On the News that France is instigating some border controls, although to what degree, has not been made clear.
crownhillpilgrim wrote: Two men linked to the attacks registered as refugees in Greece, just shows the notion we let all refugees in completely wooly-headed and dangerous.
Quinny wrote:crownhillpilgrim wrote: Two men linked to the attacks registered as refugees in Greece, just shows the notion we let all refugees in completely wooly-headed and dangerous.
Not half as wooly-headed and dangerous as jumping to conclusions:
None of the Paris suspects were refugees
Quinny wrote:crownhillpilgrim wrote: Two men linked to the attacks registered as refugees in Greece, just shows the notion we let all refugees in completely wooly-headed and dangerous.
Not half as wooly-headed and dangerous as jumping to conclusions:
None of the Paris suspects were refugees
Ave_IT wrote:Quinny wrote:crownhillpilgrim wrote: Two men linked to the attacks registered as refugees in Greece, just shows the notion we let all refugees in completely wooly-headed and dangerous.
Not half as wooly-headed and dangerous as jumping to conclusions:
None of the Paris suspects were refugees
I really don’t get this. Earlier in this thread when this was raised (before Paris) I quoted counter-terrorist experts who said categorically it wouldn’t make operational sense for ISIS to ‘infiltrate’ refugees. Surely it’s much, much easier for them to use sympathisers already in place? People who know the targets, can move around unquestioned, can speak the language and can support themselves. After that they could use the nutters who have gone to Syria then returned, fully trained and even more radicalised. Why use their own battle-hardened ‘soldiers’ who are desperately required for their own bloody domestic war and have no knowledge of the language, culture, targets or the network of jihadists already in place?
This one with the passport for example – how did he hook up with the others for this co-ordinated attack? Did he have a list of names and addresses in a little book in his back pocket when he arrived, with a Paris A-to-Z? How did he know he wasn’t going to be held in some compound for months like so many other refugees while various governments argued about them? Did the others in the gang know he was coming & did they have to wait for him to arrive and if so why? Maybe he just bumped into them by chance in the jihadist equivalent of a pub and they invited him to join?
The refugees are fleeing FROM these barbarians. ISIS despise them for this and would love to harm them as much as they want to harm us - so I can see a motivation for them to implicate the refugees or sow the fear of them amongst Europeans. THAT is what terrorists do – they terrorise, they sow fear, they divide and dehumanise. That is the only reason I can think of why they’d bother with sending someone as a refugee – then advertise the fact by leaving a passport at the scene – what sort of terrorist carries a passport on them FFS??!!! It would be EXACTLY what they want if the Paris attacks cause us to fear these poor desperate people (who have already suffered so much at the hands of ISIS) and dehumanise us to the extent we’d rather watch them to suffer and die in their thousands than help. Don’t let them diminish us.
Biggs wrote:Ave_IT wrote:Quinny wrote:crownhillpilgrim wrote: Two men linked to the attacks registered as refugees in Greece, just shows the notion we let all refugees in completely wooly-headed and dangerous.
Not half as wooly-headed and dangerous as jumping to conclusions:
None of the Paris suspects were refugees
I really don’t get this. Earlier in this thread when this was raised (before Paris) I quoted counter-terrorist experts who said categorically it wouldn’t make operational sense for ISIS to ‘infiltrate’ refugees. Surely it’s much, much easier for them to use sympathisers already in place? People who know the targets, can move around unquestioned, can speak the language and can support themselves. After that they could use the nutters who have gone to Syria then returned, fully trained and even more radicalised. Why use their own battle-hardened ‘soldiers’ who are desperately required for their own bloody domestic war and have no knowledge of the language, culture, targets or the network of jihadists already in place?
This one with the passport for example – how did he hook up with the others for this co-ordinated attack? Did he have a list of names and addresses in a little book in his back pocket when he arrived, with a Paris A-to-Z? How did he know he wasn’t going to be held in some compound for months like so many other refugees while various governments argued about them? Did the others in the gang know he was coming & did they have to wait for him to arrive and if so why? Maybe he just bumped into them by chance in the jihadist equivalent of a pub and they invited him to join?
The refugees are fleeing FROM these barbarians. ISIS despise them for this and would love to harm them as much as they want to harm us - so I can see a motivation for them to implicate the refugees or sow the fear of them amongst Europeans. THAT is what terrorists do – they terrorise, they sow fear, they divide and dehumanise. That is the only reason I can think of why they’d bother with sending someone as a refugee – then advertise the fact by leaving a passport at the scene – what sort of terrorist carries a passport on them FFS??!!! It would be EXACTLY what they want if the Paris attacks cause us to fear these poor desperate people (who have already suffered so much at the hands of ISIS) and dehumanise us to the extent we’d rather watch them to suffer and die in their thousands than help. Don’t let them diminish us.
Excellent post.
Users browsing this forum: Martyn and 37 guests
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group