On April 12th, a terror-attack against the team of one of the major German soccer clubs, BVB, was reported by several news agencies. The attack was carried out with three bombs, enclosed by metal bolts for maximum damage. Luckily, only one player was injured at his hand. Some clumsy letters found at the scene pointed to an Islamic background, another equally clumsy pamphlet pointed to the left-wing, but due to the bad spelling and grammar was immediately suspected to be a false flag, potentially set by some right-wing extremist.
As evident by the links above, the media happily picked up the Islamic theme; the German right-wing party AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, alternative for Germany) also happily embraced the opportunity.
Turns out, the actual background seems to be a completely different one, neither political nor religious: The BVB is in the stock market. The perpetrator bought "put" options and tried to kill as many team-members as possible to make a fortune when the stocks would plummet.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @06:09AM
"Say it ain't so, Joe! Say it ain't so!"
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday April 24 2017, @06:47AM (4 children)
If you're guessing terrorism, isn't ISIS-inspired more likely than some left-wing throwback or any other scenario?
How much of Yahoo Stocks and similar boards just more of this pump-n-dump type of scam? They're shady but rarely bomb-throwing shady.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by lx on Monday April 24 2017, @07:15AM (3 children)
This is Europe, where both the radical left (Greeks bombing the IMF and banks) and the radical right (Uttoya etc.) have been very active.
Every morning we wonder: Do we get bombed, shot at or run over from the left, from the right, from the Middle East? Or do we get liqudated by accident because we have the same car as a local small time gangster or live in the same street as a gang member from a "motorcycle club"?
Luckily the number of madmen with guns over here is limited, so the most our unsupervised crazies can do is set fire to their home or cause a gas explosion, taking half the block with them.
Keeps you on your toes.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Soylentbob on Monday April 24 2017, @08:04AM
Every morning we wonder: Do we get bombed, shot at or run over from the left, from the right, from the Middle East? Or do we get liqudated by accident because we have the same car as a local small time gangster or live in the same street as a gang member from a "motorcycle club"?
Not sure if you are being sarcastic, or maybe just have other experiences then me. I live in Germany, and the extend of left-wing terrorism I saw the past couple of years is usually limited to setting a car on fire or spraying some evil communist graffiti. Generally, I don't need to wonder every day what will kill me now. I'm more concerned about big companies ruining everything for mankind instead of some idiots killing me and my next of kin in a small-scale crime.
(Score: 4, Informative) by bradley13 on Monday April 24 2017, @08:30AM
This is Europe, where both the radical left (Greeks bombing the IMF and banks) and the radical right (Uttoya etc.) have been very active.
Um...which Europe do you live in? The one I live in, leftist violence manifests as vandalism, usually associated with some protest march. The vandals themselves likely aren't even interested in politics - they're just hooligans out for a good time.
The extreme right? The last incident around here was a concert [swissinfo.ch], where they booked the venue under a pseudonym (because they had been forbidden to have a concert). The organizers provided parking attendants and had people going around picking up trash after the event. Incidents of violence: zero.
Recent incidents of public violence in Europe? [express.co.uk] It's pretty much Islamic terror, nothing else.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @09:24AM
Islam supporters - Very likely
Radical right - Happens but unlikely
Radical left - Mostly thug behavior once they feel they must make a point
So statistically speaking, Islam is the one to keep an eye on.
As for hard criminals, avoid living in the same street or having interpersonal relationships with associated people goes a long way. And of course no business with them ever.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 24 2017, @07:02AM (6 children)
The Islamic terror angle is perfectly believable. Left-wing terrorism hasn't been much of a thing since Patty Hearst and Ayers have taken "respectable" jobs. Yeah, this is Germany, so things are different, but still, we don't see left-wing terror anymore.
But - if it were a Muslim, I'd want to see him executed. If it were a left-winger, I'd want to execute him. Don't know this guy's politics, but he committed the act, he needs to die. Only one person injured? So what? The INTENT to kill multiple people, at random, was there. Hang him. Put him on the guillotine. Crucify him. Put an LP air hose to an IV. String him out over a fire ant hill. Starve some wild animals, and feed him to them. Just get rid of the bastard, and make an example of him in the process.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @07:12AM
But - if it were a **** I'd want to see ***. If it were a ***, I'd want to *** him. Don't know this , but he committed the act, he needs to die. *** So what? *** at random, was there. Hang ***. *** Just get rid of the bastard, and make an example of him in the process.
Wow, a call for the death penalty, from ARKANSAS! What happened, dude? Is your paranoia revenge fantasy about to hit it's 'use by' date? And turns out it was all just murder for stock manipulation, as American as Apple Pie and Bernie! (Bernie Madoff, that is.) Not random at all! And since he will not make money on the stock market, well, hasn't he really suffered enough?
Tell us more about what you both think and don't know, Runaway! It's what keeps me coming back to SoylentNews again and again, and again, and again. And again.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by lx on Monday April 24 2017, @07:21AM (2 children)
The Greek extreme left has been antsy lately. [express.co.uk]
I notice that you exempt the right from execution. Anders Breivik must heave a sigh of relief.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 24 2017, @08:05AM (1 child)
Exempted? Really? He ain't Muslim, he ain't left, so, he's kinda presumed to be right. At least that's how I see it. Besides, how much further "right" can you get, than Muslim? Muslims aren't liberal, you know.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Soylentbob on Monday April 24 2017, @09:13AM
He ain't Muslim, he ain't left, so, he's kinda presumed to be right.
Actually the summary didn't mention if he had any religion or political direction, only that the attack was apparently motivated by neither. The articles in Germany mentioned that the guy is a Christian regularly attending the mass, active in his community. He's educated, employed and a bit introvert. I would assume he is not left, but didn't find any information to confirm that assumption.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 25 2017, @04:38AM (1 child)
The Islamic terror angle is perfectly believable.
Not, it is not. You are a gullible moron. You are a Flynnite! You probably have Jihadists hiding in your coalshed, out back. Are you not afraid! You will be! Very, very, afraid. And after the Muslins take over, and force everyone to convert, and you have to learn Arabic, so that at least you will be literate in some language, you can tell everyone, "See! I told you so!" Yes, Runaway, we know, they are coming for us. We do not see the danger. Yes, you will be one of the victims. Sorry. But you know? No one here wants to hear your personal fears and fantasies and really very uninformed and stupid opinions. So what do you think about Marine's chances? And isn't about time for Arkansas to off another one?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 25 2017, @01:57PM
No, Runaway isn't going to be a victim.
But, what's the rest of that nonsense? You're telling me that Muslims haven't blown up, shot, beheaded, or run over a couple boatloads of people in Europe? None of that stuff really happened? Wow, I'm so relieved.
As for "offing" some prisoners, don't worry about it. They're just Arkies, after all.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Soylentbob on Monday April 24 2017, @07:35AM
There were some nice comments on twitter about this story as well. I didn't want to put it into the story, since I believe the submission shouldn't be biased. (Probably it is nevertheless, but didn't want to push it further :-))
This small collection of comments I found on blog.fefe.de [blog.fefe.de], a popular, yet minimalistic, German blog:
After Dortmund: CDU demands new law to prohibit "Founding of capitalist association" [twitter.com]
(Hint: The attack happened in Dortmund, CDU is a conservative party)
Shutdown Business-Boot-Camps in German Universities! [twitter.com]
Did the Frankfurter stock market already dissociate themselves from the radical-capitalist attack on the BVB bus? [twitter.com]
Our efforts to integrate the stock-brokers in our society failed. [twitter.com] So sad.
Did any politician already demand the stock-markets to dissociate themselves from this attack? [twitter.com]
Obviously some more comments on how religiously / fanatically some individuals defend the ideas of capitalism.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @07:38AM (12 children)
In other words, it was not a terror attack.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @07:59AM (10 children)
Thanks for helping out Runaway, and the others on this sight that are reading impaled.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 24 2017, @08:08AM (9 children)
Freudian slip on your part? You like being impaled?
An act of violence, meant to sway the masses into acting in some way that you want them to act, is a terror act. In this case, the terror wasn't intended to have a political response, but a financial one. Terror. Yes, I think you may be reading impaired, as well as impaled.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @09:25AM
Something of an overcite on your part, Mein lieber kleiner Käsekuchen. Freude! Freude!
Freude, schöner Götterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische, dein Heiligthum!
Deine Zauber binden wieder
Was die Mode streng geteilt;
Alle Menschen werden Brüder,
Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday April 24 2017, @11:00AM (4 children)
That's as reasonable a definition of "terror attack" as any I've seen. Which leads to the more general question: is there any reason to make the distinction?
If someone plants a bomb and blows up a bunch of people, they're guilty of murder. What does it gain anyone to argue whether it was "terror" or "not terror"? That's a distinction without a difference. The bomber is a murderer, murder is a crime, and that's all that matters.
The same thing with "hate crime". If someone assaults another person, or slanders them, or commits some other criminal act - that's a crime. It makes no difference whether they "hated" the person or not - it's completely irrelevant. Justice is supposed to be objective, not subjective.
The only "mind reading" that comes into play (in some cases) is "mens rea", i.e., the person must have known what they were doing was illegal. This can come into play if someone is not be mentally competent, or when the law itself is unclear or not obvious (example: many people have no idea that Lèse-majesté is a crime in much of Europe).
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @01:33PM
If someone plants a bomb and blows up a bunch of people, they're guilty of murder. What does it gain anyone to argue whether it was "terror" or "not terror"? That's a distinction without a difference. The bomber is a murderer, murder is a crime, and that's all that matters.
Well, as a legal matter, sure, but there are other perspectives where it could make more sense to make a distinction.
In theory, if they're doing it to "sway the masses", massive news coverage helps the bomber, and one should probably try to limit coverage to avoid that. Whereas, if it was, say, to settle a grudge against (some of) the people blown up, that doesn't apply.
In practice, "If it bleeds, it leads"; no newspaper is going to hurt their own sales by pushing such a story back to page 2 (and analogously for other news media), so I guess it doesn't really matter here, either. (Unless one's prepared to call for restrictions on freedom of the press in such cases, which I certainly am not.)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday April 24 2017, @01:46PM (1 child)
I'm not going to weigh in on the usefulness of "hate crime" or terrorism distinctions for crimes, but your assertions about "mind reading" in law simply aren't true. Intent is an important distinction in the definition of many criminal statutes, perhaps the most well-known being the difference between murder vs. manslaughter. Different "degrees" of other crimes are often also determined by intent (e.g., whether harm inflicted was intentional, negligent, etc.). And differing punishments for different intent are frequently justified because of the goals of criminal justice, which isn't simply an "eye for an eye" simplistic punishment system. Increased punishment for different intent may serve as deterrent for deliberate crimes society deems more egregious given their societal impact, etc. (or, theoretically, different crimes may need different rehabilitation depending on their intent, though in most systems the level of interest in actual "rehabilitation" is merely nominal).
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday April 24 2017, @06:46PM
Fair enough, but it's a matter of degree. As I understand it, "Mens Rea" covers the difference between murder and manslaughter: i.e., was it intentional or not.
Beyond establishing intent, I submit that it doesn't matter. Did that dude assault and rob you because he wanted your money, or because he disliked your skin color? What difference does it make? Differing societal impact because it was a "hate" crime? Is the dude going to hate you less, after spending more time in prison?
IMHO anything beyond establishing intent treads far too close to prosecuting "thought crime". From where it is far too small a step to punishing thought in the absence of crime.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday April 24 2017, @05:59PM
Making believable threats to someone is also a crime.
"Sending messages" via murder does both: 1. murder 2. makes a believable threat.
Hence, it's "more" illegal and the punishment is greater.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 24 2017, @11:01AM (2 children)
look the man who found the universally accepted definition of terrorism.
Why hello sir, the UN and all the world's lawyers were wondering when you're returning from your coffee break.
Here's another act of violence, meant to sway the masses into acting in some way that somebody wants them too:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/world/middleeast/us-airstrike-syrian-troops-isis-russia.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]
would you like to report this terror attack?
on the off chance that you're not some american idiot just browse the news keeping your definition in mind and see what else matches ...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday April 24 2017, @12:59PM (1 child)
Well, yes. A foreign organization, bombing people inside of another country, without any sort of permission from the local government? Yes, I'd say that meets a fair definition of the word "terrorism". That's what Hezbollah does, for example.
The fact that the organization is the US government? Still terrorism.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday April 24 2017, @11:47PM
Technically, bombing someone's military facilities is an Act Of War.
If you hadn't declared war beforehand, that might also qualify as a War Crime...
This wasn't technically aimed indiscriminately at innocent civilians.
(Score: 2) by Soylentbob on Monday April 24 2017, @08:09AM
True. In the end it was just good business. [youtube.com] (0:50min)
(Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Monday April 24 2017, @03:10PM
Terrorists need money too.