[arista]

http://news.sky.com/story/1396409/ma...ng-into-market


[A man driving a van has ploughed into a crowd at a Christmas market in Nantes, western France, injuring 10 people.
The driver drove at a chalet serving hot wine in front of which several people were gathered, a witness said.
"I just saw the car charging into the stand, completely ramming into people," an elderly woman said.]



France has a Terrorist problem

[Livia]

I'd like to say I'm surprised, but frankly I'm not.

[T*]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'd like to say I'm surprised, but frankly I'm not.

[2]

[Kizzy]

'However, the source said they had "no account pointing to any religious demands" in connection with the latest crash at the market.

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the attacker appeared to be "unbalanced" and not motivated by politics or religion.'

Nothing to do with terrorism, really helps if you read the article.

[Livia]

"...Witnesses told police the driver was heard shouting he was "acting for the children of Palestine" during the rampage, which lasted about half an hour."

"...That attack came a day after another man, who was also heard shouting "Allahu Akbar," stabbed three police officers in the central town of Joue-les-Tours."

Really helps if you read the whole article.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

"...Witnesses told police the driver was heard shouting he was "acting for the children of Palestine" during the rampage, which lasted about half an hour."

"...That attack came a day after another man, who was also heard shouting "Allahu Akbar," stabbed three police officers in the central town of Joue-les-Tours."

Really helps if you read the whole article.

+1

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Livia

"...Witnesses told police the driver was heard shouting he was "acting for the children of Palestine" during the rampage, which lasted about half an hour."

"...That attack came a day after another man, who was also heard shouting "Allahu Akbar," stabbed three police officers in the central town of Joue-les-Tours."

Really helps if you read the whole article.

lmfao thank you...

people are so deterimined to say that something isn't terrorism... they don't realise how much damage they are actually doing

[Kizzy]

'However, a prosecutor said the 40-year-old driver had been to psychiatric hospital 157 times and had no known links to jihadist groups.'

It is obvious that this is a man who has not bee in his right mind for a considerable part of his life, the fact that this episode is reminiscent of terrorism is incidental.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by ArchAngel

'However, a prosecutor said the 40-year-old driver had been to psychiatric hospital 157 times and had no known links to jihadist groups.'

It is obvious that this is a man who has not bee in his right mind for a considerable part of his life, the fact that this episode is reminiscent of terrorism is incidental.

So,A religious nutter.That does'nt make it any better.
Having 'no known links to jihadist groups' does'nt mean he does'nt share the same dangerous extreme Islamic ideology and hold groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda in high esteem.The Sydney hostage taker had 'no known links to jihadist groups' but that did'nt stop him hanging an Islamic flag outside and killing people.
This ideology is so dangerous because not only are there organised groups who follow it but also lone wolf terrorists who worship them.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

So,A religious nutter.That does'nt make it any better.
Having 'no known links to jihadist groups' does'nt mean he does'nt share the same dangerous extreme Islamic ideology and hold groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda in high esteem.The Sydney hostage taker had 'no known links to jihadist groups' but that did'nt stop him hanging an Islamic flag outside and killing people.
This ideology is so dangerous because not only are there organised groups who follow it but also lone wolf terrorists who worship them.

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the attacker appeared to be "unbalanced" and not motivated by politics or religion.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by ArchAngel

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the attacker appeared to be "unbalanced" and not motivated by politics or religion.

So this was not religious at all.But he was 'acting on behalf of the children of palestine' hmm...

So how about the attack which happened the day before?No religious links?

'That attack came a day after another man, who was also heard shouting "Allahu Akbar," stabbed three police officers in the central town of Joue-les-Tours.

Bertrand Nzohabonayo, the man arrested over the stabbings, has a brother on a domestic terrorism watchlist but is not on it himself.

Two days before attacking the police station, Bertrand had copied his brother in posting an Islamic State flag on his Facebook page.'

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

So this was not religious at all.But he was 'acting on behalf of the children of palestine' hmm...

So how about the attack which happened the day before?No religious links?

'That attack came a day after another man, who was also heard shouting "Allahu Akbar," stabbed three police officers in the central town of Joue-les-Tours.

Bertrand Nzohabonayo, the man arrested over the stabbings, has a brother on a domestic terrorism watchlist but is not on it himself.

Two days before attacking the police station, Bertrand had copied his brother in posting an Islamic State flag on his Facebook page.'

Yes that's all in the article too.. his actions were similar to terrorist activity although it was in fact not, it was the delusion of a mentally ill person.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

So,A religious nutter.That does'nt make it any better.
Having 'no known links to jihadist groups' does'nt mean he does'nt share the same dangerous extreme Islamic ideology and hold groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda in high esteem.The Sydney hostage taker had 'no known links to jihadist groups' but that did'nt stop him hanging an Islamic flag outside and killing people.
This ideology is so dangerous because not only are there organised groups who follow it but also lone wolf terrorists who worship them.

Well said Paul - again.

A feather is a feather. Two feathers are two feathers. But a whole body full of feathers and beak, two webbed feet and waddle when it walks is a fecking duck - unless it's terrorist apologists who are observing, then it's still a few feathers.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Well said Paul - again.

A feather is a feather. Two feathers are two feathers. But a whole body full of feathers and beak, two webbed feet and waddle when it walks is a fecking duck - unless it's terrorist apologists who are observing, then it's still a few feathers.

If you're inferring I am a terrorist apologist then please don't. All there is in this article is a reference to terrorism nothing more, but it seems it's enough to set the media geese honking.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Well said Paul - again.

A feather is a feather. Two feathers are two feathers. But a whole body full of feathers and beak, two webbed feet and waddle when it walks is a fecking duck - unless it's terrorist apologists who are observing, then it's still a few feathers.

Those two words void anything you have to say, accusing someone of that just because they have the audacity to not take your opinion as gospel is despicable and ignorant.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by ArchAngel

If you're inferring I am a terrorist apologist then please don't. All there is in this article is a reference to terrorism nothing more, but it seems it's enough to set the media geese honking.

Kiz - Whether agreeing with you (which I have been known to do) or disagreeing with you, I have never, ever responded to you without quoting you and addressing you directly.

My use of the term "terrorist apologist" was generic and in a conversation addressed to EyeballPaul, so I was not referring to you.

To be truthful, I did have someone in mind when I used the term - but it wasn't you.

We disagree on lots of things Kizzy but I do not dislike you and I respect your views and welcome them.

Hope that's cleared up.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Those two words void anything you have to say, accusing someone of that just because they have the audacity to not take your opinion as gospel is despicable and ignorant.

Hoo Hoo Hullaballoo.

You need to calm down and climb down from your high horse.

In my opinion, the term "terrorist apologist" is not offensive, but is merely two nouns combined to form a descriptor, and my use of such a term was generic and in a conversation addressed to EyeballPaul, so I was not referring to Kizzy or anyone else in particular, or believe me it would have been addressed directly to them.

Conversely, you did address your post to me directly, and in it you call me “despicable” and “ignorant” – and both terms are highly offensive.

In addition, your post is disproportionately angry:

Kizzy – who had some reason to believe that my comments were alluding to her, because my post followed hers - merely politely requested that I do not refer to her as such, whilst you -– who had not even contributed to the thread –- see fit to join it merely to lambaste and insult me.

But we both know that the reason for your ire has nothing to do with my post or its content, don’t we?

You simply do not like me, and the reason is simply because I have had the ‘audacity’ to repeatedly post views that do ‘not take your opinion as gospel’.

Tough.

Further; there are no; ‘Two words’, or three words, or any amount of words which ‘void’ anything which I have to say, while ever I live in a democracy and enjoy the right of ‘Free Speech’.

Finally, I forgive you for your offensive insults against me (though someone in your exalted position on here really ought to know better.)

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Kiz - Whether agreeing with you (which I have been known to do) or disagreeing with you, I have never, ever responded to you without quoting you and addressing you directly.

My use of the term "terrorist apologist" was generic and in a conversation addressed to EyeballPaul, so I was not referring to you.

To be truthful, I did have someone in mind when I used the term - but it wasn't you.

We disagree on lots of things Kizzy but I do not dislike you and I respect your views and welcome them.

Hope that's cleared up.

Ok LT but as I'm giving counter to popular opinion it did seem a bit of a sideswipe.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by ArchAngel

Ok LT but as I'm giving counter to popular opinion it did seem a bit of a sideswipe.

Bless you Kizz - you are always counter to popular opinion -- your a socialist.

Seriously Kizzy, I was not referring to you.