Things seem to be getting even more complicated now that the broken spigot is being re-examined...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/world/europe/greece-macedonia-border-refugees-riots.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

As Europe's intelligence community unravels who the Belgian perpetrators were I wonder how many, if any, used the recent immigration crisis as cover.

Islamic extremism is the new norm with no solutions in sight.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:As Europe's intelligence community unravels who the Belgian perpetrators were I wonder how many, if any, used the recent immigration crisis as cover.

Islamic extremism is the new norm with no solutions in sight.

Given the events at the weekend, I suspect it is likely the perpetrators were local, reacting to the arrest of Sales Abdeslam.

As for solutions, it will never be simple. Ireland is largely peaceful but not solved by any stretch.

danivon wrote:

dag hammarsjkold wrote:As Europe's intelligence community unravels who the Belgian perpetrators were I wonder how many, if any, used the recent immigration crisis as cover.

Islamic extremism is the new norm with no solutions in sight.

Given the events at the weekend, I suspect it is likely the perpetrators were local, reacting to the arrest of Sales Abdeslam.

As for solutions, it will never be simple. Ireland is largely peaceful but not solved by any stretch.

Given that Ireland has no immigration problem that I'm aware of, I find that a curious comparison.

Of course, no one dare mention the word "Islam." That's just bad form. To even suggest that "radical Islam" is the problem is not acceptable. So, let's just pretend while the attacks continue.

I think his point was just that even after many years of peace the IRA problem hasn't entirely gone away.

The guys who did will probably turn out to be Belgian citizens. The wider problem though is that Belgian intelligence only employs about 500 staff in total, and given how many major international bodies are based there it's likely that most of these staff are not employed to deal with domestic extremism. With the vastly increased numbers of Muslim men of fighting age coming out of a warzone dominated by the most virulent jihadist organisation yet known, it's likely that European intelligence agencies are going to be totally overwhelmed. It's not going to be possible to monitor all the potential suspects, so further attacks are pretty much certain.

Clearly, Belgium represents a weak point in security against ISIS. They need to root out terrorists using it as a base. If they are short-staffed then other countries should be willing to send people to help.

They're short-staffed everywhere. The problem is most acute in France, where by all accounts there are upwards of 10000 people on the watchlist. It's impossible to monitor that number of people properly, and it's likely to be a significant underestimate of the danger in any case.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

dag hammarsjkold wrote:As Europe's intelligence community unravels who the Belgian perpetrators were I wonder how many, if any, used the recent immigration crisis as cover.

Islamic extremism is the new norm with no solutions in sight.

Given the events at the weekend, I suspect it is likely the perpetrators were local, reacting to the arrest of Sales Abdeslam.

As for solutions, it will never be simple. Ireland is largely peaceful but not solved by any stretch.

Given that Ireland has no immigration problem that I'm aware of, I find that a curious comparison.

Because the terrorists in Ireland are generally native (there were a few American immigrants who were spreading violence over Ireland, but that was about a century or so ago.

Sass got my point.

Of course, no one dare mention the word "Islam." That's just bad form. To even suggest that "radical Islam" is the problem is not acceptable. So, let's just pretend while the attacks continue.

Seriously? It is obvious that this has all the hallmarks of ISIS (who have claimed it), it seems to be linked by location at timing to the same group who carried out the Paris attacks - or their local sympathisers - and to be honest the link to Islamism goes without saying (as a link to either Irish Republicanism or Ulster Loyalism goes without saying in terrorism in Northern Ireland).

So, who has denied that it is radical Islam, DF?

Sassenach wrote:They're short-staffed everywhere. The problem is most acute in France, where by all accounts there are upwards of 10000 people on the watchlist. It's impossible to monitor that number of people properly, and it's likely to be a significant underestimate of the danger in any case.

Well, I expect there are many false positives on watchlists - which of course just makes it harder as it means resources spent on checking people who are not really a threat at all. But there's no way to really know

Of course, we need to work across borders with greater effectiveness - clearly networks can operate and can communicate internationally.

freeman3

They need to root out terrorists using it as a base.

If terrorists are living within a community and planning and seeking an opportunity to strike ...the greatest defense is the rest of the community. Its virtually impossible to perfectly defend a modern cities transportation and public spaces from events like the Brussels bombing or the Paris attacks. The greatest hope is that the terrorists are discovered by their neighbors and the police warned.
For that reason it is vitally important to react against only the terrorists and their sponsors and not the community at large. Engendering sympathy for the terrorist cause by attacking the entire community would only make it less likely a neighbor would turn them in to authorities.

The world endured over a decade of exactly this kind of terror before. And eerily the justifications of the terrorists are similar.

“We will not spare the women and children of the bourgeois,” Henry snapped, “for the women and children of those we love have not been spared.

Daesh is losing its grip on its geographical base, but unfortunately terror doesn't require a base nation. Just a private house or apartment and enough money to fund bomb making or to buy some weapons. There's actually more chance of interdicting one of the religiously or politically motivated terrorists than an ordinary lone wolf with mental health issues and a locker full of weapons.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ys-with-us

Can't say I'm on board with the notion that radical Muslim terrorism is similar to anarchist attacks from the 1890s. Funny the writer could have focused on another movement extant in the 1890s that did not die out and wound up killing millions of people...Communism.

There may be only a tiny number of Muslims actually willing to commit acts of terror against the west...but there is a much higher number of Muslims sympathetic towards them. We have to keep things in proportion, attacks by radical Muslims in the West are still relatively rare and cause relatively few casualties. So as Ricky suggests in accord to our principles we should focus on individualized suspicion rather than group membership in finding these terrorists. But if the attacks either become common or very deadly then countries will do what they need to do to deal with that problem and those steps won't be limited to looking for individual attackers. It was not pleasant to be a Communist in the US in the 1950s, regardless of whether one was completely peaceful. The Muslim community in the West needs to be a bit less focused on being unfairly being lumped in with radical terrorists and more focused on how to get rid of this virulent form of Islam which seeks conflict with the West. We are not fighting terrorism, that's just a tool. We are fighting an ideology and we need Muslim allies against that ideology. So far Muslim determination to stamp out that ideology has been missing.

danivon wrote:Given that Ireland has no immigration problem that I'm aware of, I find that a curious comparison.

Because the terrorists in Ireland are generally native (there were a few American immigrants who were spreading violence over Ireland, but that was about a century or so ago.

Sass got my point.[/quote]

Good for him. However, the forum is about immigration, so Ireland is a stretch. Furthermore, the number of terror attacks in Ireland over the past decade compared to the attacks in the rest of Europe by jihadists . . . which one is greater?

Of course, no one dare mention the word "Islam." That's just bad form. To even suggest that "radical Islam" is the problem is not acceptable. So, let's just pretend while the attacks continue.

Seriously? It is obvious that this has all the hallmarks of ISIS (who have claimed it), it seems to be linked by location at timing to the same group who carried out the Paris attacks - or their local sympathisers - and to be honest the link to Islamism goes without saying (as a link to either Irish Republicanism or Ulster Loyalism goes without saying in terrorism in Northern Ireland).

So, who has denied that it is radical Islam, DF?

Those who dare not utter the word "Islam" except to praise it. Our esteemed Baseball-Fan-in-Chief, for example.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Given that Ireland has no immigration problem that I'm aware of, I find that a curious comparison.

Because the terrorists in Ireland are generally native (there were a few American immigrants who were spreading violence over Ireland, but that was about a century or so ago.

Sass got my point.

Good for him. However, the forum is about immigration, so Ireland is a stretch. Furthermore, the number of terror attacks in Ireland over the past decade compared to the attacks in the rest of Europe by jihadists . . . which one is greater?[/quote]The thread is indeed about immigration. Not terrorism. And the recent movement of people from Syria and elsewhere may be linked to yesterday, although it does seem that the perpetrators were living in Belgium beforehand - before the Arab Spring was a thing.

Now, you could go all Trump/Cruz and suggest that we treat all Muslims as suspects and threats. But I think that is counter-productive.

Of course, no one dare mention the word "Islam." That's just bad form. To even suggest that "radical Islam" is the problem is not acceptable. So, let's just pretend while the attacks continue.

Seriously? It is obvious that this has all the hallmarks of ISIS (who have claimed it), it seems to be linked by location at timing to the same group who carried out the Paris attacks - or their local sympathisers - and to be honest the link to Islamism goes without saying (as a link to either Irish Republicanism or Ulster Loyalism goes without saying in terrorism in Northern Ireland).

So, who has denied that it is radical Islam, DF?

Those who dare not utter the word "Islam" except to praise it. Our esteemed Baseball-Fan-in-Chief, for example.[/quote]Please cite where he has explicitly denied it. Because I think you are confusing not saying something with saying something else.

danivon wrote:

So, who has denied that it is radical Islam, DF?

Those who dare not utter the word "Islam" except to praise it. Our esteemed Baseball-Fan-in-Chief, for example.

Please cite where he has explicitly denied it. Because I think you are confusing not saying something with saying something else.

Oh no, no you don't.

Look what I said, "Those who dare not utter the word "Islam" except to praise it."

In response, you ask me to cite "where he has explicitly denied it." I just said he "dared not utter it," which is not an "explicit denial." It is only an explicit refusal. He simply won't say, "Radical Islamic terrorism." It's painful to him. Yesterday, he only said, "terrorism."

What motivates those terrorists? How do you investigate them, find them, stop them, or do anything to them if you refuse to identify their central ideology?

Salah Abdeslam, the surviving terrorist from the Nov 13 Paris attack, was able to hide out in a Muslim neighborhood close to home in Belgium for several months. That no one was willing to identify him to the authorities is concerning. It's hard to imagine that he wasn't recognized by at least someone.

I don't understand the comparison to Ireland. The Irish wanted their homeland. What are the demands of ISIS that would stop these attacks? They want the west to no longer attack the ISIS. That's non-negotiable.