Truck plows into Berlin Christmas market

[Tamas]

Ok so this Pakistani guy they released, because as it turned out, the first brown guy running from  the scene that got spotted by a white man was not actually the perpetrator.

According to n-tv.de (are they reputable?), he was registered as being born in "state of Turban" (must be a typo because I haven't found such a place in Pakistan), on 01.01.1993....

Also AFAIK he was known for some kind of petty crime (or sexual harassment if you can believe the far right people spreading that) to the police already.

So, the one random Muslim-looking guy they grabbed off the street happens to be a "refugee" from a non war-torn country from half a world away who supplied bogus information when applying for sanctuary, and already having a criminal record. (I won't mention the question of why such a fact doesn't automatically and immediately get your application rejected).

What are the odds? Makes you think the portion of men among refugees who deliberately fool the system and don't shy away from petty crimes must be significant.

[Jacob]

What are the odds? Makes you think the portion of men among refugees who deliberately fool the system and don't shy away from petty crimes must be significant.

Well... if you're a petty criminal with a record (as compared to say an asylum seeker with no problems with the law) it is not far fetched that you react to a huge increase in police presence by running. And if you see a brown looking fellow running in the vicinity of a terror attack, it is not unlikely that you'd suspect and report him over any white people you may see running and the police would act on that with heightened diligence.

So I'd say the odds are higher than they might seem at first.

Of course, as you imply with the reference to the sexual harassment accusations, it's probably best to wait for actual confirmed facts before drawing any real conclusions.

[CountDeMoney]

he was registered as being born in "state of Turban" (must be a typo because I haven't found such a place in Pakistan), on 01.01.1993...

LOL M'balz iz-Hari   Haid D'Salaami

So, the one random Muslim-looking guy they grabbed off the street happens to be a "refugee" from a non war-torn country from half a world away who supplied bogus information when applying for sanctuary, and already having a criminal record. (I won't mention the question of why such a fact doesn't automatically and immediately get your application rejected).

What are the odds? Makes you think the portion of men among refugees who deliberately fool the system and don't shy away from petty crimes must be significant.

Well, that's certainly not going to play well on the front page of Der Uberweiss.

[CountDeMoney]

The Atlantic
What Their Reactions to Monday's Attacks Reveal About Trump and Obama
Two sets of statements tell radically different stories about who was being attacked, and why.
PETER BEINART 
9:28 AM ET   
GLOBAL


Monday's horrors—the attack on a Christmas market in Berlin and the assassination of a Russian diplomat in Ankara—offer a natural experiment. Since they occurred during the brief window every four or eight years in which America has both a president and a president-elect, they provoked two sets of statements, one from the outgoing administration and another from its soon-to-be successor. The differences are revealing.

The first difference, unsurprisingly, is that the Obama administration exercised caution. It said the Berlin atrocity "appears to have been a terrorist attack." Team Trump, by contrast, simply called it a "horrifying terror attack." The White House avoided speculation about the Turkish assassin's motive. Team Trump, by contrast, called him a "radical Islamic terrorist."

More significantly, the two administrations used the attacks to tell radically different stories about who was being attacked, and why. The Obama administration identified the victims as members of a nation. Its five-sentence statement about the Berlin attack used the words "Germany" or "German" four times. And the White House linked the United States and Germany strategically, declaring that, "Germany is one of our closest partners and strongest allies."

Team Obama's response to the Ankara assassination was also state-centric. It offered its "condolences to the Russian people and Government" and declared, "we stand united with Russia and Turkey in our determination to confront terrorism in all of its forms."

Russia and Turkey are not "partners" and "allies" of the United States in the way Germany is. Still, the Obama administration implied a world in which even nations with sharply different interests cooperate against their common foe: "terrorism in all its forms." Taken together, the Berlin and Ankara statements gesture toward a liberal internationalist order of the kind the United States helped build after World War II: an inner circle of cooperation linking the United States and its closest NATO allies surrounded by a broader circle represented by universal bodies like the UN, in which countries band together across ideological and geopolitical lines to battle the transnational scourges that threaten them all.

Team Trump's statement was utterly different. It described the victims as members not of a nation but of a religion. Its statement about the Berlin attack didn't refer to the victims as Germans. (It didn't mention the words "German" or "Germany" once.) Instead, it defined them as people killed "as they prepared to celebrate the Christmas holiday." The Obama team's statement made no assumptions about the victims' faith: It simply noted that the attack had occurred at "a Christmas Market." The Trump statement, by contrast, implied that the victims all celebrated Christmas. And it linked those killed in Berlin to other "Christians" who "ISIS and other Islamist terrorists continually slaughter ... in their communities and places of worship as part of their global jihad."

The contrast grows even sharper when you add in Team Trump's response to the Ankara attacks. Unlike Obama's statement, which said nothing about the assassin's faith, Trump's called him "a radical Islamic terrorist." The Trump statement also said nothing about working with either Russia or Turkey, let alone working with them against "terrorism in all its forms," which implies that terrorism has forms other those rooted in Islam.

What do these statements tell us? That Team Obama defines the struggle against terrorism as a conflict pitting countries of all religious and ideological types against a common stateless foe, while Team Trump defines it as a conflict between Christendom and Islam. (That's how ISIS defines it too. The Islamic State also views the world in terms of religious civilizations rather than nations). The natural implication of Obama's worldview is that preventing terrorism requires cooperation between very different nations. The natural implication of Trump's is that preventing terrorism requires keeping Muslims out. Neither of Trump's statements acknowledges the possibility that Christians might perpetrate terrorism or Muslims might be victims of it. (Indeed, on the very same day as the attacks in Ankara and Berlin, a gunman opened fire at a mosque in Zurich, Switzerland, injuring three.) The message to Muslims in Germany and the United States is the same one Trump has peddled for more than a year now: You are the enemy within.

[Ed Anger]

Time to bring the jackboots out of storage.

[derspiess]

Done. They are in need of a shine.

[Zanza]

Ok so this Pakistani guy they released, because as it turned out, the first brown guy running from  the scene that got spotted by a white man was not actually the perpetrator.

According to n-tv.de (are they reputable?), he was registered as being born in "state of Turban" (must be a typo because I haven't found such a place in Pakistan), on 01.01.1993....

Also AFAIK he was known for some kind of petty crime (or sexual harassment if you can believe the far right people spreading that) to the police already.

So, the one random Muslim-looking guy they grabbed off the street happens to be a "refugee" from a non war-torn country from half a world away who supplied bogus information when applying for sanctuary, and already having a criminal record. (I won't mention the question of why such a fact doesn't automatically and immediately get your application rejected).

What are the odds? Makes you think the portion of men among refugees who deliberately fool the system and don't shy away from petty crimes must be significant.

That's all just from "sources" and nothing will ever be officially confirmed now that they let him go. Your conclusion is pure speculation.

PS: The n-tv article is the only one I found that mentioned the "Stadt" (town), not "Staat" (state) of Turban. Perhaps they mean Turbat in Baluchistan. 

Edit: Found another article that confirms Turbat

[Zanza]

The eye witness that followed the now released suspect admitted that he did not see him leave the truck and just saw him leaving the scene. So the eye witness picked him - presumably because his appearance fit a preconceived notion of the witness.

[Zanza]

Police has named a new suspect, a 24 year old Tunesian whose asylum application had been rejected but who went into hiding when police was looking for him, was classified as a potential terrorist by security services and is supposedly part of an Islamist network. 

They found his ID card in the truck... 

[Liep]

They found his ID card in the truck... 

Classic ISIS move. Wasn't that the same deal with the Charlie Hebdo killers?

[Duque de Bragança]

They found his ID card in the truck... 

Classic ISIS move. Wasn't that the same deal with the Charlie Hebdo killers?

Charlie Hebdo Killers were Al-Qaida in the Arabic Peninsula.
The most ridiculous scene however was where one of them felt the need to grab one sneaker but later left his ID.

[Liep]

ISIS AL-Qaida, who cares?

[Tamas]

I am sorry but my suspension of disbelief over dropped ID cards is getting harder and harder to maintain.

[Zanza]

Why?

[Duque de Bragança]

ISIS AL-Qaida, who cares?

Counter-terrorism intelligence, security forces, police, maybe even journos and their audience.