This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Well simply because one person was rejected as a refugee and then radicalized doesn't mean all will be. A case study is a study of one case. Drawing a generalization from that case is often problematic, because individual cases are just that -- highly individualized fact patterns that can't be duplicated, nor might they be appropriate to draw generalizations about the whole of the core issue.
Two different Tunisia's, that of the capital and that of the desert. The suspect is from the former, and he was likely raised in a very strict Islamic environment. Whether he came to Europe thinking he was going to find freedom like many Tunisians do is debatable, but he like many other immigrants, probably found Europe to be exactly the opposite as he thought it would be. Or maybe he just planned to kill a bunch of people from the get go, but I doubt it.
Obviously. I was more thinking in terms of changes to the asylum procedure.
I think reasonable people can agree on this. But IIRC, and not from the alt-right, the people of Syria were sort of marching into Germany chanting slogans and the like. It was a bit antiquated (and i take your point about refugee processes being Kafkaesque. I know you mean the utter existential futility and hatred of the byzantine and arbitrary nature of bureaucratic Europe). But much as it was a dark time for Syria, it's a confusing time for Germany. You have people marching through Turkey chanting "Alluha Akbar" and tearing down gates to get into your country. Those people sound like invaders, rather than refugees. It becomes very difficult to distinguish, and the two culture clashes are on full display. A more radicalized Turkey won't take the refugees, what does Germany do?
This I agree with. And also at fault is the ideas that 1) anywhere else is better than here and 2) if I can just cross that border all my problems will be solved.
Please don't focus on Syria. What is happening in Syria is a real tragedy. From Syria you get real refugees fleeing actual disaster.
He also wasn't a refugee, has family in Germany, and Tunisia claimed he was not theirs. So it seems to me Germany couldn't deport him even even they wanted to, he had no country willing to claim him. Where would they send him?
Just some notes here:
Probably not unless they had the evidence to convict him. I guess they could have detained him and tried, but that is a waste of resources.
Amri was arrested once in Germany for forged ID papers. He served 4 years in prison in Italy. He was under surveillance for plotting robberies and selling drugs. He was also a part of a terrorist cell.
24 hour surveillance of a guy that might be a jihadist is both time consuming and expensive. At some point you have to prioritize and most of these guys don't end up worth tailing. What you are looking for is a ring, a cell, a plot. You are rarely going to be able to stop one executing a plan, that's why ISIS has been more successful at jihad than Al-Qaeda. AQ requires a parade of people to pull anything off with meetings, and couriers, and lots of comm.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4061096/Danish-police-say-man-matching-description-Berlin-lorry-attack-suspect-seen-Aalborg.html
Yeaah, humerous that the EU has islamists able to just prance all around the place thanks to the open borders.
Is that what happened here? Wasn't he killed by police.
Anis Amri's escape was more complicated than slipping across state lines. After his terrorist attack in Berlin, he made his way to Chambery, France, then to Turin, Italy and finally Milan, where he was killed by police. From an earlier post, the Schengen Agreement applies to freedom of movement for citizens of the European Union. Amri was Tunisian, without a passport. Border security utterly failed.The General said:
