Terrorist attack in Copenhagen?

As we have seen i recent weeks,terrorists are happy to attack the police.
 
trustbutverify said:
I don't know how likely a large-scale European anti-Muslim campaign is. I hope it's not likely at all. I do agree with you that these reprehensible attacks increase that likelihood somewhat. But, personally, I think a form of appeasement, with media conforming to the wishes of the orthodox under the guise of "respect," is just as probable.

But actually, none of that is what I was commenting on. I just can't find any sarcasm in your original post. Unless there's an alternate definition of sarcasm I'm not aware of, which is possible (no sarcasm intended!).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with you. Sarcasm wasn't the right word. I stand corrected.

I thought some people were accusing ME of wanting to oppress Muslims, which is probably why I said it was sarcastic.
 
casebro said:
Or conversly, a failed terrorist act.
Click to expand...
Depends on what his goal was.
If he wanted to kill a specific person he probably failed (although the name of the man he did kill has not yet been made public).
If he wanted to make people think twice about attending meetings such as this one in the future then he may have had some success.

The fact that he had to resort to car-jacking to get away makes me think he didn't plan to escape at all.
Perhaps the presence of armed police at the entrance surprised him and when he realised he wouldn't be able to get in and kill his targets he decided to run away so he'd live to fight another day.

I still don't know if the one person he did kill was attending the meeting and presumably shot through the windows or just a passer-by.
 
Fudbucker said:
Yeah, I agree with you. Sarcasm wasn't the right word. I stand corrected.

I thought some people were accusing ME of wanting to oppress Muslims, which is probably why I said it was sarcastic.
Click to expand...

No problem. It's an easy mistake to make.
 
Now reports of shots being fired in central Copenhagen not far from where the Synagogue is located.
Of course this might not be related to the earlier incident and it being near the Synagogue could just be a coincidence.
(no sarcasm intended in the above)

ETA:
One person shot in the head. Two cops injured. Shooter still at large. Or at least that's what's being reported.
 
Last edited:
mbp said:
Now reports of shots being fired in central Copenhagen not far from where the Synagogue is located.
Of course this might not be related to the earlier incident and it being near the Synagogue could just be a coincidence.
(no sarcasm intended in the above)

ETA:
One person shot in the head. Two cops injured. Shooter still at large. Or at least that's what's being reported.
Click to expand...

.....

This has been a truly ********** up day in Copenhagen......
 
If only Claus was there to kill the gunman with his bare hands.
 
trustbutverify said:
And of course, there's this.
Click to expand...


"However, in a statement to Al Jazeera T.N.N., Tabish Khair, a novelist based in the Danish town of Aarhus, cautioned against immediately linking the attack with any religion.

"It should be condemned as a criminal act, and no religious belief should be employed to explain it on any side," he said."

What? Is this guy for real? Has he spent the last few years living on Mars or something?
 
The second shooting was indeed at the synagogue. The man who was shot in the head was a young Jew working as a volunteer security guard for the Bar Mitzvah celebration taking place inside. It's been confirmed that he is now dead.

The third shooting happened when a man arrived at an address which was under surveillance. When confronted by the police he opened fire and was then shot and killed.

The police are saying they think the person they shot and killed was behind both earlier incidents. And they have no indication that anyone else were involved.

Apparently the guy took a taxi from close to where he left the car he hijacked. The police found the taxi driver who informed them of the address where he'd taken they guy. This was then kept under surveillance and is where he was killed when he showed up early this morning.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
"However, in a statement to Al Jazeera T.N.N., Tabish Khair, a novelist based in the Danish town of Aarhus, cautioned against immediately linking the attack with any religion.

"It should be condemned as a criminal act, and no religious belief should be employed to explain it on any side," he said."

What? Is this guy for real? Has he spent the last few years living on Mars or something?
Click to expand...
Maybe the White House?
 
Police press conference right now.

The police are pretty sure that it is the gunman they've shot.
 
mbp said:
This is perhaps somewhat more realistic.
Click to expand...
No, Wilders becoming Dutch PM is not realistic at all. The current polls show his one-man party in front, but with 5 other contenders for that spot (Socialist Party, Pvda (Labour), the centre liberal D66, the right-of-center christian democrats CDA, and the right-wing liberals VVD). The left and center parties would never form a coalition with them, and the right-of-center parties tried a few years ago and are fed up with him.

mbp said:
Can you point to specific policies suggested by these parties which will target muslims as a group?
This is an honest question btw. I don't follow French or Dutch politics very closely.
Click to expand...
Really? Here's the wiki page. I can't readily find his party program in English. And here's the video of the incident Fudbucker related in post #87, last year on the night of municipal elections. The public prosecutor is currently contemplating criminal charges over it, after hundreds of people filed charges. He's made similar comments earlier, that large amounts of Muslims should be kicked out of the country.
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
No, Wilders becoming Dutch PM is not realistic at all.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's likely to happen.
But you need to get the majority of the votes in order to become president of France, while I assume the Dutch PM could potentially be from a party with much lower support than that. That's why I think PM Wilders is less unlikely than President Le Pen.
 
Peter i said:
Police press conference right now.

The police are pretty sure that it is the gunman they've shot.
Click to expand...

BBC link

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31475803

Police say they killed the man in the Norrebro district after he opened fire on them.

It came after one person was killed and three police officers injured at a free speech debate in a cafe on Saturday.

In the second attack, a Jewish man was killed and two police officers wounded near the city's main synagogue.

Police say video surveillance suggested the same man carried out both attacks. They do not believe any other people were involved.
Click to expand...
 
mbp said:
I don't think it's likely to happen.
But you need to get the majority of the votes in order to become president of France, while I assume the Dutch PM could potentially be from a party with much lower support than that. That's why I think PM Wilders is less unlikely than President Le Pen.
Click to expand...

You're right in the middle part, and the Dutch PM need not even be from the biggest coalition party (though the last time that happened was Biesheuvel in 1970). But, apart from an absolute majority for Wilders (*), I don't see him getting into the Catshuis. The left simply refuses to even talk with him on a coalition, and the right doesn't want a repeat of their 2010-2012 experience.

(*) and even a majority of Wilders' party would be unstable. The party is simply too unstable for that, Wilders trying on his own to micro-manage the party. He doesn't manage to keep his parliamentary party together now: 3 out of 15 have jumped ship. Imagine what would happen when there were 76: just too many frogs would jump out of the wheelbarrow sooner or later.

The French presidential elections are a two-stage process: the two best proceed from the first round to the second round. In 2002, Le Pen père advanced to the second round because of fragmentation on the left. Chirac only won the second round so convincingly because left voters still went out to vote for him, with a peg on their nose so to say, or rather: to vote against Le Pen. But the numbers between Chirac and Le Pen in the first round were quite close (20% vs 17%). Le Pen fille has created a bit more amenable profile than her inveterate racist father, and I fear to know what would happen if she managed to advance to the second round, in a scenario similar to 2002, especially if pegged against a socialist candidate.

So I'm really not sure what would be more likely.
 
smartcooky said:
"However, in a statement to Al Jazeera T.N.N., Tabish Khair, a novelist based in the Danish town of Aarhus, cautioned against immediately linking the attack with any religion.

"It should be condemned as a criminal act, and no religious belief should be employed to explain it on any side," he said."

What? Is this guy for real? Has he spent the last few years living on Mars or something?
Click to expand...

Well, at least he thinks "it should be condemned as a criminal act". I'm keeping expectations low.
 
BenBurch said:
And you could estimate the total cost. Trouble is they have a nasty habit of making the exchange rate better than that.
Click to expand...

I don't know, how has it been doing lately? 911, 3,000:9, Copenhagen 2:1, Paris? USA vs Al Quaida?

Anybody care to find the stats and build a graph? Trend of rate?

I'm thinking that the rate is much more important than any particular incident.

And fyi, my statement was a parody of a Chinese statement, WWII I think, about the Chinese losing 100 for each Japanese soldier killed- "soon no more Japanese". 2:1 seems much within allowances in a war. Allies vs Axis? Germans vs Russia?
 
ddt said:
You're right in the middle part, and the Dutch PM need not even be from the biggest coalition party (though the last time that happened was Biesheuvel in 1970). But, apart from an absolute majority for Wilders (*), I don't see him getting into the Catshuis. The left simply refuses to even talk with him on a coalition, and the right doesn't want a repeat of their 2010-2012 experience.

(*) and even a majority of Wilders' party would be unstable. The party is simply too unstable for that, Wilders trying on his own to micro-manage the party. He doesn't manage to keep his parliamentary party together now: 3 out of 15 have jumped ship. Imagine what would happen when there were 76: just too many frogs would jump out of the wheelbarrow sooner or later.

The French presidential elections are a two-stage process: the two best proceed from the first round to the second round. In 2002, Le Pen père advanced to the second round because of fragmentation on the left. Chirac only won the second round so convincingly because left voters still went out to vote for him, with a peg on their nose so to say, or rather: to vote against Le Pen. But the numbers between Chirac and Le Pen in the first round were quite close (20% vs 17%). Le Pen fille has created a bit more amenable profile than her inveterate racist father, and I fear to know what would happen if she managed to advance to the second round, in a scenario similar to 2002, especially if pegged against a socialist candidate.

So I'm really not sure what would be more likely.
Click to expand...

Do you know anything about FN? Is it a functioning party with adequate discipline?

Honest question, I have no idea.

Wilders' party is, as you describe, a one-man-show with bad-quality puppets.
Even if I supported his viewpoints, I could still not vote for the mass that that club is.
Previous attempts by party-members to reform it were quickly punished with expulsion by the great leader.

ETA:
the party has no internal democratic mechanism. There is no voting on issues or leadership. This would not be illegal in Germany I believe.
 
Last edited:
The name of the perpetrator has not been officially released yet, but several Danish newspapers are reporting that it was a 22 year old man called Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein.

The police already knew about him as only three months ago he was sentenced to two years in prison for assaulting a stranger with a knife. Back then he was charged with attempted manslaughter but only found guilty of aggravated assault (not sure this is the right translation).
 
casebro said:
I don't know, how has it been doing lately? 911, 3,000:9, Copenhagen 2:1, Paris? USA vs Al Quaida?

Anybody care to find the stats and build a graph? Trend of rate?

I'm thinking that the rate is much more important than any particular incident.

And fyi, my statement was a parody of a Chinese statement, WWII I think, about the Chinese losing 100 for each Japanese soldier killed- "soon no more Japanese". 2:1 seems much within allowances in a war. Allies vs Axis? Germans vs Russia?
Click to expand...

Don't forget the train bombings in Europe.
 
Eddie Dane said:
Do you know anything about FN? Is it a functioning party with adequate discipline?

Honest question, I have no idea.
Click to expand...
I don't follow them well either, but given that FN has been at it for at least twenty years as a successful party, with representation on all levels, I think they are.

Eddie Dane said:
Wilders' party is, as you describe, a one-man-show with bad-quality puppets.
Even if I supported his viewpoints, I could still not vote for the mass that that club is.
Previous attempts by party-members to reform it were quickly punished with expulsion by the great leader.

ETA:
the party has no internal democratic mechanism. There is no voting on issues or leadership. This would not be illegal in Germany I believe.
Click to expand...
Oh, Wilders' party, the PVV, is perfectly democratic. After all, it has only one member: Wilders himself. :rolleyes: The other MPs are not member of the party, they're only member of the parliamentary party - which is another entity, and which is government-funded for things like parliamentary assistants. One of the dissidents, Bonte, was treasurer of the parliamentary party.
 
Just to wrap up a bit:

Investigations are still going on, of course, but it seems this was most of all an unstable and angry young man who grapped the nearest excuse to get back at the world. It was a terrorist act by the merit of the targets he picked, but it seems he might as well have shot up is old school or something else.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Just to wrap up a bit:

Investigations are still going on, of course, but it seems this was most of all an unstable and angry young man who grapped the nearest excuse to get back at the world. It was a terrorist act by the merit of the targets he picked, but it seems he might as well have shot up is old school or something else.
Hans
Click to expand...

No, I think he had a specific part of "the world" he wanted to get back at.
 
MRC_Hans said:
It was a terrorist act by the merit of the targets he picked, but it seems he might as well have shot up is old school or something else.
Click to expand...
I don't understand how you arrive at that conclusion.

Anyhow, to sum up a bit more:

The weapon used during the first attack was a stolen C7A1 assault rifle.

After failing to gain access through a back door the assailant, Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein, goes to the main entrance where he fires 27 shots.
A man is killed by one of these. At least one witness says the man was trying to stop the El-Hussein.
Danish and Swedish (bodyguards of the Swedish cartoonist Lars Wilks) police return fire, but without hitting the perpetrator. (Or at least without injuring him - there are reports he was wearing a bulletproof west so I suppose they could have hit that.)

The assailant flees in a hijacked car which is found not far away. He then takes a taxi to an address where the assault rifle is later found. This is also close to where his final confrontation with the police takes place.

During the second shooting at the synagogue he fires seven shots with a 9mm pistol and two shots with a 7.65mm pistol. A Jewish guard is killed and two policemen are injured.

He is caught when he once again returns to the area where he left the assault rifle earlier. He fires three shots at the police officers who confront him. They return fire and kill him.

During the following days two other young men were arrested and charged with accessory to the murders and attempted murders.

It has since emerged the intelligence services were notified last September that Omar El-Hussein had been radicalised while in prison. But no action was taken at the time or when he was released a few weeks ago.

Former classmates of his from two years ago say the impression they had of him back then was that he was very religious and extremist. That he had a bad temper, often carried a knife, and that he proclaimed his hatred of Jews on several occasions.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Just to wrap up a bit:

Investigations are still going on, of course, but it seems this was most of all an unstable and angry young man who grapped the nearest excuse to get back at the world. It was a terrorist act by the merit of the targets he picked, but it seems he might as well have shot up is old school or something else.

Hans
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I wonder what action or ideological atrocities can't be, at some level, described as "angry young men getting back at the world"? Congo atrocities, check. ISIS, check. The waffen SS, check. Spartacus slave revolt, check. Amazing, we can explain everything using your formulation while not pointing any fingers or being judgmental about anything! How useful!
 
My point: At present, there is no indication that he was recruited or trained by a terrorist organisation. Of course, we still need to find out how he aquired his weapon, that might be crucial to the evaluation *), but apart from this he seems an angry young man who went down what (de)route was closest to him.

It makes little difference to the incident as such, but it means a lot to what we should do to try to prevent new incidents.

Hans

*) An assult weapon of that type is normally difficult and expensive to aquire in Denmark.
 
Giz said:
Hmmm, I wonder what action or ideological atrocities can't be, at some level, described as "angry young men getting back at the world"? Congo atrocities, check. ISIS, check. The waffen SS, check. Spartacus slave revolt, check. Amazing, we can explain everything using your formulation while not pointing any fingers or being judgmental about anything! How useful!
Click to expand...

There is a difference to my mind between a terrorist cell with angry young men and independent angry young men who just happened to think they have found a cause.

The first has the potential for larger-scale attacks (e.g. 9/11, Madrid train bombings, 7/7, IRA attacks etc). The second could require little planning or preparation so must be a lot harder to prevent* as well as being uncoordinated.

I'd also say that *some* spree killers also fit in this area. Mostly they are not considered terrorists, but I'd say that it's only a matter of circumstance, and that if they'd espoused a different ideology, they would be. Anders Breivik might be an example right on the borderline.


*If you have a driving licence and a wish to attack somebody, but you don't care who, you will eventually find pedestrians that you'd have a good chance of running over.
 
jimbob said:
There is a difference to my mind between a terrorist cell with angry young men and independent angry young men who just happened to think they have found a cause.
Click to expand...

There isn't any difference to mine.

Whether its a cell of AYM who fight for "the cause" or a bunch of separate AYM whom have been inspired/radicalized by "the cause", they still kill innocent victims, and those who cared about those victims will not appreciate the fine distinctions regarding what motivated the killer(s).

"The cause" is to blame when it actively recruits and radicalize AYM.
 
smartcooky said:
There isn't any difference to mine.

Whether its a cell of AYM who fight for "the cause" or a bunch of separate AYM whom have been inspired/radicalized by "the cause", they still kill innocent victims, and those who cared about those victims will not appreciate the fine distinctions regarding what motivated the killer(s).

"The cause" is to blame when it actively recruits and radicalize AYM.
Click to expand...

But there is a difference in the nature of any threat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom