• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Amsterdam Stabbing Victims Identified as U.S. Citizens

Peter King said:
this attack happened in the Netherlands and is a crime under Dutch law, there is no legal justification to hand him over to another country.
Click to expand...

Since when has "legal justification" been a concern of the US government?

The US government demanded that the government of Afghanistan turn Osama bin Laden over to the US government, despite the fact that there was no extradition treaty between the US and Afghanistan and despite the fact that the US government refused to present the Afghan government with any evidence linking Osama bin Laden with any particular crime. Since the Afghan government persisted in acting as if Afghanistan were an independent and sovereign country, the US government invaded and conquered Afghanistan.

The US government demanded that Iraq toss Saddam Hussein out of office and the Iraqi government took the absolutely unjustifiable position that Iraq was an independent and sovereign nation which could select its own government according to its own laws. In order to enforce compliance with the orders of the US government, the US invaded and conquered Iraq.

The US government wants an American, who was in Turkey when he committed acts which the Turkish government alleges were against Turkish law released without trial because the Turkish government has not "proved" that that American is guilty of any offence. Since the Turkish government persists in acting as if Turkey were an independent and sovereign nation, the US government has imposed sanctions on Turkey and disrupted the Turkish economy in order to force compliance with the demands of the US government.

Those are just three of the most egregious examples.

Now, what possible reason would prevent the US government from demanding that the Dutch government hand the prisoner over to the US government and, if the Dutch government persists in acting like the Netherlands was an independent and sovereign nation, imposing sanctions on the Netherlands and disrupting the economy of the Netherlands in order to force compliance with the demands of the US government?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
OK, so the brush was a bit overly broad, but the version of world history that it taught in American schools tends to ignore the contributions of any other country to anything - doesn't it?
Click to expand...

No.

Why not try asking some school children when WWII started? Would you like to bet that less than 25% of the answers are "December 7, 1941" or "When Japan attacked Pearl Harbour."?
Click to expand...

WW2 started on December 7, 1941 for the United States. Most British people would say that it started when Germany invaded Poland, because that's when it started for Britain. In fact, WW2 had already begun by that time, even in Europe. It started in 1937 in Asia.

Why not try asking some school children which country declared war in 1812 and on what country it declared war?

Why not try asking some school children in which country insulin, radar, jet aircraft, tanks, radio, and steam engines were invented.
Click to expand...

The correct facts about all of those are taught in US schools. At any rate, arguments about "which country" invented things are useless. Inventions are the fruit of progressive developments that occur in a lot of different places and times, and no inventor can claim full credit for themselves or their country. It's just as stupid when the British do it as when the Americans do it.
 
some time tomorrow he will be brought in front of a judge who will decide if and for how long he will be remanded in custody, but looking this case he will be held over for questioning after which this will be repeated and then after that time he will be remanded for trial to make sure he will not get released prior to his trial sometime later this year or early next year.
 
The judge ruled that there was ample evidence to lengthen the pre-trial arrest period. He will remain in full restrictions, meaning he can only have contact with his lawyer.

The German police searched the home of the terrorist in Germany. So far there is no evidence that he worked with somebody else.
 
During questioning Jawed S. the suspect of the terrorist attack states that he traveled to the Netherlands specifically to commit an act of terror due to the many insults to Mohammed, the Qua'ran, Islam and Allah, coming from the Netherlands. He specifically named (among others) Geert Wilders.

About the cartoon competition about Islam/Mohammed that Geert Wilders organized he said nothing.

He traveled from Germany to Amsterdam Central Station to commit an act of terror. He chose the 2 victims totally at random. He did not even know they were Americans, he was just looking for a few people he could stab.
 
The perp who stabbed the 2 Americans on the Amsterdam Central Station had been seen by "spotters", police officers walking around and looking for suspicious behavior, they were of the opinion that he was behaving strange/not normal and were on their way to talk to the man when he started stabbing, hence he was stopped/shot within seconds of his rampage before he could wound or kill other people. The whole incident took less than 30 seconds, between the stabbing and his shooting was 9 seconds due to police officers already having him in their sights due to action suspicious. Of course they did not know what he wanted to do but when the knives came out/started stabbing and his shooting was as said all of 9 seconds.

It seems (unbeknownst to us mere mortals) that the police has armed and unarmed officers around specifically looking for suspicious behavior, which is logical, not maybe for terrorism (but that too must be an issue) but for all the robbing and pickpockets in such a huge and crowded place.

It also seems that German authorities had been warned about Jawed S. In February an employee from the youth institution he was staying at noticed changes in his behavior. He started acting differently and suddenly started growing his beard. The employee mentioned this to the police but the authorities in Germany said they had not earmarked him as a threat.

Before the terror attack he lived in youth institutions in Gau-Algesheim and Oberdiebach. He also lived for one year in Piesport. His asylum request was still not approved.

During police interviews in his hospital room he said that he was angry at all Dutch people for their constant insults to Allah, Mohammed and Islam. He mentioned the name of Geert Wilders regularly in his police interviews.
 
MrMike said:
Shame they didn't double tap him...
Click to expand...

Bull ****, in the Netherlands we arrest criminals, we do not kill people without justification during arrest and we do not execute people found guilty. That is more the attitude the man we that was shot and other religious extremists
 
Peter King said:
During questioning Jawed S. the suspect of the terrorist attack states that he traveled to the Netherlands specifically to commit an act of terror due to the many insults to Mohammed, the Qua'ran, Islam and Allah, coming from the Netherlands. He specifically named (among others) Geert Wilders.

About the cartoon competition about Islam/Mohammed that Geert Wilders organized he said nothing.

He traveled from Germany to Amsterdam Central Station to commit an act of terror. He chose the 2 victims totally at random. He did not even know they were Americans, he was just looking for a few people he could stab.
Click to expand...

In other words, when the news of the stabbing was first received, it was not unreasonable to conclude that a Muslim guy randomly stabbing people in the street was motivated by his religion.
 
Peter King said:
During police interviews in his hospital room he said that he was angry at all Dutch people for their constant insults to Allah, Mohammed and Islam. He mentioned the name of Geert Wilders regularly in his police interviews.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the new normal. This sort of thing will only happen more and more and more. This genie is well out of the bottle.
 
Athanasius68 said:
In other words, when the news of the stabbing was first received, it was not unreasonable to conclude that a Muslim guy randomly stabbing people in the street was motivated by his religion.
Click to expand...

He confessed/stated to the police that it was done out of religious views.
 
PeteEU said:
They can and have. Abuse victims have started to remember abuse based on hearing the voice of their abuser. This is no different.

It could also have been a visual cue of some kind.

There are hundreds of Americans in Amsterdam on any given day or in Germany where he was from... something triggered him. Accent, smell, visual cue... something.

It is far more likely than a planned terror attack.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Or the guy was just a piece of **** and WANTED to stab Americans... Seeing as he stabbed them ill go with that....
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Or the guy was just a piece of **** and WANTED to stab Americans... Seeing as he stabbed them ill go with that....
Click to expand...

No, he wanted to stab Dutch people, the 2 Americans were unlucky to be in the Netherlands right at that moment in the biggest Dutch train station.
 
Peter King said:
No, he wanted to stab Dutch people, the 2 Americans were unlucky to be in the Netherlands right at that moment in the biggest Dutch train station.
Click to expand...

Ya bull****. He obviously heard to American accents having fun and couldnt help himself. I dont care if his whole village was bombed by America he doesnt have the right to hurt innocent people.
 
Peter King said:
He confessed/stated to the police that it was done out of religious views.
Click to expand...

Bull****. He stabbed them BECAUSE HE WANTED TO. It was in his will and he did it. Unless you can prove God came down and told him to, he did it BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE HIM FEEL GOOD.
 
Peter King said:
Bull ****, in the Netherlands we arrest criminals, we do not kill people without justification during arrest and we do not execute people found guilty. That is more the attitude the man we that was shot and other religious extremists
Click to expand...

That's a shame. Perhaps when the local Dutch start finding random infidels with their heads lopped off they will figure out they've been invaded.

Oh heck...it's already too late for them.
 
Andalublue said:
That's a perfectly plausible possibility. Not every Afghan/Syrian/whatever migrant or refugee who commits an act of violence is motivated by religion or a terrorist ideology. People who have lived through conflict are at risk of psychological trauma. Ask any combat veteran.

I've no idea if this is the case here, but it's a possibility. You sound as if you don't even want to entertain it.
Click to expand...


Now I understand.
 
Peter King said:
During questioning Jawed S. the suspect of the terrorist attack states that he traveled to the Netherlands specifically to commit an act of terror due to the many insults to Mohammed, the Qua'ran, Islam and Allah, coming from the Netherlands. He specifically named (among others) Geert Wilders.

About the cartoon competition about Islam/Mohammed that Geert Wilders organized he said nothing.

He traveled from Germany to Amsterdam Central Station to commit an act of terror. He chose the 2 victims totally at random. He did not even know they were Americans, he was just looking for a few people he could stab.
Click to expand...

OK.

Now, I'm in agreement that he has confessed.

(I'm not going to get picky and insist that "in reality" all we have is "a statement from the police that he has confessed".)
 
Athanasius68 said:
In other words, when the news of the stabbing was first received, it was not unreasonable to conclude that a Muslim guy randomly stabbing people in the street was motivated by his religion.
Click to expand...

If all that you have to go on is "Is a Muslim." + "Stabbed People", then, indeed, that would be ONE of the potentially NOT unreasonable conclusions that one could reach.

On the other hand if all that you have to go on is "Is a Muslim." + "Stabbed People", then ONE of the potentially NOT unreasonable conclusions that one could reach would be that there was a serious psychiatric problem.

Personally, I have some fairly substantial (strategic and tactical) reasons for thinking that the "best" way of dealing with this type of situation is to treat the perpetrator(s) as if there was a serious psychiatric problem involved rather than making a big deal out of "religious motivation arising from a sincere belief".
 
PeteEU said:
1)

2) America is a violent country and thanks to the NRA there has never really been studies done on who and what back ground people who commit gun violence come from.. or any other type of violence. We know that vets are over represented in homeless and mental disorder numbers.. so why not acts of violence... would make sense.
Click to expand...

Wow, here we go...with guns?

1st, it took place in Europe.

2nd, he didnt use a gun

3rd, they have literally done thousands of studies into the backgrounds and origin of violent and criminal people in the US. For decades.

4th, you got that right, sadly, that many vets are homeless and have PTSD. But to assume that for this 'immigrant' is a vet is just speculation at this point.
 
PeteEU said:
Lots of young people carry knives on them in Europe...it is a very serious problem. Knife fights and stabbings among young people are at an all time high in many countries so it is not unrealistic for him to have one... especially if he feels threatened constantly in a hostile environment.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hmm. So what are the countries of Europe doing about the large numbers of knives being carried and used?
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Or the guy was just a piece of **** and WANTED to stab Americans... Seeing as he stabbed them ill go with that....
Click to expand...

Another NOT unreasonable conclusion that could be reached based on the original data.
 
Peter King said:
No, he wanted to stab Dutch people, the 2 Americans were unlucky to be in the Netherlands right at that moment in the biggest Dutch train station.
Click to expand...

OK, so yet another NOT unreasonable conclusion that could be reached on the original data was that he was an incompetent nut job.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Ya bull****. He obviously heard to American accents having fun and couldnt help himself. I dont care if his whole village was bombed by America he doesnt have the right to hurt innocent people.
Click to expand...

Sure, he is telling all the specifics of his attack and his disdain for Dutch people and wanting to kill them and then lies about that he was stabbing people at random without knowing they were American.

He most likely did not hear any accidents as he was walking around like a headless chicken, that is the reason the spotters took notice of him. In the very noisy Amsterdam Train Station you are supposed to stay several steps behind the people at the desk. He has stated he just stabbed people at random, thinking they were the Dutch he wanted to punish and there is zero reason so far to deny his confession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom