What If a Refugee Triggers the Bomb in Germany?
German investigators have confirmed that it was a refugee who planned in June to detonate a biological weapon in Germany. The 29-year-old Tunisian man was thwarted, but he is not the only one who has been plotting behind the scenes. Thousands in Europe are also considered a potential threat.
“There were very concrete preparations for such an act using, if you will, a biological bomb,” said Holger Münch, president of Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office, the bka. “This is a first in Germany.”
The man, identified by police as Sief Allah H., had been following instructions on the Internet on how to make a biological weapon from the toxin ricin. He had already begun manufacturing the toxin, and other parts needed to make a bomb were found in his apartment.
The Tunisian plotted his attack for months. His scheme was thwarted only after foreign-security partners alarmed Germany’s secret service of Sief Allah H.’s potentially dangerous purchases.
The suspect was motivated by the Islamic State. His target: “infidels.”
Sief Allah H. came close to igniting the terrorist bomb in Germany. How many more are plotting similar attacks?
In Germany, about 770 people are currently classified as potential threats.
Jihad fighters terrorize to divide, cause fear and chaos. They have struck in Europe before with bombs, guns and trucks. But Europe’s citizens and leadership will strike back. In response to the Nov. 13, 2015, Paris attacks, Trumpet executive editor Stephen Flurry wrote “The Paris Bloodbath Awakens a Sleeping Giant in Europe,” explaining this change building in Europe. He wrote:
Last week’s attack on Paris was the worst violence that city has seen since World War ii. To many, Paris is the epitome of civilization, yet Friday’s coordinated attacks were some of the most barbaric in the history of the world. Now that the reality of what has just happened is sinking in, the big question on the minds of people around the world is, how will Europe respond?
The short answer is, much more strongly than in the past.
French President François Hollande called the Paris attack an act of war. “Faced with war, the country must take appropriate decisions,” he said. France “will be merciless toward the barbarians of Islamic State group” and “will act by all means anywhere, inside or outside the country,” said Hollande.
Forty-eight hours after the attacks, France sent 10 fighter jets to blast the Islamic State-held city of Raqqa, Syria, with 20 bombs. It was France’s largest campaign against the Islamic State so far.
Compare this with Spain’s non-response to the terrorist attack on Madrid in 2004. After that, Spain capitulated to the jihadists! This time around, France appears to be dead set on seeking revenge.
That was in 2015. How much more violently would Europe react today? The article continued:
Germany too may be gearing up for action. “Do we now have to go to war?” asked Germany’s most popular newspaper Bild. It speculated that France could invoke nato’s mutual defense clause and quoted several German politicians stating Germany’s preparedness to use military force.
The Paris massacre has awakened a sleeping giant.
Recent crimes by migrants in Germany have made headlines. Thousands marched in Chemnitz after one death that was allegedly perpetrated by a migrant. Chemnitz police forces found themselves unable or unwilling to keep the violent protesters in check. Pictures resembling a civil war circulated the world. How much more violent would Germany’s reaction be if an immigrant makes a successful terrorist attack?
There’s a growing desire for change in the German government—not just a change in the government’s migrant policy, but a change of leadership style. In uncertain times, there is a growing appetite for a strong leader.
A major attack in Germany would accelerate this 100-fold. At the start of last year, following a major terrorist attack in Germany, theTrumpet.com managing editor Brad Macdonald wrote:
Following the Berlin attack (as well as the others), the response from the Merkel administration and Germany’s mainstream elite was alarming. While they were certainly sobered by the attack and displayed compassion for the victims, Merkel and her colleagues were extremely apathetic about the broader causes of the attack.
There was no dramatic and forceful response from Merkel or her government. No meaningful change in direction. No recognition that her migrant policies are flawed and have clearly put Germany in danger. There were plenty of platitudes, but no major decisions; plenty of promises, but no noticeable actions.
Many in the West, especially intellectuals, would argue that this “rational,” unemotional response speaks to Germany’s postwar transformation. This is how an advanced, sophisticated nation is supposed to react in this situation.
Millions of Germans, however, will not see Merkel’s response this way. It is very human amid such a crisis to seek vengeance, and to go into self-preservation mode. …
These frustrated Germans don’t want to persecute migrants, beat them up, imprison them or kill them. They are not Nazis seeking to commit genocide against German Muslims. Most are regular, sound-thinking, rational people, many of whom have great sympathy for the migrants. But they are justifiably concerned and alarmed at the impact millions of migrants are having on Germany—on its institutions, its infrastructure, its economy, its culture and its people. They are frightened by the prospect of more terrorist attacks. And they are concerned that Merkel’s government refuses to give serious attention to their fears and worries.
Merkel’s failure to react more energetically to the Berlin attack, her failure to recognize the extent of the problem and the part her policies played in creating it, and her failure to take the German public’s concerns seriously are deeply alarming. By failing to tackle these issues, Angela Merkel is turning the German people into a ticking time bomb!
The more disillusioned, frustrated and angry the German people become, the more vulnerable they will be to radical politics and radical leaders with radical solutions.
Bible prophecy says we can expect this scenario. The book of Daniel is written specifically for the “time of the end” (Daniel 8:17; 12:4, 9). Passage after passage describes a powerful leader who will shake the world. He will be the “king of the north” (Daniel 11:40), ruling over a united European power. He will most likely be the leader of Germany, which controls the rest of the European Union.
What type of man is this new leader? The Bible says that “the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god” (verse 36). He will be a “king of fierce countenance” (Daniel 8:23). He is assertive, aggressive and ambitious. He is a strong leader!
This leader will come “understanding dark sentences” (same verse)—or, as Clarke’s Commentary puts it, he will be “learned and skillful in all things relating to government and its intrigues.” He is very different from Germany’s current leader.
Angela Merkel has been one of the most popular and successful postwar German chancellors. For 11 years, she has been exactly the leader Germans have wanted. But Germans now want—and need—a leader with a different personality and different policies. They need someone who speaks the truth and who is willing to confront the issues. …
Watch for that man to rise.