
Brussels Rocked by Terrorist Attacks - maibaum
http://www.wsj.com/articles/people-injured-after-explosion-at-brussels-airport-police-say-1458632527
======
DoubleMalt
What I find reassuring in the midst of this tragic mayhem however, is how
little actual damage the terrorists could do.

They had explosives, weapons, the resolve to sacrifice themselves and tried
their best to do as much damage as possible. And they managed to to kill less
than 30 people (provisional count).

Of course every death that brought on by this fanatic mob is too much, but we
should keep our perspective.

A bus accident in Spain last week left 11 exchange students dead, in the US
alone every day more than 50 people die in road accidents.

Of course we should root out the people that try to bomb our freedom away. But
don't let us be terrorized by something that doesn't make a statistically
recognizable dent in our probability for survival.

~~~
rtpg
A major airport and the entire rail system of the city was shut down. A lot of
damage was done. And, of course, a bunch of people died from something not
many signed up for.

Driving a car at least gives you the opportunity to reject taking on the risk.

The fabric of society is based around us not shooting each other/ blowing up
trains. Every event like this (or, say, some countries bombing out
neighborhoods in other countries) makes it harder to rely on the idea that
this sort of thing doesn't happen.

Acknowledging that this happens because of conscious policy decisions by many
people is also good.

There's absolutely nothing inevitable about these kinds of attacks. We could
bring this sort of event down to a number real close to 0.

Not to mention that it's possible to worry about car crashes _and_ terrorism
at the same time

~~~
Someone1234
> There's absolutely nothing inevitable about these kinds of attacks. We could
> bring this sort of event down to a number real close to 0.

I don't think so.

Even if you exclude international politics completely the number still isn't
zero. Take the 2011 Norway attacks where 77 people died. That was one guy, a
Christian fundamentalist, likely paranoid schizophrenic who wanted to rid the
world of Marxism/feminism/islam/something. Then you have the unabomber, most
school shootings, and so on which you can point to.

My point is: This stuff is NEVER going away. All you can do is minimise it.
Zero is certainly a laudable goal but likely an unachievable one.

~~~
ptaipale
Labeling Breivik as a Christian fundamentalist serves a political need, but if
we really have to attribute to a religion what he did, he was more like a
pagan fundamentalist ("Odinist") who expressed his belief that Jesus was
"pathetic".

Edit: However I agree with the part that this is never going to go away
(completely). You cannot totally prevent terror, and living in a society that
could would be terror itself.

------
dmichulke
As sad as it is, I think the responses will be:

\- we need more surveillance rights and money for the secret services

\- we need more police and higher spending

\- and possibly bomb some country (Syria is en vogue)

What won't be said is:

\- How come this happens _again_ without anyone having seen it coming?

\- What does it say about the success of the Western anti-terror foreign
policy adopted ~2001?

~~~
wslh
I think investing in explosives detection is a better approach. It is an irony
that there were explosions at the airport while they are screening you
completely before boarding a flight.

~~~
jonatanheyman
According to BBC the explosion are believed to have been in the checkin area,
i.e. outside of the security screening.

~~~
ekianjo
This is a clear weakness of airports: where people regroup even before
reaching the terminal, with no surveillance or security checks whatsoever. And
that's not just in Brussels.

~~~
eonwe
Only place I've seen some security checks was at Ben Gurion airport in Tel
Aviv, where there was a mild security check when entering the airport.

This consisted of a small interview on what I've been doing in Israel, where I
am going to, with whom and who packed my stuff. This all was before even
entering the actual terminal building.

~~~
compactmani
I see Europe in the future adopting many of the (some call paranoid) security
measure of Israel. For example security checks before entering all malls.

~~~
mrblueblue
In Paris, there are security checks at entrances to malls and big stores now.

------
themartorana
This is a mess larger than I can comprehend, with scores of innocent dead. The
spectrum of political issues this crosses is vast. We're talking nationalism,
immigration, religion, extremism, surveillance, privacy, and war to name a
few.

The nuance required to understand and attack the big picture is almost nowhere
to be found.

I saw the French PM said something like "we're at war" \- I'm not sure who
they're at war _with_ but onward with the endless war.

I've seen plenty of comments about ISIS. It's like a 99.999% chance it's not
ISIS - maybe Al Qaeda, maybe a different extremist group. (For _why_ it's
probably not ISIS and one of the most fantastic explanations of the what's and
whys of ISIS, see [0].) But it shows just how vastly uneducated most people
are about the issues that lead to attacks like this.

This breeds calls for extremism in response, like expelling all Muslims (and
can only help Trump's campaign) or comments like the one from the French PM
above.

I can't imagine being in charge of trying to address all of the underlying
issues that feed into attacks like this. And I don't know that those in charge
are up to the task.

[0] [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-
isi...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-
wants/384980/)

Edit: ISIS _inspired_ maybe, but not ISIS planned and backed. "During his
visit to Mosul in December, Jürgen Todenhöfer interviewed a portly German
jihadist and asked whether any of his comrades had returned to Europe to carry
out attacks. The jihadist seemed to regard returnees not as soldiers but as
dropouts. “The fact is that the returnees from the Islamic State should repent
from their return,” he said. “I hope they review their religion.”"

I always stand to be corrected.

~~~
josteink
> This is a mess larger than I can comprehend, with scores of innocent dead.

What's most sad about it, is that the current situation is the result of doing
nothing, despite having crystal clear data on the situation, and in which
(wrong) direction things has been changing.

It's been clear that something needs to be done for years, even decades, but
actually doing something about the situation would mean publicly acknowledging
these facts. And nobody has been willing to do just that.

In fact actually _using these known indisputable facts_ has been
systematically avoided for fear of being seen as "racist" or whatever.

Putting the specific issue of immigration aside, I think that it's a very bad
sign for the future of enlightened democracy when actually running a fact-
based policy is deemed as "risky" and even unacceptable from a public
relations point of view.

If we let this attitude persist, we can do lots of wrongs in other areas as
well: Think about environmental changes, etc etc.

We need to heighten the status of cold data, of facts as a matter of
indisputability. But that's not a left/right issue and I don't think you will
find any party fronting such a position.

~~~
tomp
> that the current situation is the result of doing nothing

I think the current situation is the result of doing _way too much_ the the
past decade (or two). If the US and EU stayed out of the Middle East (Iraq,
Libya, Syria), the EU+ME part of the world would be a much more peaceful
place.

~~~
josteink
Fair enough and absolutely a valid counterargument.

Allow me to amend my comment slightly, and emphasise that I'm speaking of
domestic policies.

Across Europe we've seen increased ghettofication, social segregation and
religious extremism.

But because this has mostly been within demographic segments considered "weak"
or "minorities", the explicit policy has consistently been sweeping things
under the rug and proceeding as if nothing has been wrong.

And that has landed Europe where it is today.

Anyway. This is HN and I don't want to get more political than I need to. What
bothers me the most is honestly the low status facts have in the politics of
nations today, something I think should be a fairly incontroversial position.

~~~
mistermann
> What bothers me the most is honestly the low status facts have in the
> politics of nations today

100% agree....when you can sit and watch a debate or discussion on TV, and one
side or the other, or both, are using arguments that are known to be factually
incorrect, it's bound to not turn out well.

I think if we are going to accept immigration from anywhere, we should first
figure out how to assimilate all cultures to prevent as you correctly note
ghettofication, social segregation and religious extremism. The things we're
seeing today might be small potatoes compared to what could happen if there's
a mass uprising.

------
plehoux
"2 bombs exploded close to where I was sitting, so scary." \-
[https://twitter.com/lrz/status/712173581103448064](https://twitter.com/lrz/status/712173581103448064)

"Bombs at Brussels airport. I'm alive but I think there are casualties." \-
[https://twitter.com/lrz/status/712173286281650176](https://twitter.com/lrz/status/712173286281650176)

Laurent Sansonetti MacRuby & RubyMotion's creator and lead developer was near
the blast.

------
coldcode
People always freak out when this happens. As long as there have been people
with enough hate (or often political motives) there has always been terrorist
attacks. Even the Romans suffered as much.

I don't think there is any solution which makes everyone perfectly safe.
Politicians always want to guarantee perfect safety but it's not possible.
Some things you can prevent, some things you can stop, but some horrible thing
will inevitably happen.

~~~
michaelmcmillan
You seem to attribute a lot to politics. I would argue that religion is the
variable that plays the dominant role in this war of ideas.

~~~
twoquestions
You and many others seem to post that there is a mental cancer infecting 1.5
billion people on this planet, and at any time it could transform its host
into a bloodthirsty murderer seemingly at random.

I don't buy it.

~~~
harshreality
Islam, and radical Islam specifically, are not the sole ingredient
transforming random people into murderers or suicide murderers.

It is an ingredient. Eric Hoffer's _The True Believer_ is a good sketch of the
phenomenon. Among the disaffected, some will latch onto any available dogmatic
belief system. As long as radical Islam is in the news, and is accessible,
some among the disaffected will choose that path.

Not all dogmas result in blowing yourself up in crowds, or setting off bombs
or gunning down people in theaters. Doesn't it make sense to preferentially
attack those dogmas that bring out, _at present_ , the worst characteristics
in their adherents?

It would be great if our foreign policy in the past 1.5 (or 3, or 5, or 7)
decades hadn't been a disaster and promoted unrest in the region, because that
undoubtedly increased the seriousness of our current situation. We (by that I
mean our leaders who make foreign policy and military decisions) should try to
learn from history and not repeat the same mistakes, although they all (no
matter their politics) seem to do a very poor job of that. But the question of
why radical Islam is such a problem now is irrelevant to the question of
whether we should fight radical Islam. It's not a very reasonable thing to
conclude that because we're partly responsible for the rise of radical Islam,
we should do nothing and let it conquer the world if it wants.

~~~
twoquestions
Deal with individuals goading others to violence by all means!

What I think would be an awful mistake is to replicate the Roosevelt style
policy with regard to Muslims.

Also, The True Believer is already on my to-read list, I'll bump it up after I
get done with Piketty. Thanks for the recommendation!

------
matthewaveryusa
We havent seen a group of 50 militants take over a city and reck havoc because
our surveillance systems can detect such levels of organization. As horrible
as this sounds, anyone with an IQ above 60 can plot and kill 30 people because
there's not enough signal in the vast noise our communication networks
generate to pick up on it. If we can prevent terrorist attacks that kill
thousands of individuals we've won.

~~~
kbart
If entering a major _airport_ strapped with explosives undetected and blowing
up _twice_ killing tens of people isn't a spectacular security failure, I
don't know what is. I agree that it's nearly impossible to detect/prevent
random shootings/stabbings (like in Paris attacks), but this is not such case.

~~~
matwood
In a free society people can move where they please. The explosions happened
before the security checkpoints at a very busy airport, so I don't see how
this was some security failure. Intelligence failure yes, but airport
security? I'm not so sure. Are you suggesting that a perimeter be setup around
the entire airport and people are checked before entering the grounds?

------
elcapitan
Belgium hasn't had stable governments for many years, with many observers,
especially in the aftermath of the Paris attacks, calling it a 'failed state'.
I read an article about that a while ago, couldn't find it directly, but I
found this one: [http://www.politico.eu/article/belgium-failed-state-
security...](http://www.politico.eu/article/belgium-failed-state-security-
services-molenbeek-terrorism/)

~~~
kirk21
Let's not exaggerate. This is not a third world country. A lot things work
really well. You're right that immigration was not handled well but except
that Belgium is pretty well managed.

------
pluma
My first visceral reaction was "Fuck it, just kill them all and bomb them back
to stone age". I know I'm not alone on this -- the recent rise of nationalism,
isolationism, Euro-scepticism and hostility towards refugees all over Europe
is painful evidence for this sentiment.

But it's important to understand that these feelings are what such attacks are
intended to invoke. They're intended to harden the gap between "us" and
"them", to make Westerners despise anyone who looks conveniently foreign
enough to be suspicious of belonging to "them" and to use them as scapegoats
for the perpetrators who have often already escaped justice through death.

These atrocities weren't committed by "Muslims" just like the atrocities in
the UK during the Troubles were not committed by "Christians". The
perpetrators were individuals -- even if they belonged to a group that group
wasn't "Muslims", it most likely wasn't even "ISIS"; just a small group of
like-minded dangerous individuals who were convinced they would aid mankind by
committing atrocities like these.

In so far as certain ideologies led to these convictions it is important to
understand that you can't kill ideas with weapons. Yes, where there are armies
fighting for dangerous ideologies they need to be stopped, but where you can't
even clearly distinguish the soldiers from the civilians you need to destroy
the ideology, not the people.

But unlike people, ideologies are very difficult to destroy and take a long
time to fully extinguish. And in times like these it's far too easy to fall
prey to politicians promising fast satisfaction rather than a long-term
strategy towards a shift in ideologies.

We need to embrace our humanity and liberties. We have already had our period
of enlightenment and we have overcome totalitarianism and theocracy. We must
not allow ourselves to regress to the dark age, no matter how appealing it may
seem in times like these -- neither here in Europe, nor oversees in the US.

~~~
gerbilly
> ideologies are very difficult to destroy and take a long time to fully
> extinguish

I like that you used "extinguish" here.

I'm not sure if you intended it, but I think the behavioural psychology
definition of "extinguish" is especially relevant.

In other words, to get rid of the ideology, we'd have to not reinforce it:
i.e. to neither reward it or punish it.

And yes extinction[1] takes a long time.

Also see "extinction burst".

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_(psychology)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_\(psychology\))

------
Cenk
Facebook has activated Safety Check. —
[https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/brusselsexplosions-
marc...](https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/brusselsexplosions-march2016/)

I guess it’s official. Facebook Safety Check is for terrorist attacks in
white, western countries only. Good to know.

Edit: I was wrong and I take back what I said:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Safety_Check#Other_de...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Safety_Check#Other_deployments)

~~~
tobltobs
[https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/ankaraexplosion-
feb17-2...](https://www.facebook.com/safetycheck/ankaraexplosion-feb17-2016/)

~~~
Cenk
You are 100% right, Facebook Safety Check was in fact deployed during both
Ankara explosions this year, and for an attack in Nigeria late 2015. I take
back my (unnecessarily snarky) comment.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Safety_Check#Other_de...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Safety_Check#Other_deployments)

------
vigilant
How can technology help prevent such attacks without infringing on the basic
right to privacy?

Perhaps some sort of real time image recognition of video streams from major
public areas (like airports), which can detect things like guns and unattended
packages and alert authorities automatically? Of course, that doesn't help
detect the suicide bomber scenario.

Automatic facial recognition of known criminals? That would be hugely open to
abuse.

------
ikeboy
[https://archive.is/hJm1m](https://archive.is/hJm1m)

------
andremendes
Could someone provide a link to a not paywalled version? Going through google
didn't helped.

~~~
icpmacdo
[http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-a...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-
airport-explosions-live-updates)

------
altotrees
Today is the first time since 9/11 that I can remember hearing the news of a
terrorist attack and not being gripped by panic. I guess the Boston Marathon
Bombings, Paris Attacks (Charlie Hebdo and Bataclan both) shootings and other
events have kind of led me being in an oddly calm state when I hear news like
this now.

This is not the way I want to feel. If you would've told me around 8:30 a.m.
on September 10th the way things would be changed, I couldn't have fathomed
it. I was sitting in my high school Spanish class, trying to get the attention
of a girl who probably doesn't even remember my name now. But things changed
and I kind of came into my own with those changes, growing up, going to
college, getting one job, then another. It became normal.

Data is the buzzword now. I eat it and breathe it every single day. I work
with collections of numbers and information. These are the same things that
keep us safe from attacks - collections numbers and information. The NSA and
others rely on it. For every attack we hear about, I cannot even venture a
guess on how many are thwarted.

Given that numbers and information are critical tools in trying to prevent
future tragedies, I struggle with the same question we all do: how much is too
much? What do I want to let the government know about me? About my family?
About where I travel and when? Is there an inevitable trade-off between safety
and privacy?

I think abut these things at work, at home, while driving. It seems now that
we are facing a new breed of terror that has evolved, even since 2001. It is
calculated yet seemingly random, completely lawless yet in their eyes the only
lawful way to live, more violent, vile and sadistic any other terrorist cell I
have heard about.

So you would think, given the way I feel about this new iteration of terror,
and the struggle I have with personal privacy questions, I would've been
paralyzed with anxiety this morning, seeking meaning, trying to configure a
strategy in my head for how the governments involved will deal with it and
prevent future attacks.

But I did not feel or do those things. I poured my coffee and walked out the
door. Of course I feel horrible for the poor innocent lives lost, but as far
as worrying and obsessing about it, I just cannot. This is not how I want to
feel. I fear that my not panicking signals attacks like this as a new normal
for me, something my 17 year-old self never could've or would've wanted to
imagine. Thanks everyone for sharing thoughts and insights on this, I think it
is helping me process yet another attack in my own way.

~~~
dwaltrip
I think one of the most important things that we can do when faced with these
types of events, but which usually fails to happens, is for us to humbly drop
our assumptions, and to dig in to try understand the deeply complex histories
and motivations that led to the attacks. If we don't understand why something
is happening (and no, it's not because "ISIS is evil incarnate", as some try
to proclaim), how we can ever hope to stop it, or more importantly, prevent
similar/analogous conditions that result in this type of outcome from arising
again? Due to the complex cultural, historical, economic, and psychological
factors at play, there is no "easy fix" that actually solves the problem in
the long run.

Edit: I don't claim to have a rich understanding of the issue, but I
appreciated the nuanced analysis in this article:

[http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-
isi...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-
wants/384980/)

~~~
altotrees
I completely agree. I spent lots of time, especially after the Paris attacks,
reading about Daesh, and the origins of their beliefs. The Atlantic article
you mention is a fantastic primer on this very complex and hard-to-digest
topic.

Many people seem to view doing this kind of reading and learning as some kind
of gesture that is sympathetic to those who commit such acts. I will never
understand how wanting to be educated on the history of a group automatically
means you are siding with them ideologically...but I am from the midwest and
left quite a few beliefs I will never understand.

------
mtgx
Hopefully this doesn't end up as another call to "be united". I've seen how
the governments in question abuse that. If they get all the support they need,
then they start doing awful things, even illegal things against European laws
and whatnot. But because the countries are "united", nobody says anything
anymore.

What we need is to _think this through_ , which also means _challenging_
conventional wisdom, not just be "be united in following whatever said
government wants to do".

------
spriggan3
So what will the excuse be ,manufactured by pundits on the other side of the
Atlantic this time ? "Belgium didn't integrate these people well" /s ? just
like for Paris ?

------
r721
Other discussions:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11334908](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11334908)
(67 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11335167](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11335167)
(79 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11335518](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11335518)
(115 comments)

------
eis
I wonder why this important event is getting not many upvotes and also ranks
lower than other stories with less upvotes but older.

Is it getting flagged for being off-topic?

~~~
qb45
Quite possibly. Another submission had been flagged to death earlier today:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11334908](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11334908)

------
jackgavigan
Presented without comment: _" This is a solid Moment to get up to speed on the
Brussels situation. Click the follow button to stay in the loop."_ \- @sacca

[https://twitter.com/sacca/status/712270790037610499](https://twitter.com/sacca/status/712270790037610499)

~~~
mikeyouse
I know @sacca is a huge promoter of twitter (and investor in..), but I was in
bed this morning putting off getting ready to go to work and I saw his tweet
about the Moment. It was actually really useful, much easier than trying to
aggregate wtf was happening from 20 disparate tweets and feeds.

------
amai
Erdogan knew it was coming: [https://www.rt.com/news/336769-erdogan-warning-
brussels-atta...](https://www.rt.com/news/336769-erdogan-warning-brussels-
attacks/)

------
protomyth
The BBC is once again doing their live update site:
[http://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-
europe-35869266](http://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-35869266)

------
mtgx
Relevant:

[https://www.wnyc.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-
handbook-...](https://www.wnyc.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-handbook-
terrorism-edition/)

------
sydneysider
I wonder how long it will take for people to connect the dots... Meanwhile
Europe has no borders, massive security risk which we are only beginning to
see the consequences of.

~~~
qb45
The problem is mainly with external borders, not internal. They are likely
getting weapons and other aids from outside, you can't just buy AK47 in EU.

~~~
sydneysider
Should have been clearer, I meant external. But honestly, I don't mind having
to show my passport while crossing internal borders.

------
0x4a42
A third bomb exploded just now.

~~~
kup0
Source? I have yet to see any proof of this statement. All of the live
coverage still only points to two attacks...

~~~
0x4a42
I was watching french info TV (BFMTV) when they announced the third bomb
exploded a few sec ago. The airport was already empty though.

EDIT: it was a controlled explosion made by the mine-clearing experts.

------
fweespee_ch
[http://bigstory.ap.org/article/511cf974eea64581814f9777a40f0...](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/511cf974eea64581814f9777a40f0fd6/explosion-
heard-brussels-airport)

If you want a link without a paywall.

------
t0mk
Why is this on Hacker News? There are ten other channels through which people
will get this message.

------
rplnt
The comments there are... as expected I guess.

~~~
odinduty
I guess it's hard to feel in any other way when recent migration policies have
translated into a sharp decline of our own security in our own developed
countries.

~~~
ascorbic
The Paris attackers were French and Belgian, not immigrants. This has been the
case with almost all attacks in Europe, where the perpetrators have almost
always been local.

~~~
raverbashing
"Local", yes, keep telling yourself that

2nd generation _immigrants_

I'm not against immigration per se, but there's a lot of problems coming from
people who _fail_ (because it's mostly their responsibility) to integrate

~~~
ascorbic
If they're born in the country and lived there their whole life, they're local
by any non-racist definition.

~~~
mistermann
That's rather disingenuous. They are second generation immigrants of a
particular religion that seems to be coincidentally associated time after time
in these incidents.

~~~
ascorbic
Second generation immigrants don't mean this a problem with immigration. Lots
of people like to link this to the current Syrian refugee crisis, but none of
them are refugees. If you want to make it about immigration, make it about
immigration from France's former colonies in the 1960s and 70s.

~~~
mistermann
> Second generation immigrants don't mean this a problem with immigration

And that they're not first generation immigrants doesn't prove it _isn 't_ a
problem with immigration either. We are still left with this recurring
coincidence aren't we.

I don't claim to know the absolute truth here, I'm just suggesting we honestly
acknowledge reality during discussions.

~~~
ascorbic
It's not first generation immigrants or refugees doing this. It's not Syrians
doing this. By what possible rationale could you say that recent immigration
has anything to do with this, other than that they're Muslim?

~~~
mistermann
> By what possible rationale could you say that recent immigration has
> anything to do with this

I didn't say it was _recent_ immigration that caused this incident, we both
know that (if they are 2nd generation, it couldn't be recent).

> other than that they're Muslim

You think that their religion has absolutely nothing to do with this? I mean,
even unjust prejudice within their host country _because of their religion_
could easily cause social isolation and economic disadvantage leading to anger
- that seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation to me and largely places
the ultimate blame on the host country.

~~~
ascorbic
The original comment specified recent immigration. What gave you the
impression I thought religion had nothing to do with this? Of course it does.
I was talking about immigration though, and the fact they're both Muslim
doesn't mean that these incidents have any connection to recent refugees from
Syria, aside from the fact that the Syrians are running from these kind of
people.

~~~
ptaipale
Actually, two of the nine Paris attackers were (probably) from Syria and had
come as refugees, as they were registered with fingerprints in Greece.

A few of the others were French and were known to be in Syria, but how they
came back to EU is apparently not known (could be with help from people
smugglers, avoiding any registration at borders, because some of them were on
wanted lists).

~~~
ascorbic
So three of them probably came as refugees. One of those has been identified
and it turns out he was actually French, but you still assume the two
unidentified ones were "real" refugees, rather than other French terrorists
who had fought with IS and were trying the same trick?

~~~
ptaipale
I can't really say whether they are "real" refugees or not. The point is more
that border checks have ceased to exist.

Schengen area doesn't actually even try to verify who comes in, and that
enables also movement of jihadists - even if they are only a few among
thousands and thousands, but the few can avoid border controls.

------
HemanHeartYou
Riveting tech news right here.

~~~
ageofwant
I'm standing with you brother. Let them drag us down together.

------
xchaotic
The more coverage this gets, the more you feed the terrorist troll.

~~~
noobie
I am almost certain they are not doing this for attention.

~~~
geon
The whole point of terrorism is attention.

~~~
noobie
Is that so? Why is it that terrorism goes hand in hand with religion then?
Terrorism is about fulfilling an arguably skewed view of religion.

~~~
gotchange
That's just one strain of terrorism i.e. religious terrorism or more
specifically Islamic terrorism as I may speculate that's what you intended.

There are many other strains of terrorism like the last terrorist attack in
Ankara last week where a female Kurdish ultra-nationalist militant blew
herself in a bus killing about 40 civilians in the process. This was just an
instance of a political/nationalist violence/terrorism that has nothing to do
with religion or Islam for that matter.

~~~
noobie
I stand corrected.

