Christmas market attack in Germany

[The Gambling Whale]

No video, no speculation.

It's completely the opposite,no video lots of specualation.
The same when the police tell people not to speculate,they only speculate because they are not told anything.

[daviemac]

The Saudi Government has a bit of a reputation for using arrest warrants as a means of discrediting those who disagree with them :- if that fails, they just murder them if they can get them into an Embassy.

Do you really want to be banned. This thread is about the actions of a nutter in Germany so why are you brining another government into it.

I've posted one warning on this thread,  ↓  I won't post another.

If you can't manage to stay off politics and religion then don't post on the thread especially as you tend to make things up as you go along just for the sake of it.

[MLawro93]

I think "bigots" is putting it a bit too strongly.

When we see attacks that involve mass casualties (in Europe) then the perpetrator nearly always is Muslim. Speaking the facts or commenting on a clear pattern is not being "bigoted".

The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful but that does not negate the glaring facts that a minority of that community are causing the majority of terrorist attacks on European soil.

To effectively try to shut down a much needed debate by calling people bigots is perpetuating the problem and by "debate" I do not mean on this forum but by our elected representatives.

The motives for this attack are currently unclear. Apparently, he was an "ex-Muslim" and even "anti-Islamic" (??). The background to this seems to be a lot more complex.

His X tweets portray someone who is avidly anti-Islamic and who claims he was being censored by the German authorities to such an extent that he turned his hatred towards Germany and the German institution......ironically manifesting his hatred by mowing down innocent Germans and presumably the majority were non-muslims.

Your response actually illustrates my point perfectly. You immediately jumped to discuss Muslim perpetrators despite admitting that this case appears to have different and more complex motivations. This selective focus on one demographic when discussing violence is precisely what I was referring to.

The data on extremist violence shows it comes from many ideological sources - far-right, far-left, religious extremism of various kinds, anti-government groups, and individuals with complex personal grievances. Each case deserves to be understood on its own terms so we can better prevent future violence.

Rather than fixating on demographics, we should be examining common factors that lead to radicalisation and violence - like social isolation, exposure to extremist content online, mental health challenges, and how we can better identify and intervene before someone turns to violence. These factors cross all demographic and ideological lines.

If we genuinely want to prevent attacks, we need to look at the complete picture rather than confirming our pre-existing biases. What specific early intervention programs have worked? How can we better secure public spaces while preserving their openness? These are the productive conversations we should be having.

[sir wanksalot]

Your response actually illustrates my point perfectly. You immediately jumped to discuss Muslim perpetrators despite admitting that this case appears to have different and more complex motivations. This selective focus on one demographic when discussing violence is precisely what I was referring to.

The data on extremist violence shows it comes from many ideological sources - far-right, far-left, religious extremism of various kinds, anti-government groups, and individuals with complex personal grievances. Each case deserves to be understood on its own terms so we can better prevent future violence.

Rather than fixating on demographics, we should be examining common factors that lead to radicalisation and violence - like social isolation, exposure to extremist content online, mental health challenges, and how we can better identify and intervene before someone turns to violence. These factors cross all demographic and ideological lines.

If we genuinely want to prevent attacks, we need to look at the complete picture rather than confirming our pre-existing biases. What specific early intervention programs have worked? How can we better secure public spaces while preserving their openness? These are the productive conversations we should be having.

I suspected it might play into someone's convenient narrative but I am happy to debate that respectfully with you.

The perpetrator was from Saudi Arabia so I am presuming he was born, raised and lived a large part of his life as a muslim. I did not "immediately jump" to discuss muslim perpetrators. There was a relevance behind it.

Early reports suggest that there is indeed some complexity behind his background and ambiguity behind his motive.

I was NOT "selectively focusing on one demographic when discussing violence". I was linking a common denominator to the majority (if not all) the mass casualty attacks in Europe. By all means give me examples where that has not been the case but the pattern is clear. The facts are undisputable and the only uncertainty is whether we have the stomach to debate this openly.

I was not disussing violence (as you put it). I was discussing mass casualty attacks in Europe i.e. stabbings, shooting sprees, bombings, vehicle attacks etc 

The data on extremist violence shows it comes from many ideological sources - far-right, far-left, religious extremism of various kinds, anti-government groups, and individuals with complex personal grievances. Each case deserves to be understood on its own terms so we can better prevent future violence.

I am not sure what your data source is but it is obvious to most people that mass attacks on European soil hail from one particular demographic. I can even accept that some of the Islamist attacks that have taken place have not been deeply rooted in any credible ideological motive. I sometimes think that hatred can trump a motive and what really needs to be examined is why a particular religious group tends to be fertile ground for this rather than other groups.

 

[Blackpool Rock]

I suspected it might play into someone's convenient narrative but I am happy to debate that respectfully with you.

The perpetrator was from Saudi Arabia so I am presuming he was born, raised and lived a large part of his life as a muslim. I did not "immediately jump" to discuss muslim perpetrators. There was a relevance behind it.

Early reports suggest that there is indeed some complexity behind his background and ambiguity behind his motive.

I was NOT "selectively focusing on one demographic when discussing violence". I was linking a common denominator to the majority (if not all) the mass casualty attacks in Europe. By all means give me examples where that has not been the case but the pattern is clear. The facts are undisputable and the only uncertainty is whether we have the stomach to debate this openly.

I was not disussing violence (as you put it). I was discussing mass casualty attacks in Europe i.e. stabbings, shooting sprees, bombings, vehicle attacks etc 

I am not sure what your data source is but it is obvious to most people that mass attacks on European soil hail from one particular demographic. I can even accept that some of the Islamist attacks that have taken place have not been deeply rooted in any credible ideological motive. I sometimes think that hatred can trump a motive and what really needs to be examined is why a particular religious group tends to be fertile ground for this rather than other groups.

I know what you mean however how many people have been killed by the demographic you reference compared to say for instance ETA in Spain / The Basque region who estimates put at killing around 900 people 
And then you have Ireland / Northern Ireland and the UK mainland where the IRA killed around 1800 people and the death toll to all paramilitaries is more like 3500

Sometimes the fear of crime is worse in peoples minds than the likely reality

[hairdownthere]

I know what you mean however how many people have been killed by the demographic you reference compared to say for instance ETA in Spain / The Basque region who estimates put at killing around 900 people 
And then you have Ireland / Northern Ireland and the UK mainland where the IRA killed around 1800 people and the death toll to all paramilitaries is more like 3500

Sometimes the fear of crime is worse in peoples minds than the likely reality

ETA and the IRA were fighting for a cause, the mainland Europe attacks are mostly driven by an ideology.

Whatever the reasons, there are no excuses for violence

[Blackpool Rock]

ETA and the IRA were fighting for a cause, the mainland Europe attacks are mostly driven by an ideology.

Whatever the reasons, there are no excuses for violence

According to Dr Google an ideology is or at least can be a cause, anyway you asked for examples and I gave you two

[MLawro93]

I suspected it might play into someone's convenient narrative but I am happy to debate that respectfully with you.

The perpetrator was from Saudi Arabia so I am presuming he was born, raised and lived a large part of his life as a muslim. I did not "immediately jump" to discuss muslim perpetrators. There was a relevance behind it.

Early reports suggest that there is indeed some complexity behind his background and ambiguity behind his motive.

I was NOT "selectively focusing on one demographic when discussing violence". I was linking a common denominator to the majority (if not all) the mass casualty attacks in Europe. By all means give me examples where that has not been the case but the pattern is clear. The facts are undisputable and the only uncertainty is whether we have the stomach to debate this openly.

I was not disussing violence (as you put it). I was discussing mass casualty attacks in Europe i.e. stabbings, shooting sprees, bombings, vehicle attacks etc 

I am not sure what your data source is but it is obvious to most people that mass attacks on European soil hail from one particular demographic. I can even accept that some of the Islamist attacks that have taken place have not been deeply rooted in any credible ideological motive. I sometimes think that hatred can trump a motive and what really needs to be examined is why a particular religious group tends to be fertile ground for this rather than other groups.

Based on both the historical incident data and the recent Europol TE-SAT 2024 report (External Link/Members Only), your assertion about "mass casualty attacks in Europe" needs to be examined against actual data rather than perceptions. Let me share some concrete numbers.

First, looking at major casualty incidents historically:

• Neo-fascist terrorism (Bologna massacre: 85 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• Far-right extremism (Norway attacks: 77 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• Separatist terrorism (Omagh bombing: 29 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• State-sponsored terrorism (Lockerbie: 270 casualties - External Link/Members Only)

The recent Europol TE-SAT 2024 report shows an even more complex picture for 2023:

• 70 separatist attacks, 32 left-wing/anarchist attacks, 14 jihadist attacks, and 2 right-wing attacks
• The majority of actually completed attacks were from separatist and left-wing/anarchist groups
• While jihadist attacks had higher casualties per incident, they represented a minority of total attacks (14 out of 120 attacks in 2023)

This data contradicts your statement that "mass attacks on European soil hail from one particular demographic." The reality is far more complex. When you say "the facts are undisputable," you're actually arguing against the statistical evidence presented in both the historical incident data and Europol's official reporting.

The key to prevention isn't focusing on demographics - it's understanding radicalisation pathways, improving early intervention, and addressing common factors that lead to extremist violence regardless of ideology. By fixating on one group while ignoring other sources of extremist violence, we miss opportunities to develop comprehensive prevention strategies that could actually make a difference.

What specific prevention strategies would you support that address all forms of extremist violence based on this evidence?

[Colston36]

When yet another loony runs amok I recall the blessing given by a bishop to a set of bells bound for the South Seas a couple of hundred years ago: "Long live The Church of England, and down with enthusiasm."

[sir wanksalot]

Based on both the historical incident data and the recent Europol TE-SAT 2024 report (External Link/Members Only), your assertion about "mass casualty attacks in Europe" needs to be examined against actual data rather than perceptions. Let me share some concrete numbers.

First, looking at major casualty incidents historically:

• Neo-fascist terrorism (Bologna massacre: 85 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• Far-right extremism (Norway attacks: 77 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• Separatist terrorism (Omagh bombing: 29 casualties - External Link/Members Only)
• State-sponsored terrorism (Lockerbie: 270 casualties - External Link/Members Only)

The recent Europol TE-SAT 2024 report shows an even more complex picture for 2023:

• 70 separatist attacks, 32 left-wing/anarchist attacks, 14 jihadist attacks, and 2 right-wing attacks
• The majority of actually completed attacks were from separatist and left-wing/anarchist groups
• While jihadist attacks had higher casualties per incident, they represented a minority of total attacks (14 out of 120 attacks in 2023)

This data contradicts your statement that "mass attacks on European soil hail from one particular demographic." The reality is far more complex. When you say "the facts are undisputable," you're actually arguing against the statistical evidence presented in both the historical incident data and Europol's official reporting.

The key to prevention isn't focusing on demographics - it's understanding radicalisation pathways, improving early intervention, and addressing common factors that lead to extremist violence regardless of ideology. By fixating on one group while ignoring other sources of extremist violence, we miss opportunities to develop comprehensive prevention strategies that could actually make a difference.

What specific prevention strategies would you support that address all forms of extremist violence based on this evidence?

Jesus Christ man-how far do you want to go back just to prove a point I wasn't even arguing against?

I was linking a common denominator to the majority (if not all) the mass casualty attacks in Europe. By all means give me examples where that has not been the case but the pattern is clear. The facts are undisputable and the only uncertainty is whether we have the stomach to debate this openly.

I was not disussing violence (as you put it). I was discussing mass casualty attacks in Europe i.e. stabbings, shooting sprees, bombings, vehicle attacks etc 

I think I owe you an apology as I assumed you would realise I was talking about relatively modern historical attacks, perhaps post 9/11 if I was trying to put a time bookmark on it.

Bologna was 1980.....really?? I'm surprised you didn't go back further.

The Europol stats-what are they defining as terrorism? The Christmas market massacre a few days ago will probably not be recorded in their stats as a terrorist attack, likewise the Southport stabbings or any other attack where it was not explicitly expressed by the perpetrator that they were commiting the act for an idealogical purpose.

I also made it very clear that I was talking about mass casualty attacks, not someone throwing a brick through a synagogue or a mosque or whatever constitutes an "attack" in Europol's stats.

The key to prevention isn't focusing on demographics - it's understanding radicalisation pathways, improving early intervention, and addressing common factors that lead to extremist violence regardless of ideology. By fixating on one group while ignoring other sources of extremist violence, we miss opportunities to develop comprehensive prevention strategies that could actually make a difference.

What specific prevention strategies would you support that address all forms of extremist violence based on this evidence?

But surely current pathways to understand radicalisation DO focus on demographics to a large extent?? Authorities will not be looking for far right activitist/militants in an Islamic learning centre nor will they be looking for a Jihadist militant in a pub in Croydon.

I really don't understand the sensitive aversion to discussing demographics-it's almost like it's a dirty word and taints the person who raises the topic as a bigot.

If both you and I are being entirely honest, we don't really know what the intelligence agencies are focusing on or what their strategy is. You're reflecting your views onto this argument and I mine.

What strategies would I support? I honestly don't know my friend. I never said it was an easy problem to solve. Maybe, a naive hope is that particular types of indoctrinated hatred simply fizzle out after time and we do our best to monitor what we can in the meantime.

[MLawro93]

Jesus Christ man-how far do you want to go back just to prove a point I wasn't even arguing against?

I think I owe you an apology as I assumed you would realise I was talking about relatively modern historical attacks, perhaps post 9/11 if I was trying to put a time bookmark on it.

Bologna was 1980.....really?? I'm surprised you didn't go back further.

The Europol stats-what are they defining as terrorism? The Christmas market massacre a few days ago will probably not be recorded in their stats as a terrorist attack, likewise the Southport stabbings or any other attack where it was not explicitly expressed by the perpetrator that they were commiting the act for an idealogical purpose.

I also made it very clear that I was talking about mass casualty attacks, not someone throwing a brick through a synagogue or a mosque or whatever constitutes an "attack" in Europol's stats.

But surely current pathways to understand radicalisation DO focus on demographics to a large extent?? Authorities will not be looking for far right activitist/militants in an Islamic learning centre nor will they be looking for a Jihadist militant in a pub in Croydon.

I really don't understand the sensitive aversion to discussing demographics-it's almost like it's a dirty word and taints the person who raises the topic as a bigot.

If both you and I are being entirely honest, we don't really know what the intelligence agencies are focusing on or what their strategy is. You're reflecting your views onto this argument and I mine.

What strategies would I support? I honestly don't know my friend. I never said it was an easy problem to solve. Maybe, a naive hope is that particular types of indoctrinated hatred simply fizzle out after time and we do our best to monitor what we can in the meantime.

Regarding timeframes: You didn't specify a post-9/11 timeframe in your original claims about "mass attacks on European soil." But even if we focus on recent history, the Europol data still shows a diverse threat landscape.

About the Europol statistics: You raise a fair point about definitions. However, the report specifically tracks mass casualty events and foiled plots, not just minor incidents like vandalism. The report is transparent about its methodology and classifications. If you have alternative data sources for mass casualty attacks that support your position, I'd be interested in seeing them.

On demographics and radicalisation: Of course, demographics play a role in investigation strategies. But there's a crucial difference between tactical intelligence gathering and understanding the broader phenomenon of extremist violence.

The evidence shows that radicalisation pathways share many common elements across different ideological movements:

• Social isolation
• Online radicalisation
• Grievance narratives
• Personal crisis points
• Exposure to extremist content

Your example about not looking for far-right activists in Islamic centres or jihadists in Croydon pubs actually illustrates a potential blind spot in prevention. Extremists don't always fit our predetermined profiles, which is why comprehensive approaches are crucial.

I agree with you that we don't fully understand intelligence agencies' strategies. And you're right—there are no easy solutions. But that's precisely why we need to examine all the evidence and avoid oversimplified narratives about any particular group or demographic being the primary source of threat.

Your point about hatred potentially "fizzling out" is interesting. What do you think causes some extremist movements to decline while others persist or emerge?

Also, it is worth pointing out that this discussion is probably deviating "slightly" from the original thread point, so I am happy to discuss it elsewhere. Always worth carrying on a good discussion. 

[sir wanksalot]

Regarding timeframes: You didn't specify a post-9/11 timeframe in your original claims about "mass attacks on European soil." But even if we focus on recent history, the Europol data still shows a diverse threat landscape.

About the Europol statistics: You raise a fair point about definitions. However, the report specifically tracks mass casualty events and foiled plots, not just minor incidents like vandalism. The report is transparent about its methodology and classifications. If you have alternative data sources for mass casualty attacks that support your position, I'd be interested in seeing them.

On demographics and radicalisation: Of course, demographics play a role in investigation strategies. But there's a crucial difference between tactical intelligence gathering and understanding the broader phenomenon of extremist violence.

The evidence shows that radicalisation pathways share many common elements across different ideological movements:

• Social isolation
• Online radicalisation
• Grievance narratives
• Personal crisis points
• Exposure to extremist content

Your example about not looking for far-right activists in Islamic centres or jihadists in Croydon pubs actually illustrates a potential blind spot in prevention. Extremists don't always fit our predetermined profiles, which is why comprehensive approaches are crucial.

I agree with you that we don't fully understand intelligence agencies' strategies. And you're right—there are no easy solutions. But that's precisely why we need to examine all the evidence and avoid oversimplified narratives about any particular group or demographic being the primary source of threat.

Your point about hatred potentially "fizzling out" is interesting. What do you think causes some extremist movements to decline while others persist or emerge?

Also, it is worth pointing out that this discussion is probably deviating "slightly" from the original thread point, so I am happy to discuss it elsewhere. Always worth carrying on a good discussion. 

It's clear you take a very data led approach to this whilst I am perhaps more emotive.

When someone commits an atrocity that involves mass carnage my mind isn't very open to sympathising with that person's difficult childhood, social isolation, "personal crisis points" etc

Sometimes an evil act is committed by evil people and evil is colour blind and yet we are seeing a disproportionate amount of attacks leading to mass casualties from one particular demographic.

I don't want to veer much further away from the topic as I think the Mods have humoured both you and me so far but I have seen similar arguments with the child grooming scandals in northern towns. There is clearly a demographic pattern where the perpetrators are concerned yet I have seen people bend over backwards to argue that there is no pattern there.

Regarding hatred "fizzling out". It's just a theory based on history. It may be a deeply flawed theory as previous eras of hatred which led to terrorist attacks were mostly (if not all) politically motivated and at least in those case there was usually some type of political solution.

With idealogically sourced hatred maybe there is no obvious solution.

[RadioKid]

External Link/Members Only

Supposedly was a rabid exMuslim with an unhinged obsession of Israel, Zionism and constantly bashing and calling for deporting Muslims and was featured on BBC!

He was also reported by other citizens aswell as the Saudi Government itself and was quite evidently a nutter.

Ironically he had links with right wing grifters like Tommy Robinson and his Internet Pals (who are now scampering to distance themsleves)

Seems like a massive failure from German Police