Islamic State militants planning for 'large-scale' attacks on Europe

cdeb · 29-01-2016 2:15pm

EagererBeaver wrote: »

This man, assuming it is proved that he committed a crime (in this instance, likely criminal possession of a firearm), should receive the standard sentence applicable. He should not receive an arbitrary sentence of 10 years because you think it's a nice round number or a life sentence because of the "current climate".

Ten years was a non-scientific estimation.

But I don't agree that the current climate shouldn't be taken into account. At best, it's an utterly daft thing to do to essentially imitate/imply a major shooting event given what's gone on in past months. A slap on the wrist and six months in jail for trying something like this is hardly a deterrent to making a serious attempt again. And this kind of crap needs to be utterly discouraged.

Caliden · 29-01-2016 2:17pm

Sounds like a nutter who just wanted to get caught.

EagererBeaver · 29-01-2016 2:23pm

cdeb wrote: »

Ten years was a non-scientific estimation.

But I don't agree that the current climate shouldn't be taken into account. At best, it's an utterly daft thing to do to essentially imitate/imply a major shooting event given what's gone on in past months. A slap on the wrist and six months in jail for trying something like this is hardly a deterrent to making a serious attempt again. And this kind of crap needs to be utterly discouraged.

If he's charged and convicted under anti-terror legislation, that'll take care of a longer sentence. In what possible way could it ever be just or reflective of democratic ideals to have different sentencing guidelines because of other people's state of mind after a terrorist attack.

cdeb · 29-01-2016 2:35pm

EagererBeaver wrote: »

If he's charged and convicted under anti-terror legislation, that'll take care of a longer sentence.

This is what I mean though. Terrorism isn't just ISIS militants; it has to cover copy-cat stuff as well. And anti-terror legislation, one would imagine, has to be influenced in part at least by the current situation.

I would be looking to have him tried under stricter legislation and not just as someone who's carrying a concealed weapon.

If I've phrased it enthusiastically, shall we say, my apologies - but what you have above is what I'm getting at.

EagererBeaver · 29-01-2016 2:40pm

cdeb wrote: »

This is what I mean though. Terrorism isn't just ISIS militants; it has to cover copy-cat stuff as well. And anti-terror legislation, one would imagine, has to be influenced in part at least by the current situation.

I would be looking to have him tried under stricter legislation and not just as someone who's carrying a concealed weapon.

If I've phrased it enthusiastically, shall we say, my apologies - but what you have above is what I'm getting at.

To be convicted of terrorism though, it has to be proved that there was a terrorist motive. This can be vague and wishy-washy, but that's the way it is. He can't (or more correctly, shouldn't) be convicted of terrorist offences if he's just your run of the mill scumbad criminal who happened to commit his crime at a time when everyone's on alert.

aziz · 29-01-2016 2:44pm

The French government could be under pressure to say that this was not a terrorist attack or Disneyland Paris could end up like the euro itchy and scratchy land in that Simpsons episode.

conorhal · 29-01-2016 3:05pm

Nodin wrote: »

I never said he was a saint, I'm just saying that he wasn't necessarily going to run around Euro Disney shooting the mickey mousesesez

You know there's a rake of sex workers that do business in Euro Disney? And that Paris is not, by any stretch, a crime free zone?

http://i.imgur.com/QY7Udir.jpg

Mr. teddywinkles · 29-01-2016 4:11pm

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, Paris is known for food, culture, music, wine, architecture and generally sophisticated lifestyle. And Ireland..., well,...isn't. And it does have a summer. Ireland only has one season.
But weather aside, we may not a big enough target, so far being a small country on the periphery of Europe has been an advantage. But if they do attack, we are utterly fcuked. Will they Gardai saunter up to them and say "Is this your rrocket prropelled grrenade launcher? Do you have any idea how fasht your prrojectile was going?".
I would feel safer being protected by the London Philharmonic Orchestra.
But in the end you can't worry too much about a few extremists. There always have been and always will be violent people who want to kill everyone. The problem is evolution. We're barely down from the trees and we have just about gotten a tiny bit intelligent. In another 500000 years, we might evolve into a nicer, more gentle species.

Then the aliens attack

conorhal · 29-01-2016 4:53pm

The liklihood of a terrorst atack on an Irish target is low, but the reality is that the liklihood of one planned here is high. Very high, we have been a handy base of operations for islamist terrorist groups eager to stay off the radar for quite some time.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/editorial/alqaeda-terrorists-using-ireland-as-moneymaking-base-26210455.html
Revelations in this newspaper last Sunday and on several occasions over the past three years, about the activities of al-Qaeda and other groups here, underline that there are key figures in these groups using Ireland as a base.

Although they have not carried out any serious acts of violence here, they continue to use Ireland, particularly Dublin, for fund-raising, providing fake identities, visas and other documentation, and as a location for safe houses for terrorists, including suicide bombers.

In fact it's been going on a very long time:
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fbi-turns-spotlight-on-al-qaeda-s-dublin-operations-1.1090400

If all this sounds familiar, we're still trying to deport this joker:
http://www.thejournal.ie/isis-recruiter-in-dublin-hospital-2524286-Dec2015/

You read those articles and realise what a joke our security services are, assault them and you get a suspended sentence and offer them a cup of tea!

Nodin · 29-01-2016 5:21pm

aziz wrote: »

The French government could be under pressure to say that this was not a terrorist attack or Disneyland Paris could end up like the euro itchy and scratchy land in that Simpsons episode.

From what I can gather it already is. Looks quite run down in places apparently. There is apparently a reluctance to close it, despite the fact its losing money.

jonon9 · 29-01-2016 6:09pm

eeguy wrote: »

And decades of experience against the IRA and gangland criminals and an army who are constantly involved in UN missions around the world.

Don't forget the Irish Army Rangers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_Ranger_Wing

BigJackC · 05-02-2016 2:18pm

BERLIN (Reuters) - Islamic State militants have slipped into Europe disguised as refugees, the head of Germany's domestic intelligence agency (BfV) said on Friday, a day after security forces thwarted a potential IS attack in Berlin.

Hans-Georg Maassen said the terrorist attacks in Paris last November had shown that Islamic State was deliberately planting terrorists among the refugees flowing into Europe.

"Then we have repeatedly seen that terrorists ... have slipped in camouflaged or disguised as refugees. This is a fact that the security agencies are facing," Maassen told ZDF television.

"We are trying to recognize and identify whether there are still more IS fighters or terrorists from IS that have slipped in," he added.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0VE0XL?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Well done to the German police but it looks like another terrorist attack in Europe is inevitable at this stage. People have been saying this was happening for months, but they were called "racists, bigots and xenophobic" for even mentioning the possibility.

FTA69 · 05-02-2016 3:27pm

BigJackC wrote: »

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0VE0XL?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Well done to the German police but it looks like another terrorist attack in Europe is inevitable at this stage. People have been saying this was happening for months, but they were called "racists, bigots and xenophobic" for even mentioning the possibility.

Were they? Who said this? I think considering the Madrid and 7/7 bombings, Lee Rigby and a few other incidents - I don't think anyone was saying that there was no possibility of a terrorist attack at all.

bear1 · 05-02-2016 4:02pm

I'm wondering why attack berlin?

Fratton Fred · 05-02-2016 6:31pm

bear1 wrote: »

I'm wondering why attack berlin?

Why attack Paris?

dr.fuzzenstein · 05-02-2016 7:18pm

bear1 wrote: »

I'm wondering why attack berlin?

Seriously?

05-02-2016 7:22pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why attack Paris?

'Cause France attacked Libya.

acb121 · 05-02-2016 8:01pm

bear1 wrote: »

I'm wondering why attack berlin?

Why attack Berlin ? Paris ? Dublin ? Cork ?

When you look at what these folk believe, and their much, much, much larger constituent of ideological supporters and sympathisers believe, it is very clear.

Why is the official ISIS magazine called Dabiq ? Because they believe their Islamic scriptures foretell that Muslims and the Infidel will fight an apocalyptic battle at a place in the middle east called Dabiq.

Why do ISIS rape 9 year old girls and sell 9 year old girls as sex slaves ? Because they believe in a " Prophet ", Muhammed, who f@cked a 9 year old girl, his " favourite wife " ( at the time he was aged 53, so it was hardly " doctors and nurses " ).

Why do they keep Yadzi women as rape slaves ? Because their " Prophet ", Muhammed, not content with 11 ( or was it 13 wives ) who he serviced each and every one each night, also took any women whose menfolk had been murdered by his followers that he took a shine to to keep as his personal rape slaves. He told his followers that after any battle, they were free to take any women as their property, as rape slaves.

Why do they kill ? Because their " Prophet ", Muhammed, himself killed other human beings.

Why do they steal ? Because their " Prophet ", Muhammed, himself ordered his followers to engage in raids to steal and divide up the spoils.

Why do they kill anyone who criticises them ? Why would people inspired by them kill the staff of Charlie Hebdo, or the Japanese translator of Salman Rushdie's book ? Because their " Prophet ", Muhammed, during his lifetime personally ordered the assassination of about 40 poets, artists and thinkers who criticised him or his ideas.

Why do they behead their enemies ? Because they follow a " Prophet ", Muhammed who beheaded his enemies. Muhammed personally led his followers in beheading 600 Jews in an afternoon. Indeed amongst Muhammed's collection of 7 swords, his " favourite sword " was affectionately named " The Cleaver Of Necks ".

Why attack Berlin ?

Because they follow a " Prophet " and an Ideology that states that the whole world must be conquered, in the name of Sharia Law, and the Kuffar must me destroyed.

These savages are fighting a war that began in the year 632. Folk who try and frame it in the timescale of their own lives ( Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan ) are just wallowing in their own self loathing, rather than grasping the issue we face.

When the LUAS finally gets suicide bombed, there will still be some folk saying " why ", or " must be Shannon ", despite the fact that these folk have been telling us their motivations for centuries.

bear1 · 05-02-2016 9:37pm

I was only asking a question lads.

acb121 · 05-02-2016 9:50pm

bear1 wrote: »

I was only asking a question lads.

Well, you got an answer.

We live in an age where after every atrocity and outrage, people, nice liberal Europeans, sensitive to other people's feelings and keen not to " offend " wail that " it is all our fault ", and " we should not have upset them " and " it has nothing to do with islam ", and " we need to understand ".

I guess my answer is pretty unsavoury. The truth stinks sometimes. Nobody really wants to think about a 53 year old man shagging a 9 year old, who is not only one of his 11 wives, but he keeps another 4 or 5 women prisoners to rape, after his followers murdered their husbands, brothers, fathers and uncles. A man who murdered, beheaded, assassinated being the perfect man and the man who gave us the " Religion of Peace ".

We don't like to think about that stuff.

Best we stick with " it's all our fault ".

This is the problem we face, when dealing with the problem we have to deal with.

tomwaterford · 05-02-2016 9:57pm

acb121 wrote: »

Well, you got an answer.

We live in an age where after every atrocity and outrage, people, nice liberal Europeans, sensitive to other people's feelings and keen not to " offend " wail that " it is all our fault ", and " we should not have upset them " and " it has nothing to do with islam ", and " we need to understand ".

I guess my answer is pretty unsavoury. The truth stinks sometimes. Nobody really wants to think about a 53 year old man shagging a 9 year old, who is not only one of his 11 wives, but he keeps another 4 or 5 women prisoners to rape, after his followers murdered their husbands, brothers, fathers and uncles. A man who murdered, beheaded, assassinated being the perfect man and the man who gave us the " Religion of Peace ".

We don't like to think about that stuff.

Best we stick with " it's all our fault ".

This is the problem we face, when dealing with the problem we have to deal with.

Has the possibly the Korean is an effective eggsagersted fairy tale entered your head atal??

acb121 · 05-02-2016 10:04pm

tomwaterford wrote: »

Has the possibly the Korean is an effective eggsagersted fairy tale entered your head atal??

Everybody knows that The Koran is the literal, unchangeable word of God himself, sorry Allah, for all time, and in all places.

If you believe that the Koran it is an exaggerated fairytale, I politely suggest you go out onto the streets of Mecca, Medina, Kabul, Mogadishu, Tehran, Raqqa, Lahore, Luton, Tower Hamlets or any other pleasant Islamic settlement and stop a few of the locals to express your theory.

Let us know how you get on.

Nodin · 05-02-2016 10:41pm

acb121 wrote: »

Everybody knows that The Koran is the literal, unchangeable word of God himself, sorry Allah, for all time, and in all places.

If you believe that the Koran it is an exaggerated fairytale, I politely suggest you go out onto the streets of Mecca, Medina, Kabul, Mogadishu, Tehran, Raqqa, Lahore, Luton, Tower Hamlets or any other pleasant Islamic settlement and stop a few of the locals to express your theory.

Let us know how you get on.

Luton and tower hamlets are not "Islamic settlements" nor am I sure why you use that term with regards to the other citys.

KingBrian2 · 05-02-2016 10:49pm

If there was a terrorist incident in Europe it would be perpetrated by Sunni, Alawites, Shi'ites, Wahhabi's or Salafists against each. The broad range of views Muslims have are not being tackled. Europol really needs to get on this and stamp on these terror networks.

acb121 · 05-02-2016 11:11pm

Nodin wrote: »

Luton and tower hamlets are not "Islamic settlements" nor am I sure why you use that term with regards to the other citys.

There has been a seismic demographic shift in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

Within living memory, the native English ( if it is still OK to use such terms ) population would have been in excess of 90% whilst the Islamic population would have been 0%.

As of the last couple of years, the Islamic population of Tower Hamlets is now in excess of 45% ( these of course are official figures, which would not show illegal immigrants, interestingly Tower Hamlets is in places the most overcrowded urban area in Western Europe ) with the Native White English ( if I may still use that term ) under 30%.

Tower Hamlets was recorded as the fastest growing area of England, with a population increase of around 30% within 10 years.

This points to settlement, rather than demographic change through births.

tomwaterford · 05-02-2016 11:27pm

acb121 wrote: »

Everybody knows that The Koran is the literal, unchangeable word of God himself, sorry Allah, for all time, and in all places.

If you believe that the Koran it is an exaggerated fairytale, I politely suggest you go out onto the streets of Mecca, Medina, Kabul, Mogadishu, Tehran, Raqqa, Lahore, Luton, Tower Hamlets or any other pleasant Islamic settlement and stop a few of the locals to express your theory.

Let us know how you get on.

Your not the same as them Gouls in the westboro baptist church
It would be a pretty shihtty if twoznt open to interpretation....otherwise how could they be using machine guns and jeeps instead of swords and horses??

acb121 · 05-02-2016 11:32pm

Reading about Muhammed ( a rather unpleasant read ), I would suspect that Muhammed himself, whilst primarily concerned with listening out for Allah to give further pronouncements to validate his sexual urges and his rather colourful and somewhat distateful "sex" ( if one can call it that ) life, would have assumed that his and Allah's orders to " Kill The Kuffar ", " Kill The Jews ", " Kill The Infidels ", " Kill The Unbelievers ", " Kill The Apostates " would have allowed for a little bit of artistic licence.,

KingBrian2 · 06-02-2016 1:00am

The allies are mad to be supporting these guys the FSA is made up of these people. People that want to impose sharia law on us all. They should press Turkey to end their support for terrorism across the region.

Nodin · 06-02-2016 6:58am

acb121 wrote: »

There has been a seismic demographic shift in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

Within living memory, the native English ( if it is still OK to use such terms ) population would have been in excess of 90% whilst the Islamic population would have been 0%.
.

You seem to think you can't be English and muslim.

acb121 wrote: »

As of the last couple of years, the Islamic population of Tower Hamlets is now in excess of 45% ( these of course are official figures, which would not show illegal immigrants, interestingly Tower Hamlets is in places the most overcrowded urban area in Western Europe ) with the Native White English ( if I may still use that term ) under 30%.

Tower Hamlets was recorded as the fastest growing area of England, with a population increase of around 30% within 10 years.

This points to settlement, rather than demographic change through births.

So you're using the term to demonise muslims. Grand. Always best to check.

acb121 · 06-02-2016 10:39am

Nodin wrote: »

You seem to think you can't be English and muslim.

So you're using the term to demonise muslims. Grand. Always best to check.

I didn't claim that you cannot be Muslim and English.

I referred to Muslim settlements.

Which was not demonising Muslims.

It was recognising that when Muslims emigrate, they appear to colonise rather than integrate.

Hence settlements.

But don't take my word for it, you may have ( conveniently ) missed the comments of Trevor Philips in the last week, who stated;

" Continuously pretending that a group is somehow eventually going to become like the rest of us is perhaps the deepest form of disrespect.
‘Because what you are essentially saying is the fact that they behave in a different way, some of which we may not like, is because they haven’t yet seen the light. It may be that they see the world differently to the rest of us. "

I assume those Muslims in Tower Hamlets just love to put on their pearly king and queen outfits, and have a good old pie and mash, washed down with a pint of Watneys. More English than the English, don't you know !

Rather than having turned the place into an oppressive ghetto, which is what it has become.

Nodin · 06-02-2016 11:02am

acb121 wrote: »

I didn't claim that you cannot be Muslim and English.

I referred to Muslim settlements..

They aren't settlements. You distinguish between 'native english' and muslims, implying that one cannot be both.

.

acb121 wrote: »

It was recognising that when Muslims emigrate, they appear to colonise rather than integrate..

No, its you claiming that happens, thus demonisation. And of course, many have been born there.

acb121 · 06-02-2016 11:28am

Nodin wrote: »

They aren't settlements. You distinguish between 'native english' and muslims, implying that one cannot be both.

.

No, its you claiming that happens, thus demonisation. And of course, many have been born there.

Pooh.

Didn't demonise anyone.

Pointed out that Tower Hamlets is a muslim settlement in England.

And that's a fact, regardless of you trotting out one of your many cut and past arguments as full time beligerant and moral policeman of boards ie.

48% of the original population indiginous ( not allowed to use that word when it refers to White Europeans, only tragic ethnic folk ) of Tower Hamlets have not converted to Islam. The 48% of the Tower Hamlets population that are defined as muslim have grown through immigration, primarly from Bangladesh.

Therefore, immigrants, chose, to settle in Tower Hamlets. Given that parts of it are the most densly populated parts of Western Europe, one would have to assume that there is some sort of pull factor. After all, if there is no available housing there, and overcrowding, then the local authority are not dumping people there, they are

The English population of Tower Hamlets within living memory was indiginous ( except you are not allowed to call them that, you must say " Britiain has always been a nation of immigrants ", despite the fact that the statistics prove its a lie ).

The muslim population of Tower Hamlets are overwhelmingly Bangladeshi.

They muslim population of Tower Hamlets are not the original population who are now converts ( sorry revert, excuse me while I gag on the arrogance of the ideology ).

The immigrated to the UK.

They then settled in Tower Hamlets.

And have set about changing the social order of the area, through a form of neo colonialism.

Hence it is a settlement.

There are 3 million muslims in Britain, and over 50% of them were born abroad.

They are settleing.

And where, they choose to settle and colonise, that is a settlement.

Herb Powell · 06-02-2016 11:59am

Them not immediately dropping their religion = colonising?

acb121 · 06-02-2016 12:10pm

Herb Powell wrote: »

Them not immediately dropping their religion = colonising?

What a ridiculous statement.

You know what exactly what colonisation is.

Nodin · 06-02-2016 1:26pm

acb121 wrote: »

Pooh.
Didn't demonise anyone.
Pointed out that Tower Hamlets is a muslim settlement in England.
.

It is not. You use that term to demonise and fear monger.

abc121 wrote:

48% of the original population indiginous ( not allowed to use that word
when it refers to White Europeans

,

And now the race element creeps in.

abc121 wrote:

And where, they choose to settle and colonise, that is a settlement.

And now the full blown language of the far right.

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:42pm

Ah Diddums.

There are Islamic settlements in the UK, and in Europe, and that is a fact.

Tower Hamlets is wideley recognised as having all the characteristics of colonisation. The unprecedented demographic changes in the area were driven by immigration from Bangladesh, and Bangladeshi people choosing to settle in Tower Hamlets and change it to their way of liking; local politics, sharia law, local culture.

Not scaremongering, not racism, not the language of the far right.

Just a fact

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:42pm

Ah Diddums.

There are Islamic settlements in the UK, and in Europe, and that is a fact.

Tower Hamlets is wideley recognised as having all the characteristics of colonisation. The unprecedented demographic changes in the area were driven by immigration from Bangladesh, and Bangladeshi people choosing to settle in Tower Hamlets and change it to their way of liking; local politics, sharia law, local culture.

Not scaremongering, not racism, not the language of the far right.

Just a fact

Nodin · 06-02-2016 1:45pm

There are no "Islamic settlements". At least not outside the imagination of some.

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:49pm

Because of course, Muslims settling in England decided to spread themselves out, and ratio themselves equally across the country.

Rather than settling en masse in certain areas, and effectively colonising the area, establishing sharia courts, and developing a local society that required no little adapation to their new homes country, such as language or culture.

Nodin · 06-02-2016 1:51pm

acb121 wrote: »

Because of course, Muslims settling in England decided to spread themselves out, and ratio themselves equally across the country.

Rather than settling en masse in certain areas, and effectively colonising the area, establishing sharia courts, and developing a local society that required no little adapation to their new homes country, such as language or culture.

Could you name me a group that did spread out upon arrival?

Mesrine65 · 06-02-2016 1:53pm

acb121 wrote: »

Because of course, Muslims settling in England decided to spread themselves out, and ratio themselves equally across the country.

Rather than settling en masse in certain areas, and effectively colonising the area, establishing sharia courts, and developing a local society that required no little adapation to their new homes country, such as language or culture.

Much like the British empires colonisation of their lands?

Mea culpa...

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:54pm

Did the Irish establish their own secret legal system ?

Did the West Indians demand that British law is changed to protect Rastafarianism from criticism ?

Have Indians been known to organise sex gangs abusing white British girls ?

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:54pm

Did the Irish establish their own secret legal system ?

Did the West Indians demand that British law is changed to protect Rastafarianism from criticism ?

Have Indians been known to organise sex gangs abusing white British girls ?

acb121 · 06-02-2016 1:57pm

Mesrine65 wrote: »

Much like the British empires colonisation of their lands?

Mea culpa...

But everybody knows British colonialism is A VERY BAD THING ....

Whereas modern day Islamic colonialism in Britain ? Vibrant, enriching, diversifying.

Perhaps we should consider that the Australian Aborigianl and the Native American protested too much. They should have enjoyed and celebrated the benefits if immigration, the diveristy, the enrichment, the vibrancy

Nodin · 06-02-2016 1:57pm

acb121 wrote: »

Did the Irish establish their own secret legal system ?

Did the West Indians demand that British law is changed to protect Rastafarianism from criticism ?

Have Indians been known to organise sex gangs abusing white British girls ?

Have loaded questions ever been proven to do anything other than show the questioners lack of an argument?

Can you name a few groups that have "spread out" as opposed to gathering in certain areas?

Mesrine65 · 06-02-2016 1:58pm

acb121 wrote: »

But everybody knows British colonialism is A VERY BAD THING ....

Whereas modern day Islamic colonialism in Britain ? Vibrant, enriching, diversifying.

Perhaps we should consider that the Australian Aborigianl and the Native American protested too much. They should have enjoyed and celebrated the benefits if immigration, the diveristy, the enrichment, the vibrancy

The disease...

Nodin · 06-02-2016 1:58pm

acb121 wrote: »

But everybody knows British colonialism is A VERY BAD THING ....

Whereas modern day Islamic colonialism in Britain ? Vibrant, enriching, diversifying.

Perhaps we should consider that the Australian Aborigianl and the Native American protested too much. They should have enjoyed and celebrated the benefits if immigration, the diveristy, the enrichment, the vibrancy

Doesn't exist and is a figment of your imagination.

Tony EH · 06-02-2016 2:23pm

coolbeans wrote: »

It's not really warfare though is it. I live in London and despite all their meddling in Iraq and Libya I've more chance of being killed crossing the road than hurt in a terrorist attack. Despite all the hyperbole we're the safest most secure generation that ever existed. The actual threat from these losers is less than miniscule.

Politics of fear.

Governments want their the underlings to be afraid constantly.

You're controlled better like that.

Herb Powell · 06-02-2016 8:13pm

acb121 wrote: »

What a ridiculous statement.

You know what exactly what colonisation is.

I do, do you though?

Ulysses Gaze · 06-02-2016 11:05pm

Tony EH wrote: »

Politics of fear.

Governments want their the underlings to be afraid constantly.

You're controlled better like that.

Fear or Religion is used to control people.

Keep them in line and their minds off real problems in society. And allows countless infractions on our civil liberties.

Crisis, Reaction, Solution.

Islamic State militants planning for 'large-scale' attacks on Europe

Comments