Man shot dead at Marseille train station after knife attack

DeSarge

On sky news now. 2 people reported dead unfortunately. Both victims are women who had their throats cut . This appears to becoming a specific tactic of islamists , like in Finland .

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Stickie required.



Hi again...

Neon_Lights

Smell of the Shtate of those lads who did it

4068ac1elhodqr

That's the same Marseille train station that 4 American tourists were attacked with acid earlier this month.
At that time, French authorities said the assailant was suffering from a 'mental illness'.

suicide_circus

Marseille is a hole

maryishere

suicide_circus wrote: »

Marseille is a hole

So are all of the places with huge immigrant communities / muslim populations in France

BillyBobBS

maryishere wrote: »

So are all of the places with huge immigrant communities / muslim populations in France

Not just France but Europe.

YFlyer

maryishere wrote: »

So are all of the places with huge immigrant communities / muslim populations in France

Don't have any Muslims in Southill.

chupacabra

Christian fundamentalist irish republican anti-capitalist anarcho-Buddhist extremeists strike again!

RIP to the victims

TheQuietFella

Segregation and mass expulsions unfortunately!

Outlaw Pete

Chris Rock gonna have to change part of his act for the next few shows in Europe I'm thinking.

He has a segment about mass shootings and how you never see mass knifings, but if you did, only two people maximum could ever be seen as victims as from the third one onward they'd deserve to die.

Was funny in fairness but.... timing and all that.

BorneTobyWilde

One by one they fall . I guess it's something. Can you imagine if they acted like serial killers, picking us off one by one and vanishing.

Will I Am Not

Apparently a rented truck ploughed into a crowd in Canada this morning too.

Doltanian

People of their own kind should stick together and respect boundaries. Humans are tribal in nature and no amount of political correctness can change this fact.

DeSarge

The French police questioned the suspect in Marseille knife killings days prior to attack. Same old story. He was an illegal immigrant too.

cfuserkildare

Multi-Culturism is great ain't it.
( Sarcasm )

DeSarge

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Multi-Culturism is great ain't it.
( Sarcasm )

When done right.

cfuserkildare

Gun Advocate wrote: »

Now, now, don't you know that all the tribes of man will live peacefully side by side in Europe?

Mwah Hah Hah.
Yeh. Right.

imme

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Multi-Culturism is great ain't it.
( Sarcasm )

Multi-culturalism is a silly phrase,
a meaningless phrase

Mutant z

These are the consequences of mass immigration.

imme

Mutant z wrote: »

These are the consequences of mass immigration.

Should we stop all mass immigration then?

Aristotle145

imme wrote: »

Should we stop all mass immigration then?

Yes that is the best solution for now.

Aristotle145

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Multi-Culturism is great ain't it.
( Sarcasm )

Angela Merkel says its a failure,still they keep pouring in more immigrants into Germany and Europe.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11559451

Sand

imme wrote: »

Should we stop all mass immigration then?

Well, mass immigration has no genuine benefit and causes significant social, political and economic issues so, yes, yes we should stop all mass immigration. The first step is acknowledging that the entire world doesn't have a right to move to Europe, and that Europe doesn't have a moral duty to accept mass immigration. That doesn't exclude the possibility of sensible immigration (and asylum) policies.

4068ac1elhodqr

One important factor to remember is that (unlike in all previous mass migration waves),
all this cheap new low/unskilled labour really won't be required going forward.

The Auto-bots will soon be able to replace most low/un-skilled work.
Unless of course 'they're all Doctors and Engineers with perfect English language skills'.

Mutant z

imme wrote: »

Should we stop all mass immigration then?

It should have been controlled but it hasnt been, when you import those in their thousands with an alien culture to the indigenous population its never going to work out well.

Mutant z

Aristotle145 wrote: »

Yes that is the best solution for now.

When you look at the effects of mass immigration in the UK and France and see the huge social problems it has led to you would wonder why anyone could possibly be in favour of it, its been nothing short of a disaster.

cfuserkildare

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the effects of mass immigration in the UK and France and see the huge social problems it has led to you would wonder why anyone could possibly be in favour of it, its been nothing short of a disaster.

You have to remember that Germany has a Declining population!
Angela Merkel wants to boost the German gene pool.
Again, the EU is simply the Fourth Reich!!

imme

Sand wrote: »

Well, mass immigration has no genuine benefit and causes significant social, political and economic issues so, yes, yes we should stop all mass immigration. The first step is acknowledging that the entire world doesn't have a right to move to Europe, and that Europe doesn't have a moral duty to accept mass immigration. That doesn't exclude the possibility of sensible immigration (and asylum) policies.

It's a human thing really.
People around the world are for the most part trying to get on with their lives, they don't want to move anywhere.

Some look to move to better their circumstances, they will use whatever works, hence the number of people claiming asylum in Ireland.
There are more Nigerians living in Ireland than there are Spaniards, that's from the latest census.

We don't have any economic, social or political compact with Nigeria, we're nowhere near Nigeria!

But a combination of improvement in education and a growing middle class has led people from all sorts of places choosing to seek a betterment of their circumstances in another country other than the country of their birth.

Aristotle145

Mutant z wrote: »

When you look at the effects of mass immigration in the UK and France and see the huge social problems it has led to you would wonder why anyone could possibly be in favour of it, its been nothing short of a disaster.

Problem its gone to far now,so its not political correct to put a stop to it,and if they do,they will be on the losing end with their voters and their political power.
And power is really what its all about,in EU,the fourth reich.

FTA69

Sand wrote: »

Well, mass immigration has no genuine benefit and causes significant social, political and economic issues so, yes, yes we should stop all mass immigration. The first step is acknowledging that the entire world doesn't have a right to move to Europe, and that Europe doesn't have a moral duty to accept mass immigration. That doesn't exclude the possibility of sensible immigration (and asylum) policies.

I don't disagree per se but we must also be honest about the effect that European action has had in making the logistics of this problem a lot worse. For instance Britain and France eagerly toppling Ghadaffi and thus opening a mass black hole in North Africa where desperate people are funnelled in order to grab a raft to Europe.

maryishere

FTA69 wrote: »

I don't disagree per se but we must also be honest about the effect that European action has had in making the logistics of this problem a lot worse. For instance Britain and France eagerly toppling Ghadaffi and thus opening a mass black hole in North Africa where desperate people are funnelled in order to grab a raft to Europe.

Ghadaffi got his comuppance in the end. Good enough for him, having supplied the PIRA with so much explosives and arms, no wonder the whole world turned against him post 9/11. The Poor of Africa and the Middle East and Asia are coming via many routes / countries. The ships who pick up people from the people smugglers are just helping the people smugglers and encouraging more.

FTA69

maryishere wrote: »

Ghadaffi got his comuppance in the end. Good enough for him, having supplied the PIRA with so much explosives and arms, no wonder the whole world turned against him post 9/11. The Poor of Africa and the Middle East and Asia are coming via many routes / countries. The ships who pick up people from the people smugglers are just helping the people smugglers and encouraging more.

I know yeah. Libya is in a fanatic position now because of it too, what with people being traded in slave markets and black people being lynched on the street. I'm in Tunis at the moment and met black Libyans who described sort of Mad Max situation going on over the border. Africa's most prosperous and developed country is now in ruins.

But then again mary, you've always been a spoof merchant when it comes to your posts so no surprise you're at it again.

maryishere

FTA69 wrote: »

I know yeah. Libya is in a fanatic position now because of it too, what with people being traded in slave markets and black people being lynched on the street. I'm in Tunis at the moment and met black Libyans who described sort of Mad Max situation going on over the border. Africa's most prosperous and developed country is now in ruins.

But then again mary, you've always been a spoof merchant when it comes to your posts so no surprise you're at it again.

You are in Tunis now and I'm in Tripoli lol
Nobody denies that Libya is in an awful state now, like much of Africa / Middle East. However at least I knew that the UN imposed sanctions on Libya over the bombing of a PanAm airliner over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in December 1988. Other attacks carried out with Libyan Semtex included the Enniskillen bomb in 1987. So no great sympathy for the Libyan dictator who the Libyan people finally ousted, as he was the man who supported the IRA's campaign of violence for so long, during his 42 year dictatorship.
Did you know the families of the 180 US victims of the Lockerbie bombing eventually received $1.3bn (£1bn) in total as part of a deal between the US and Libya. An Assembly motion in 2009 which called for compensation from Libya for IRA victims was backed by all parties, except Sinn Fein. The UK government has never secured a compensation deal from Libya for victims of IRA attacks...you would not have liked them to, did you?

The first proven connection with Libya was discovered in 1973 when the Irish Navy boarded a ship called the Claudia, off the Irish coast. They found five tonnes of weaponry supplied by Libya. Five tonnes is quite a bit, or maybe you see more everyday in Tunis? In 1987, French authorities stopped a ship, the Eksund, which was on its way to Northern Ireland carrying around 1,000 AK-47 machine guns, more than 50 ground-to-air missiles and two tonnes of Semtex.
It is believed that other shipments of arms reached Ireland before the Eskund was apprehended.

Sand

FTA69 wrote: »

I don't disagree per se but we must also be honest about the effect that European action has had in making the logistics of this problem a lot worse. For instance Britain and France eagerly toppling Ghadaffi and thus opening a mass black hole in North Africa where desperate people are funnelled in order to grab a raft to Europe.

True, but in being honest we have to recognise that the Libyan civil war started before Europe intervened. Government forces were advancing on Benghazi, and the inhabitants knew what their likely fate would be. Europe's leaders were always likely to react to the promise of a civilian massacre by Qaddafi secret police and torturers. The UN issued a resolution to make that intervention. If they didn't act, it would be another Rwanda, or another Syria, played out in the international media. We do need to be honest that the outcome of acting was not a stable regime replacing Qaddafis, but also be honest there was no risk free, morally clean options.

imme wrote: »

It's a human thing really.
People around the world are for the most part trying to get on with their lives, they don't want to move anywhere.

Some look to move to better their circumstances, they will use whatever works, hence the number of people claiming asylum in Ireland.
There are more Nigerians living in Ireland than there are Spaniards, that's from the latest census.

We don't have any economic, social or political compact with Nigeria, we're nowhere near Nigeria!

But a combination of improvement in education and a growing middle class has led people from all sorts of places choosing to seek a betterment of their circumstances in another country other than the country of their birth.

But we don't have to accept or enable their preferences.

FTA69

maryishere wrote: »

You are in Tunis now and I'm in Tripoli lol
Nobody denies that Libya is in an awful state now, like much of Africa / Middle East. However at least I knew that the UN imposed sanctions on Libya over the bombing of a PanAm airliner over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in December 1988. Other attacks carried out with Libyan Semtex included the Enniskillen bomb in 1987. So no great sympathy for the Libyan dictator who the Libyan people finally ousted, as he was the man who supported the IRA's campaign of violence for so long, during his 42 year dictatorship.
Did you know the families of the 180 US victims of the Lockerbie bombing eventually received $1.3bn (£1bn) in total as part of a deal between the US and Libya. An Assembly motion in 2009 which called for compensation from Libya for IRA victims was backed by all parties, except Sinn Fein. The UK government has never secured a compensation deal from Libya for victims of IRA attacks...you would not have liked them to, did you?

The first proven connection with Libya was discovered in 1973 when the Irish Navy boarded a ship called the Claudia, off the Irish coast. They found five tonnes of weaponry supplied by Libya. Five tonnes is quite a bit, or maybe you see more everyday in Tunis? In 1987, French authorities stopped a ship, the Eksund, which was on its way to Northern Ireland carrying around 1,000 AK-47 machine guns, more than 50 ground-to-air missiles and two tonnes of Semtex.
It is believed that other shipments of arms reached Ireland before the Eskund was apprehended.

Yep, I'm bang in the middle of the medina as it happens and am about to go out for a mint tea and probably a few beers after.

It's wonderful how you can quote long tracts from Wikipedia telling us what we already know but any way you'd like to address the point made about Libya's current situation and the fate of black Libyans and migrants there?

maryishere

I said nobody denies that Libya is in an awful state now, but you were not complaining about the place when Ghadaffi was sending tons of semtex and arms to "the lads".

FTA69

maryishere wrote: »

I said nobody denies that Libya is in an awful state now, but you were not complaining about the place when Ghadaffi was sending tons of semtex and arms to "the lads".

Probably because I was one at the time. And no, even recently I wasn't complaining about Libya because it was a relatively prosperous and developed country that largely provided for its citizens as opposed to the dump it has become now because of French and British intervention in order to shore up their own selfish interests.

end of the road

BillyBobBS wrote: »

Not just France but Europe.

so for example, all those areas in the uk with a large irish contingent are hell holes, or is it just the areas in europe with brown people?

Mutant z wrote: »

These are the consequences of mass immigration.

they aren't as most of the attacks have been caried out by homegrown nuts. so called mass immigration has always happened since the dawn of time.

maryishere wrote: »

Ghadaffi got his comuppance in the end. Good enough for him, having supplied the PIRA with so much explosives and arms, no wonder the whole world turned against him post 9/11.

most of the world had sympathy for the PIRA. countries turned against Ghadaffi because they saw an opportunity to plunder more natural resources. it backfired. + britain and others are selling arms to un-negotiable terrorists such as saudi arabia.

maryishere wrote: »

The Poor of Africa and the Middle East and Asia are coming via many routes / countries. The ships who pick up people from the people smugglers are just helping the people smugglers and encouraging more.

they are mostly coming via libya. again, all britain and other's fault for de-stabelising the country.

maryishere wrote: »

You are in Tunis now and I'm in Tripoli lol
Nobody denies that Libya is in an awful state now, like much of Africa / Middle East. However at least I knew that the UN imposed sanctions on Libya over the bombing of a PanAm airliner over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in December 1988. Other attacks carried out with Libyan Semtex included the Enniskillen bomb in 1987. So no great sympathy for the Libyan dictator who the Libyan people finally ousted, as he was the man who supported the IRA's campaign of violence for so long, during his 42 year dictatorship.
Did you know the families of the 180 US victims of the Lockerbie bombing eventually received $1.3bn (£1bn) in total as part of a deal between the US and Libya. An Assembly motion in 2009 which called for compensation from Libya for IRA victims was backed by all parties, except Sinn Fein. The UK government has never secured a compensation deal from Libya for victims of IRA attacks...you would not have liked them to, did you?

The first proven connection with Libya was discovered in 1973 when the Irish Navy boarded a ship called the Claudia, off the Irish coast. They found five tonnes of weaponry supplied by Libya. Five tonnes is quite a bit, or maybe you see more everyday in Tunis? In 1987, French authorities stopped a ship, the Eksund, which was on its way to Northern Ireland carrying around 1,000 AK-47 machine guns, more than 50 ground-to-air missiles and two tonnes of Semtex.
It is believed that other shipments of arms reached Ireland before the Eskund was apprehended.

britain was supplying weapons and more to loyalist gangs so you don't get to have any moral outrage over libya supposibly helping the PIRA.

maryishere

end of the road wrote: »

most of the world had sympathy for the PIRA.

Then why was the PIRA condemned by everyone from the US administration to Russia? After Enniskillen nobody wanted to be associated with the PIRA except the likes of the dictator Gadaffi, who was eventually toppled by his own people.

end of the road wrote: »

britain was supplying weapons and more to loyalist gangs

You are confusing Haughey and the arms trial and Blaney and Irish collusion with the IRA. If Britain supplied weapons and more to loyalist gangs, then why did Britain spend so much blood, sweat, tears and money filling its jails with loyalist terrorists as well as republican terrorists? If Britain wanted to take out extremist Republicans, they would have done it in a more efficient way than by helping the pathetic loyalist paramilitaries.

end of the road

maryishere wrote: »

Then why was the PIRA condemned by everyone from the US administration to Russia?

arms came from the US and russia.

maryishere wrote: »

After Enniskillen nobody wanted to be associated with the PIRA except the likes of the dictator Gadaffi, who was eventually toppled by his own people.

wrong i'm afraid. plenty of governments were either talking or helping them in some way.

maryishere wrote: »

You are confusing Haughey and the arms trial and Blaney and Irish collusion with the IRA.

i'm not. there was no irish collusion with the ira.

maryishere wrote: »

If Britain supplied weapons and more to loyalist gangs, then why did Britain spend so much blood, sweat, tears and money filling its jails with loyalist terrorists as well as republican terrorists?

they had to be seen to be doing something. and they had to direct any possible questions in relation to them away from themselves.

maryishere wrote: »

If Britain wanted to take out extremist Republicans, they would have done it in a more efficient way than by helping the pathetic loyalist paramilitaries.

not without huge bloodshed on the british mainland. they wouldn't have known who the supporters of a republic were. much easier for britain to collude with murder gangs to keep their hands clean. britain has a history of doing that.

maryishere

end of the road wrote: »

arms came from the US and russia.

Both the US governments and Russian governments condemned PIRA atrocities. Fact.

end of the road wrote: »

i'm not. there was no irish collusion with the ira.

According to the Smithwicks tribunal there was.

end of the road wrote: »

not without huge bloodshed on the british mainland. they wouldn't have known who the supporters of a republic were.

Because of MI5, MI6, supergrasses, co-operation with the Gardai etc the British government knew who a lot of the Republicans were. They were not stupid. They flew Adams over to London for secret talks in an effort to stop the PIRA campaign in the early seventies. If the British government want to take out Republicans they would have done so in a more efficient way than by helping the bumbling loyalist paramilitaries. Instead the British caught and tried and jailed many loyalist paramilitaries, sometimes after gunfights and deaths.

end of the road

maryishere wrote: »

Both the US governments and Russian governments condemned PIRA atrocities. Fact.

and supplied arms.

maryishere wrote: »

According to the Smithwicks tribunal there was.

i have no doubt that there wasn't any.

maryishere

end of the road wrote: »

and supplied arms.

The US government caught some arms smugglers to the PIRA. Russia condemned the PIRA, especially after Enniskillen. Not very impressed with attacking those who were commemorating those who died in WW2 fighting facism, after all the Russians went through. Not surprising the Russians strongly condemned the PIRA then.

end of the road wrote: »

i have no doubt that there wasn't any.

It was proven in the (Irish government) Smithwicks tribunal that there was.
That was not the British or the loyalists saying there was, that was the Irish government admitting there was, after a long and very expensive investigation / tribunal.