Germany

Explosion Near Music Festival in Germany Injures 12

|

DANIEL KARMANN/EPA/Newscom

An explosion near Nuremberg has injured at least twelve people, including three seriously, German broadcaster DW reports.

According to DW:

Police said in a statement that "a man, according to our current knowledge the perpetrator, died" in the blast outside a wine bar in the town where an open-air music festival was being held on Sunday night. Twelve people were injured, three of them seriously.

Ansbach Mayor Carda Seidel said the explosion was near an entrance to the festival. Around 2,500 people were attending the event, which was canceled after the blast was heard at about 10 p.m. local time (20:00 UTC).

Earlier in the day, a Syrian refugee was arrested accused of macheting a pregnant woman to death on the street in Reutlingen and injuring two others. Police say the incident did not appear terrorism related but that the suspect had an unspecified history of injuring others.

The incidents happen as funerals were held for the victims of a mass shooting at a shopping center in Munich Friday. The gunman, identified by authorities as Ali David Sonboly, shot and killed 9 people before killing himself. A 16-year-old Afghan was reportedly arrested as an alleged accomplice, accused of failing to report the shooting, which the gunman had planned for almost a year accoding to authorities, in advance.

Thomas de Maizière, the interior minister, said it was "inappropriate" to talk about relief when asked if he was relieved the gunman did not appear to have links to ISIS, saying Munich had joined cities like "Nice, Bamako, Istanbul and all the other cities which have suffered from shooting rampages or terror attacks," according to Financial Times. "For the victims and their families it doesn't make any difference what the motivation is for these murders."

German officials have already started to push for even stricter gun laws in the wake of the Munich shooting.

Advertisement

NEXT: Sanders Supporters Push to End Superdelegates, Closed Primaries, Make it Easier for a Trump to Win on the Democratic Side

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. German officials have already started to push for even stricter gun laws in the wake of the Munich shooting.

    Stricter immigration laws, out of the question.

    1. The Department of State puts up travel warnings:

      “We issue a Travel Warning when we want you to consider very carefully whether you should go to a country at all”.

      http://tinyurl.com/jcshc4p

      They list Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, . . .

      If warning Americans that maybe they shouldn’t go to a country “at all” because of anti-American terrorism isn’t bigotry, then why would it be bigotry for the State Department to decide that bringing immigrants here from those countries is something maybe we shouldn’t do “at all” for the time being?

      It doesn’t need to be about Islam.

      It can just be about terrorism.

      1. If warning Americans that maybe they shouldn’t go to a country “at all” because of anti-American terrorism isn’t bigotry, then why would it be bigotry for the State Department to decide that bringing immigrants here from those countries is something maybe we shouldn’t do “at all” for the time being?

        *** scratches head ***

        FYTW?

      2. It can just be about terrorism.

        Then people miss the whole point of the terrorism, which is entirely about Islam. But if that’s the reasoning that will make the multicultural fetishist lose their grip on policy, then that’s something at least.

        1. The First Amendment isn’t a multicultural fetish, and those of us who don’t want the government to discriminate against people because of their religion have a legitimate concern.

          It doesn’t need to be about religion.

          If anybody has a fetish, it’s those who insist it needs to about religion when that’s actually unnecessary.

          P.S. Mulitculturalism works great. Is there a better example of a group that’s less mulitcultural than ISIS anywhere in the world? Insisting that everyone drop their own culture and assume yours is totalitarian. Only totalitarians make culture a matter of public policy.

          1. I think the opposite of multiculturalism is more along the lines of “you stay in your country and we’ll stay in ours” than it is “you can come here but you better start acting like us.”

            1. Veil bans are the opposite of multiculturalism.

              Anybody who thinks, say, the French are multicultural because they’re generally on the left is missing something important.

              One of the reasons we’ve done a much better job of integrating Muslims into our society may be because we’re multicultural but France isn’t. They use a forced integration model, and it’s been a disaster.

              That socialism does a shitty job of providing economic opportunities for people didn’t help France either.

              1. Ken I would argue that multiculturalism sucks. The multiculturalists out there try to argue that all cultures are equal, with only some superficial differences in clothing and food.

                The problem is that there is a hell of a lot more to culture than whether some eats with chopsticks or a fork. And some of it is god awful, like thinking that rape victims should be stoned to death for adultery, or that it’s better for schoolgirls to be locked in a burning building rather than let strangers see their hair.

                1. “The multiculturalists out there try to argue that all cultures are equal”

                  Cultural relativism argues closer to what you’re saying.

                  Multiculturalism isn’t that.

                  “And some of it is god awful, like thinking that rape victims should be stoned to death for adultery, or that it’s better for schoolgirls to be locked in a burning building rather than let strangers see their hair.

                  Multiculturalism isn’t about ignoring the rights of crime victims either.

                  Multiculturalism isn’t the idea that murderers shouldn’t be prosecuted because they belong to some culture–although any defense attorney that wants to argue that in front of a jury should be free to do so. I wouldn’t bet on that defense myself.

                  Whether people are free to speak their own language, wear their traditional clothing, put signs up in whatever language they choose, follow their own religion–or generally do anything else they want so long as they aren’t violating anybody’s rights–is multiculturalism.

                  Chinatown, Little Saigon, and Koreatown are multiculturalism. You won’t hear a lot of English in parts of Miami–and leaving them free to speak as they please has made them more American than they would be otherwise.

                  That using the government to force people to assimilate would be an abysmal failure shouldn’t surprise any libertarian. We are wildly successful at integration where France and other European governments have failed, and that is specifically because we don’t use forced integration.

                  1. Fair enough, the problem is that there is a huge overlap between between multiculturalism, and cultural relativism. Look at the ‘feminists’ wearing burqas in support of Muslim women. The Burqa isn’t just some traditional garment like a kilt or lederhosen. The fact of the matter is that in most parts of the world where women wear burqas, it’s because if they don’t, the men with guns will kill them if they don’t wear it. But ‘feminists’ will celebrate the burqa. because, hey, it stops the male gaze in countries where it’s cool to kill chop off your daughter’s head for having premarital sex, consensual or not.

                    The little Italy/Korea/Chinatown stuff, that doesn’t bother me. Hell, I’ve worked for a few and with a immigrants. I’ve known some Iranian expats whose views on Islam make Rush Lambaugh sound like the Ayatollah.

                    My anti-immigration animus is for the people who fled their fucked up countries, and want to make the US more like the countries they left. So if a Greek immigrant wants to start up a restaurant then good for him, I love gyros and wish him success. If he starts advocating socialist policies while also avoiding taxes, then fuck him for bringing that shit to the U.S.

                  2. We are wildly successful at integration where France and other European governments have failed, and that is specifically because we don’t use forced integration.

                    There’s a bit more to it than that- and unfortunately, France or Germany cannot be like the US by implementing changes in policy any more so than I can become Scarlett Johansson by putting on a wig and some fake tits. There’s fundamental cultural differences which cannot be overcome.

                    1. The other part of it has a lot to do with capitalism vs. socialism, labor regulations, etc.

                      When even your well educated graduate students need to protest to force the government to hire them because there aren’t any jobs to be had–how much worse it for relatively uneducated migrants?

                      Take a look at France’s youth unemployment rate–after you click on “Max”.

                      http://tinyurl.com/mtygsdp

                      Now take a look at the U.S. (on Max again)

                      http://tinyurl.com/hhcdynx

                      Their average youth unemployment rate is worse than what we see during the worst of our recession. If we were facing Depression era unemployment rates every day for decades, we’d feel pretty marginalized, too.

          2. Multiculturalism works for shit. Look at Europe. Multi-cultural as hell, racist as fuck. Loves to confine cultures to their own ghettos and deny them opportunities for advancement while stuffing them full of welfare checks – and they’re paying the price for that.

            Look at the US where multiculturalism hasn’t (yet!) caught on. We’re a ‘melting pot’ society, an *assimulationist* one, not a multicultural one. Our line is ‘this is the way we do shit over here – unless you can show us a better way’.

            1. “Multiculturalism works for shit. Look at Europe.

              When you say Europe is an example of multiculturalism, what do you mean?

              Europe is an excellent example of the failures of forced assimilation–which is the opposite of multiculturalism.

              1. Beyond stunts like banning the hijab in France, Europe is very pro-‘all cultures are equally good and valid and we shouldn’t force anyone to adapt to prevailing norms’ – coupled with ‘we don’t actually *like* you people so stay in your own areas’.

                That’s how you get things like the rape ring in Rotherham, banliues full of unemployed Muslims itching to burn Citroens, governments issuing ‘don’t rape me, bro’ bracelets in response to mass sexual assaults and in the aftermath of an axe attack on a train, the German government seriously considers it necessary to *start teaching Germans about Islam* rather than teaching Islamic refugees that ‘its not ok’ to butcher people with axes in broad daylight.

                Multi-culturalism builds multiple little islands around each culture and works to prevent those cultures from learning from each other or changing in response to proximity. No one in Europe is seriously considering telling the Muslims to knock it the fuck off – they’re telling their own people to be more sensitive to the needs of Muslims.

                1. And the alternative is not straight forced assimulation – there’s a range of responses and the US is in the middle. Its why we have a colorful and diverse society that still mostly gets along even though shit in Maine is completely different than stuff in Southern CA. Immigrant populations may cluster but they do so out of choice and you see a graduation of assimulation as you move from grandpa from the old country (who doesn’t even speak English) to the grandson who moves seamlessly between the expectations of that core and the wider American community.

                  1. The cultural matrix here is fundamentally different than Europe. If an Italian moves to Luxembourg, settles there, has kids, grandkids, and so on, the family is there for 200 years, and they are indistinguishable from all of their neighbors, Luxembourgers will still refer to them as “those Italians.”

                2. “Beyond stunts like banning the hijab in France, Europe is very pro-‘all cultures are equally good and valid and we shouldn’t force anyone to adapt to prevailing norms’

                  This is in your head.

                  I’m not sure there’s ever been a culture in the history of the world that was convinced of its own superiority more than France.

                  It hasn’t changed much since the Colonial era–before then even. Adopting French culture has been the primary difference between insiders and outsiders since before the days of colonialism, certainly, (some might argue going back to Charlemagne), and it continues to be that way.

                  http://tinyurl.com/zy5glca

                  France is just not a multicultural society, they do not have respect for other cultures, they expect immigrants to abandon their old culture and adopt French culture, and they’re used as a textbook example of forced assimilation.

                  A lot of Americans have come to associate France and Europe with leftism and leftism with multiculturalism, but that’s just projecting American politics onto the Europeans.

                  1. No, France does not expect that. France does not *want* that. While the French government loves them some immigrants, they all get pushed into ghettos and are expected to stay there.

        1. Actually, even Trump seems to have gotten the difference. During his speech on Thursday he talked about restricting immigration ‘from countries that have been compromised by terrorism’. No mentions of ‘keep out the mooslims’ this time.

          It may be a much more digestible approach for many more voters, and certainly makes much more sense, in line with what Ken Shultz said above. Someone on the speech committee nailed that one for him.

          1. You’d almost think that by this time he’d be running his ideas by the speech committee *before* spouting off.

    2. German officials have already started to push for even stricter gun laws in the wake of the Munich shooting.

      Stricter immigration laws, out of the question.

      When push comes to shove, which would Reason.com* prefer?

      (*I really should distinguish the magazine from the website now that the former is in the capable hands of KM-W)

    3. German gun laws are extremely strict. There’s no way the shooter wasn’t in violation of them well before he opened fire.

      Note to the German parliament: passing more laws doesn’t help your inability to enforce laws that already exist.

      1. “But we can make it illegaler!”

        /prog

      1. +1 “What the fuck does that mean?”

        You could have knocked me over with a feather when I learned the BBC were going to make Capaldi the next Doctor Who.

        In The Loop is one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen.

        1. It really is. Ianucci is a tiny genius.

          1. The scenes with Jamie or Gandolfini had me absolutely on the floor of theater laughing.

            Toby Wright: We called some builders. They didn’t turn up when they said they would.

            Jamie MacDonald: What did you expect? They’re builders! Have you ever seen a film where the hero is a builder? No, no, because they never fucking turn up in the nick of time. Bat-builder? Spider-builder? Huh? That’s why you never see a superhero with a hod!

            or

            Linton Barwick: PWIP what?
            Bob Adriano: PWIP PIP.
            Linton Barwick: What is it, a report on bird calls? What does it even stand for?
            Bob Adriano: I can’t recall. It’s factish. Intel for and against intervention.
            Linton Barwick: We have all the facts on this we need. We don’t need any more facts. In the land of truth, my friend, the man with one fact is the king…

            …Linton Barwick: All right, Karen is not to know about this, huh? She is an excitable, yapping she-dog. Get a hold of those minutes. I have to correct the record.
            Bob Adriano: We can do that?
            Linton Barwick: Yes, we can. Those minutes are an aide-memoire for us. They should not be a reductive record of what happened to have been said, but they should be more a full record of what was intended to have been said. I think that’s the more accurate version, don’t you?

            Hell, just go to the IMDB Quotes section

            1. Veep is just as funny as the British movie/show. I try to bring it up as often as possible here because I think it accurately shows how awful modern politics is while being absolutely hilarious.

              My favorite Veep moment, which was probably added just to make loyal fans laugh.

    4. They refuse to accept the PEBTG theory of gun violence.

  2. I think what the Germans really need is another million Syrians. Everything seems to be working out great there.

    1. Man, some people are really trying to lure Cytotoxic out today.

  3. I’m sure this didn’t have anything to do with Muslims, and even if it did, it was a Muslim with mental problems.

    Regardless, the solution is that we need to gun grab and spend more on mental health care, or my name isn’t Hillary Clinton.

    1. a Muslim with mental problems

      “Mental illness has hijacked a Great Religion!”

      1. Well, they do a lot more cousin-fucking than members of other religions. It only increases the likelihood of birth defects slightly (a few percent) ….

        1. Quite a lot more than that if you do it more than one generation.

        2. Quite a lot more than that if you do it more than one generation.

          1. The Cost of Islamic Incest. (Warning: Disturbing photo, unless Freaks is your favorite movie.)

      2. That’s what they’re saying about the “German-Iranian”.

        He had mental problems. He was being treated for depression, so don’t blame his religion.

        Meanwhile, my concern is that the important question is being overlooked.

        They make it so much about whether Islam is the problem (or not), that people stop talking about whether we should discriminate against people because of their religion. You know, those are actually two different questions, but both sides are conflating them into one whether they mean to or not.

        It’s entirely possible to think Islam is the problem and also think that the government shouldn’t discriminate against people because of their religion.

        1. The government can discriminate against political beliefs, and Islam is a political belief (as well as a religion).

          But I think you are conflating two questions: one can believe that the government should not discriminate against the religion of people in the country, and still believe that the government is under no obligation to be blind to religion when it comes to immigration. I think the policy should be: “We reserve the right to refuse entry to anyone, for any reason.”

          1. Please see my comment up top.

            The Department of State already designates countries that are unsafe for travel because of anti-American terrorism.

            If anti-American terrorism is rife in a country, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t suspect immigration from that country for that reason alone–regardless of the religion.

            Whether you believe Islam is a political belief system or not doesn’t need to have any bearing on it. It doesn’t need to be about Islam. It can just be about terrorism.

            1. “If anti-American terrorism is rife in a country, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t suspect [suspend] immigration from that country for that reason alone–regardless of the religion.”

              Fixed!

              1. That just seems like tortured reasoning to avoid reality. A Syrian Christian is a very low terror risk, despite his country. An Italian Muslim is a much higher terror risk, despite the fact that Italy has had little terror in recent years.

                1. Do you know a good way tell the difference between a Muslim or a Christian? If the 9/11 guys were hanging out at strip clubs, I doubt asking someone to eat a ham sandwich is going to be a bulletproof test. But determining country of origin is a bit easier.

                2. “That just seems like tortured reasoning to avoid reality.”

                  It’s respecting the First Amendment.

                  Call it whatever you like.

                  It isn’t tortured.

                  The government has no business discriminating against people because of their religion.

                  And it’s unnecessary to do so.

                  P.S. How do you tell a Syrian Christian from an ISIS terrorist? Do they have distinctive tattoos?

                  P.P.S. Syrian Christians largely back our enemy, Assad. They see him as their protector against the Sunnis–even if they don’t especially like him.

          2. “I think the policy should be: “We reserve the right to refuse entry to anyone, for any reason.””
            Which essentially assumes collective ownership of all property in the US, as it means officials elected by the majority of people can determine what guests any individual is allowed to host on their own property. Not exactly a libertarian position. Now, you could argue that public ownership of infrastructure gives the state the right to deny access because immigration inevitably implies use of public property, but then you;d sound like a progressive trying to rationalize confiscation of property or elimination of freedom of association.

            Even if you think that the state should be allowed to restrict entry of individuals it deems (for whatever reason) to be likely to cause harm (what ‘likely’ means is of course rather arbitrary. 2X as likely to violate the law as the average person? 5X? 100X?). But “for any reason?” No, that should not be legal. If I want to hire a Chinese guy at my business, and some dipshit bureaucrat or public official decides to stop me because he thinks Chinamen are ugly or because he thinks I should hire an ‘murican instead, he does not have that right; the majority of the voters who elected the politician telling him to do that do not have that right.

            1. It’s even more basic than that to me.

              The government has no business policing what people believe.

              Government control of what people do is authoritarianism. Government control of what people believe is the defining characteristic of totalitarianism.

              Some beliefs may be harmful. The government still doesn’t have any business policing people for believing harmful things.

              Meanwhile, there’s no reason why the government should let an invading army march across our borders, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t limit immigration from a country where there are a lot of anti-American terrorists who mean us harm. If the government has any legitimate purpose at all, it is to protect our rights, and if the government needs to restrict immigration from certain countries to protect our rights from terrorism, then that is something it might legitimately do.

              1. So in the 20th century, the government was wrong to deny immigration to Nazis and Communists?

                1. Conversely, a guy like Einstein (among many, many others) would never have made it Stateside owing to his German citizenship, because Nazis?

            2. The government has very few legitimate powers, the main one being to protect the country from external threats. The main external threat to this country is now Islamic terror, which is, by the way, explicitly anti-libertarian. Defending ourselves against violent anti-libertarians is not a violation of libertarian principles.

        2. It’s entirely possible to think Islam is the problem and also think that the government shouldn’t discriminate against people because of their religion.

          You’re going to have to explain this to Frankie

          1. It’s the same with everything.

            Ignoring people’s Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights might make us safer from rapists and armed robbers. I think the government should respect our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights anyway.

            Even IF IF IF violating our Second Amendment rights did mean less violent crime, I think the government should respect our rights anyway.

            I think freedom ultimately leads to a generally safer society, but freedom will always be dangerous, too.

            If Nazis, the Klan, Muslims, and Satanists say and believe harmful things, I think the government should respect their rights anyway.

            I don’t even think of that as making me especially libertarian. It just makes me a patriotic American who likes the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights just fine, damn it.

    2. Ya know, for someone who has a couple of plane tickets to Munich in about 6 or 7 weeks, I don’t really care if he had mental problems or not. I saw a list of the attacks that have happened in Europe since the Nice attack 10 days ago, and it seems like A MUSLIM has gone bat shit crazy in one form or another every other day for a couple of weeks.

      At the end of the day, there is one common denominator, and trying to explain it away with libertarian immigration values, but those value can’t reconcile with common sense when this is the environment we’re dealing with. I hate it, but FFS Trump isn’t sounding like the dumbest person in the room anymore, Merkel is.

      I’m still going to Oktoberfest, but I’m happy I’m only there a few days.

  4. a Syrian refugee was arrested accused of macheting a pregnant woman to death on the street in Reutlingen and injuring two others

    German officials have already started to push for even stricter machete laws in the wake of this incident, right? RIGHT?!

    1. As I understand it even non-firearm weapons are fairly restricted in German already. It’s rather difficult to be a collector there.

      1. The last time I travelled in that direction, the advice was, “Don’t take your pocket knife.”

        1. I took my pocket knife to Rockefeller Center. Mistake.

          1. They still have my Swiss Army knife, too.

      2. As I understand it even non-firearm weapons are fairly restricted in German already. It’s rather difficult to be a collector there.

        HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

        1. AIUI, the MickeyDs shooter got his gun the same way another shooter in Germany got his: evidently non-working models of firearms, including the Glock pistol he supposedly used to kill 10 people, are good to go and can be mail-ordered, provided the non-working models are missing a variety of parts. Which just so happen to be easily replaceable through another merchant.

          Non-working models in the US require, IIRC, more stringent steps to be declared non-working: the barrel filled with lead, the receiver cut into pieces with a torch, etc…. Steps you can’t easily reverse with some parts from Glockmeister.

  5. This mass migration to Germany is just doing wonders for them. Enriching them economically, culturally and politically. Every country should get their own swarm of middle eastern colonists if they don’t already have one, otherwise they’ll miss all the fun.

    1. I’m sure there’s a Keynesian multiplier effect in there somewhere.

  6. Sheesh. Even the most pessimistic people wouldn’t have predicted so much shit beginning to happen in such a short time span.

    That makes 4 in a week now?

    1. It’s a good thing the Olympics aren’t in Paris.

      1. Haha, The Rio Olympics are such a cluster…

        1. (Read elsewhere), Hey, if we’re going to re-enact the worst of the 60s and 70s in other things, with racial unrest, violent political protests, etc… why not re-enact the Munich Olympics?

          Doesn’t bode well for USA men’s basketball…

    2. The cluster seems like it was probably intentional, coordinated. If so, I wonder what their goal is? To get the Germans to lash back?

      1. I disagree. I suspect these were largely coincidental. Each attack probably inspires new ones, but I doubt they were all in communication and planning this out together. You’re giving them too much credit I think.

        Anger the Germans? These people really are stupid aren’t they?

  7. Merkel let one million refugees/migrants into Germany.

    One. Million.

    How many bad apples are in that bunch? Since when does a host nation have to tolerate the raping and murder of its people to (potentially) benefit down the road?

    1. Since when does a host nation have to tolerate the raping and murder of its people to (potentially) benefit down the road?

      Typically only when they’ve been broken and conquered.

    2. Obama has brought in 85,000.

      We agreed to up that to 100,000 next year.

      1. Hillary wants to increase Obama’s numbers by 550%. That’s one good reason why Trump doesn’t have a chance in November. /sarc

        Oh, and at her proposed rate for refugees and other Muslim immigrants, she would bring in about a million in her first term. But remember, there are no important differences between her and Trump. /sarc

        1. She’s a rigid ideologue.

          And she cares more about her ideology than she does about protecting our rights from terrorists.

          1. Hillary is many things, but I am pretty sure that ideologue is not one of them. Unless being nakedly power hungry counts an ideology.

            1. If tomorrow morning’s internal polling says orphan-burning is cool, Hillary will have subsidies-for-buring-orphan program by tomorrow night.

              She’s just anxious to serve us.

              1. Orphan burning isn’t cool?

              2. That explains why she’s always carrying that book around with her, called “To Serve Man.”

    3. Since when does a host nation have to tolerate the raping and murder of its people to (potentially) benefit down the road?

      What are you talking about? There was no raping or murdering here (besides the poor gentleman that killed himself).

      Suicide

      The attack happened outside the wine bar in Ansbach, near Nuremburg, after being denied access to the nearby Ansbach Open music festival, according to Germany’s interior minister Joachim Herrmann.

      Hermann said the suspect had lived in Germany for two years but was denied asylum in the country a year ago.

      He said it is unclear if the suspect intended to kill others or just himself but said he had “tried to commit suicide” twice before and had previously been in psychiatric care in the district hospital in Ansbach.

      Please go take your Islamaphobia somewhere else!

      1. Of the 12 people injured, three were critically injured in the blast, police said.

        Pogrom time.

        1. Of the 12 people injured, three were critically injured in the blast, police said.

          (Emphasis added)

          One of the crits is probably the bouncer at either the music festival or wine bar who told the backpack-toting shitbag to stay the fuck out.

          So, is this going to be an everyday sort of thing for Germany now? We’ve: the ax guy on the train, the wannabe schoolshooter at MickeyDs, the guy who can’t take no for an answer from the Polish chick working at his dad’s doner stand, and now this fuck.

          Incidentally, I’m going to guess his backpack is going to test positive for the same explosive compound that blew the guy’s foot off in Central Park a week or two ago, during Elie Wiesel’s memorial service down the street: TATP. Guess this guy was just another “explosives hobbyist.”

      2. Can I take my ball too?

        But that is a fair point.

        Sound nut jobs are bound to grab headlines.

        As for the charge of Islamaphobia…here’s my middle finger as that wasn’t my intent.

        1. *Some*

        2. Assuming that wasn’t sarcasm.

      3. It’s one thing to be Islamophobic, it’s another to think that a person blowing themselves up maybe isn’t an in the moment impromptu attempt at suicide.

        1. It’s one thing to be Islamophobic, it’s another to think that a person blowing themselves up maybe isn’t an in the moment impromptu attempt at suicide,

          No, it’s perfectly understandable. This poor gentleman, who had tried to kill himself in the past, was turned away from the music festival by anti-Islam bigots. This pushed him over the edge and he tragically took his own life.

          1. It’s a good thing he happened to be carrying around an explosive vest, then.

      4. He said it is unclear if the suspect intended to kill others or just himself

        People strap bombs to themselves and go to crowded public places to kill themselves ALL THE TIME, dudes. please, enough with the izzyphobes

  8. “For the victims and their families it doesn’t make any difference what the motivation is for these murders.”

    If this attacker had been a German nationalist who wrote a manifesto about immigrants and socialists ruining his country, this guy would still be saying the same exact thing, right? Right??

    1. If he was a white German everyone would have no problem rushing to judge.

      The papers, pundits, left-wingers etc. They’d all scream about how bad Christian right-wingers are.

      It’s a sickness. A strange variation of Stockholm Syndrome at play.

    2. “For the victims and their families it doesn’t make any difference what the motivation is for these murders.”

      I don’t really care about the motives for terrorism in this debate, specifically, either. If we can minimize the risk of terrorism by keeping high risk refugees outside of our borders, then their motives are pretty much beside the point.

      I don’t want them blowing up people. If the terrorists are outside our borders, we don’t have to worry so much about how they feel.

  9. Ok, that’s it.

    I want martial law, and I want it now!

    Who do I vote for?

    1. Here you go. Martial law Canadian style:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis

      1. And look. One of the criminals of the FLQ ended up being elected as a socialist thus further cementing the notion left-wingers love violence and are evil.

        “In 1996, Rose was elected leader of the NDPQ which by this time was called the Parti de la d?mocratie socialiste. He led the party until 2002 when it joined the Union des forces progressistes. Rose worked for the Conf?d?ration des syndicats nationaux labour union. Rose remained a strong supporter of the Quebec sovereignty movement, which he likened to “a liberation nationalism. It’s a people being denied its existence that is trying to find its place in the sun, in the same way as Palestine and Ireland.”

        http://bit.ly/2a3l5F1

      1. His blog was more fun before he disabled comments.

        1. Wow. Comment darkening must be fairly recent. Adams used to be going on and on about Trump being a ‘Master Wizard,’ with about 650 or more mostly sycophantic posts cheering him on for each blog entry.

          Wonder why he shut it down?

          1. I think it was that too much moderation became necessary, with Nazi imagery and comments about Jews.

            1. But there was always skepticism and pushback.

      2. Does the President have powers to declare martial law or is that also something that has to go through Congress?

        1. It’s a constitution, not a suicide pact.

        2. are you talking legality or a course of action Rufus?

        3. Legally, I don’t think martial law is possible at the federal level. The military is not allowed to act on US soil, legally, and the feds only control federal branches or law enforcement, which don’t have effective numbers to employ martial law. However, if governors give control away, the National Guard can act on US soil. So, possible to some extent. But if the feds just say FYTW, then yeah, sure the President can employ martial law

          1. That about answers my question. Thanks.

            Where there’s a will there’s a way with the executive now.

          2. That’s not correct. Federal troops can be used domestically for limited circumstances. See Insureection Act.

            Once the National Guard is federalized (which can be done without the consent of the governor), the same restrictions would apply to them.

  10. Must have been some rethuglican teahadist…

    1. Maybe Reason needs to word filter “terrorist” to “Cytotoxic’s Cultural Enrichers.”

  11. Aaaaaand it’s Muslims. And more votes for Trump.

    1. Shouldn’t the title of this article be “Trump gains momentum in polls thanks to explosion in Germany”?

  12. From the Sun:

    A spokesman had no immediate information on when the suspect arrived in Germany, nor when the previous incidents took place.

    However, he said he apparently acted alone in today’s attack, which took place close to a kebab stand in a city bus station.

    “There is no danger to anyone else at this time,” the official told Reuters.

    Carry on. Nothing really matters, to me.

    1. How’d he get the device? How’d he learn how to make it, and the detonating mechanism?

      Never mind, I thought you were talking about the music festival.

      The doner kebab stand attack sounded like he just wigged out on the Polish gal working at his dad’s doner stand. No idea why he cut two other people.

      Thank goodness that bystander decided to interfere with the front bumper of his BMW.

    2. Now that the guy is dead, yeah there’s no more danger to anyone else.

  13. Religion of Pieces?

  14. I still want to know if anyone is taking bets on violence or riots at the DNC. I want to bet on it.

  15. So,serious question: Is Germany just getting the special ed. terrorists? Because so far they mainly only seem adept at killing themselves, which I’m sure makes for quite a spectacle for the Germans, but they seem to be npvices compared to the ones the French are getting. I’m sure Germans aren’t complaining of course.

    1. On the other hand, Muslims make up, what, 5% of the EU population? I understand they make for spectacular headlines when they go on killing sprees but are Europeans truly in danger over 5% – never mind that terrorists or mentally ill individuals posing as terrorists make up an even smaller percentage.

      Yet, friends and cousins in Nice tell me it’s not so Nice anymore.

      Worth a look:

      http://bit.ly/21c96s8

    2. It’s because Germany has better GUN CONTROL, duh!

  16. If tReason can make every post about TRUMP , I can do the same for GayJay. He has a page of endorsements that includes some cuck with the unfortunate name and resume: Charles Kuck – Atlanta Immigration Attorney

  17. In another news, about 100 cross the border to join ISIS each week. That’s down more than 50% from a year or so ago when they were getting about 1,000 recruits a month and losing about 500 a month.

  18. Robert Spencer’s troll-fu remains impressive:

    “So far, the investigation has found no evidence of an attempted political assassination or extremism?” As if a Muslim carrying out a jihad/martyrdom suicide bombing in a wine bar weren’t evidence enough of “extremism.” Have German authorities determined yet whether or not the invasion of Normandy was a sign of anti-Nazi sentiment?

  19. Do any of you geeks hold K.W. Jeter’s Dr. Adder in the same high regard I do ?

    This is for you

    I should blog her.

  20. Do you remember 20 years ago when terrorism wasn’t really a weekly thing? The good old days.

  21. How long until one of these cock suckers get their hands on no bullshit WMDs and take out a football stadium or multiple city blocks? Meanwhile, the western world is importing them in droves without regard to assimilation. Seems like we’re sitting on a big powder keg.

    1. It’s a mental illness.

      They need our love and support.

      1. If only we started a hash tag campaign before that goat fucker went Ford Tough on the people in Nice.

  22. Oh, OT, but pertinent to everyone’s interests: HPD OFFICERS SHOOT MAN CARRYING PELLET GUN IN MONTROSE

    The H stands for Houston, and the pellet gun is some sort of Airsoft thingy. Like Tamir Rice’s replica, the damned thing looks awfully like a real firearm to me.

    Nonetheless, he did not drop it when ordered to, in a somewhat expensive area of town, and promptly got ventilated by two of Houston’s finest. Critical condition at Ben Taub, so he’ll probably make it. A nearby minimart clerk claims the guy flashed the pistol at the clerk when the clerk tried to stop him from leaving without paying for a soft drink. The guy’s a mid to late-20s white guy, so this is probably the last you’ll hear of the shooting.

  23. I got $20 on the next attack being in France within the next 48 hours.

    1. I have $40 that it is the donut commenter guy in France within the next 48 hours. Make that $45 – I’m feeling lucky.

      1. $45? That’s a shitload of donuts.

        1. But they’re really great donuts.

  24. two days ago grey McLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a littleover.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly layouts..it’s realy thesimplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making overhourly.

    Here Going You Are….. http://www.Alpha-Careers.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.