheb]

I think you're mixing up with people denying ISIS was infiltrating fighters in the refugees flows. Part of the argument was that ISIS don't need to do it, because it got plenty of European-born fighters with up to date passport. The recent attack by what look like three Belgians kind of support that point.