Reply With Quote
I heard a security "expert" talking about this very thing after the Brussels Airport attack. Basically they create a better target by creating a completely secure area that everyone has wait to get into.
NPR brought up this exact point.
I heard a security "expert" talking about this very thing after the Brussels Airport attack. Basically they create a better target by creating a completely secure area that everyone has wait to get into.
No words.... you can't even turn on the news any more without hearing about some kind of attack.
Some people in the media are guessing that this type of attack will be copied considering how easy it is to get your hands on a truck.
I've heard conflicting accounts of what kind of hardware he actually had in the truck. I'm sure that will answer this question.Radicalized lone wolf ... I'm guessing this is not what we want to hear.
Yeah just peaked back on CNN and they're now saying the dude had one handgun, but the rifles and grenades were fake. So that makes it more likely that he was acting alone... or "inspired" by ISIS.
These governments seem hopeless fighting this just like when modern terrorism started in the 70s. Absolutely no control of the situation and no plan of keeping people safe.
They've had groups of soldiers patrolling the tourist areas in Southern France all summer. There are some things you just can't plan for/control.
Man sadly this even solidifies Lord Trump presidency even more
He's a lock now. I knew it for months. Now everyone does
... but but but, you hate govt!! except when you need them. ing ridghtwingnuts
Get your straight. France invaded, colonized, "protectorate d" Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco up to 200 years ago. Algeria was as French as New York is American.
Then when France needed cheap labor, France imported 100Ks of Maghrebins, just like the USA imported Mexicans.
There are about 6M Maghrebin in France who are citizens, not immigrants. French racism towards Maghrebins is as strong as American racism is against blacks, resulting in the same alienation, poverty, hopelessness, crime among Maghrebin youth. Now Muslim radicalization makes it all worse.
Yeah ISIS is a great ally for Trump
it raised concerns that Trump was signaling to terrorists that they can help dictate events in the United States.
There was also something of a mixed message: the GOP candidate delayed his vice-presidential announcement in the name of propriety, but Trump nevertheless headlined a fundraiser last night and made multiple Fox News appearances.
And during those television interviews,
Trump called for a declaration of war, though he may not fully understand what that means; and
Trump called for a NATO offensive against terrorists, though he doesn’t think NATO should exist.
On Twitter, Trump added, in response to the deadly attack, “When will we learn?” He hasn’t made any effort to explain what it is, exactly, he wants us to learn that we don’t already know.
In the wake of the latest terrorist crisis, Trump continues to raise questions about his basic competence and ability to function well under pressure.
That said, compared to Newt Gingrich, Donald J. Trump is practically a learned statesman.
Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House who had been muted as a potential Trump running mate, took his GOP colleague’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. a step further in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity.
“Every person here who is of a Muslim background” should be tested to determine whether he or she believes in Shariah, a legal code based on the Quran and other Islamic scriptures.
If they do, he said, they should be deported – even if they’re U.S. citizens. Gingrich added that anyone who simply visits any website “favoring ISIS or al Qaeda or other terrorist groups” should be guilty of a felony, “and they should go to jail.”
Not to put too fine a point on this, but Gingrich’s approach isn’t just patently uncons utional, it’s bonkers.
There is no scenario in which the United States government can identify a religious minority group and start applying loyalty tests.
There is no scenario in which the United States government can start monitoring the browsing habits of Americans based on whether or not Newt Gingrich approves of their faith.
There is no scenario in which the United States government can charge Americans with a felony for visiting a website.
And then, of course, there’s the practical matter. Under Gingrich’s vision, government officials would ask every Muslim person in the country – individually – whether they believe in Shariah law. If they say yes, Gingrich wants them deported, which is probably why they’d respond, “No.”
If Gingrich actually believes his own nonsense, last night was an alarming display.
If, however, Gingrich hoped to exploit the violence in Nice to make a last-ditch effort to become Trump’s running mate, spewing bizarre garbage with the expectation that Trump would be impressed, last night was disqualifying.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
Amazing. Trash is totally bonkers, as are all the Trash ass-lickers.
Yet it was ambassadokilla who created ISIS tbqh
Mother of ISIS vs ally of ISIS?
ambassadokilla after the attack "this just means we need to keep working with our allies and destroy ISIas headquarters and strongholds"
Government's main job is public safety and defense of the country. That's priority number one. France is not doing a good job at it.
The French president sounds like a defeated man. He should step down.
the truck driver was French citizen with no known terrorist connections. How does any police force prevent that?
Neither Hillary nor Trump make any goddamm sense on this point. How do you fight/prevent locals from becoming radicalized via the internet?
Best strategy, IMO, is to gleefully affix blame to a general racial or religious group after every high-profile attack.
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/17/...-and-the-west/
It is tempting to view such violence as senseless and nihilistic. However, taking into account the Islamic State’s history, it is clear that such a determination would be a mistake. By launching increasingly shocking attacks against Western targets, the Islamic State is pursuing a specific goal — generating hostility between domestic Muslim populations and the broader societies that they live in.The Islamic State has little hope of achieving that level of disastrous success in Western Europe or North America. But what the group is seeking to accomplish nonetheless mirrors its strategy of divide-and-conquer in Iraq. Through increasingly provocative terrorist attacks, hostage executions, and videotaped threats, the Islamic State is consciously seeking to trigger a backlash by Western governments and citizens against the Muslim minorities living in their societies. By achieving this, the group hopes to polarize both sides against each other, locking them into an escalating spiral of alienation, hatred and collective retribution. In a such a scenario, the group can later attempt to pose as the only effective protector for increasingly beleaguered Western Muslims.
Ban Trucks.
libs will never turn on Muslims for terrorism or sexual nastiness. They have almost infinite toleration for those things, as we've already seen.
hater's lame, smily-ridden attempts at scorn
Not an immediate short term solution (don't think one exists) but it would probably be a good start to stop bombing other countries if you want to pretend to have the moral high ground. Ever notice that the countries these attacks happen in have all attacked someone else in the past 5 years or so? Reciprocity is a crazy idea, I know...
"Why can't everyone stick to blaming guns, Christians, white males and the Republican Party?"
How is going after ISIS physical facilities going to stop euro and American citizens with no ties to ISIS from killing?hater's lame, smily-ridden attempts at scorn
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions