It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

German police hunting down G20 terrorists one by one

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   
During the G20-sumit in 2017 far-left and antifa were wreaking havoc and brought terror to the local citizens of Hamburg by turning over cars, setting fire, robbing stores and beating down alleged "nazis".

Now it seems, our police/criminal affairs ares slowly getting them one by one. Hah, seems like those masks were not much of use. On 13.03.2018 they released photographs of 24 terrorists to 15 different agencies spread over europe. To name a few:

-Guardia Civil Counter Terrorism Unit" (Spain)
-State Security Division (Greek)
-SO15 Counter Terrorism Command (Great Britain)

and other agencies in those countries: France, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Italy and Switzerland.

They are being accused of (among several other criminal activities):
-breach of inner peace
-grievous bodily harm
-arson

SOKO: Black Block

They also use mobilephone geodata to cross-reference with photographs and video-material to possibly identify the terrorists. The last time our police and BKA/LKA did such huge manhunts was during RAF times.

Of course the left party in Germany is up in arms against that, to protect their little minions. Who would have thought that? This is how Ulla Jelpke from the left-party mocks the victims, trying to spin it on the police (my translation):
"It´s a disproportionate violation of their fundamental rights. [...] Mind you, this is not about a terrorist attack, but about allegations in a demonstration."
Source (sorry, only German)

They really have the nerves to state that! Just shows how they trample fundamental rights of others by excercising their "fundamental right" to set fires, rob and beat up others who have the balls to speak up against them. A slap into the face of every hard working citizen that was harmed in one or another way by those animals.

I hope every single one of those low-life critters is hunted down, brought before a judge and pay for their terroristic acts in prison for a long time. Yes the BKA/LKA (similar to the US FBI) is deeming those terrorists and I agree. Next wednesday, the hamburg´s police will release more details about the investigations and how many they snatched up already.

edit on 12-5-2018 by verschickter because: changed the order of paragraphs because I found it to be a little bit confusing to read.




posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I had to swap two paragraphs because it was confusing, now it should be clear that Ulla Jelpke is not against the violence, quite the contrary, she´s excusing it.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

I'm uncomfortable with calling demonstrators terrorists regardless of whether they've damaged property of not , criminals yes terrorists No.
Slippery slope.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
I hope every single one of those low-life critters is hunted down, brought before a judge and pay for their terroristic acts in prison for a long time. Yes the BKA/LKA (similar to the US FBI) is deeming those terrorists and I agree.


They were not really terrorists. They were vandals, thugs and dick heads; but not terrorists.

While I agree these anti-social cretins and "anarchists" should be brought to book, I do object to them being called terrorists



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Oh that´s exactly what they are by definition.



terrorism ˈtɛrərɪzəm/ noun noun: terrorism
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.


Fit´s 100% or doesn´t it?



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I'm fine with calling them terrorists. They use indiscriminate violence against the innocent for political gain. Not that it works, but that's what they do.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Demonstrators normally don´t set fire, beat up citizens, rob and steal. That´s the slippery slope here!



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

.....you don't use a dictionary to define terrorism, terrorisim is defined by the state not by google.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So define what they are then.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex
Have you read my OP?

They were not just destroying property, by setting fire they showed how less they care if someone dies. Also, you left out this here:

-grievous bodily harm

You know, when you beat up others so their life is in danger.

No terror, just friendly "demonstrations"


Throwing fist to head sized stones


You tell those people that live there, it was not terror they faced!
edit on 12-5-2018 by verschickter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: verschickter

I'm uncomfortable with calling demonstrators terrorists regardless of whether they've damaged property of not , criminals yes terrorists No.
Slippery slope.


I kind of agree but it can be difficult.

Most states use a very board definition of terrorism, I personally think that these definitions are too broad and only exist to further the powers of the state and this is wrong. If you look at the UK law regarding terrorism then it could be argued that in the technical wording of the law the use of violence during a protest could lead to a charge of terrorism. To my knowledge this has never happened and the charge is usually for criminal damage, breach of the peace or assault. So far in the UK the CPS has avoided using counterterrorism legislation against demonstrators although some right wing groups have argued that this has been the case such as the banning of the group National Action.

In my view I think that in the UK we should not be labelling those who are involved in protests that turn violent as "terrorists" because like you I think its a slippery slope. Now thats not absolute, I can envisage cases where it would be appropriate to use terrorism legislation against a violent protester or group. Yet for the most part, I agree, even if I disagree with the views of the protesters I think labelling them as "terrorists" is wrong.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So define what they are then.


Feel free to go read the Terrorism Act 2000 (and 2006). You will find the UK definition that I recognise as it is the definition that is used the jurisdiction which I fall under.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It happened in Germany, to German citizens, done by mostly German´s. Your definition in the UK does not count. 15 countries see this as terrorism. You can disagree with me as long as you want, I respect that.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter




Demonstrators normally don´t set fire, beat up citizens, rob and steal.

Demonstrators don't but anarchists do and they are doing what they have done for decades in cities around the world , designating them as terrorists isn't going to stop it.


edit on 12-5-2018 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

Yes so again you use the definition as set out under German law, not the dictionary. You as ME to define it and I define it as it is set out under UK law because that is the jurisdiction which I am subject to.

Sorry but this is one of my pet peeves its just lazy writing to run to a dictionary to find a definition for something so complex in my view.

But to get back to the topic at hand I disagree with them being labelled as "terrorists" for the reasons I outlined above
edit on 12-5-2018 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   


Demonstrators don't but anarchists do and they are doing what they have done for decades in cities around the world , designating them as terrorists isn't going to stop it.


Yeah, poor anarchists.

I´m done arguing the definition of terrorism.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

No I do not, I pulled this from an english source.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

No you used a dictionary not a legal definition.

Its not really something worth getting all upset about I am just trying to point out the difficulties with doing this.

Again to get back to the point in the OP I do not think that any protesters should be labelled as terrorists except in exceptional cases such as detonating a bomb or something similar.

Question.

Do you believe that those who use violence during a protest such as assaulting police or opposing protestors should labelled as "terrorists"?
edit on 12-5-2018 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin




Do you believe that those who use violence during a protest such as assaulting police or opposing protestors should labelled as "terrorists"?


IF they set fire AND don´t care about others life because of a politic thing, YES. Besides that, 15 countries disagree with you.

Last post for a while, need to water my garden and the granddaughter won´t sleep, too.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   
It’s all fun and games until you reep the reprocussions for your actions. I think the terrorist label is being used to broadly in this case, but I don’t feel bad for them losing their rights. They didn’t care about others rights when committing these atrocious acts.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join