Breaking: At least 1 man dead after stabbing rampage in Dundalk

Grayson

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Well you could have said all that above rather the the he’s a C-word!

I believe brevity is a virtue.

And I didn't realise that they're a regular poster. I generally follow the rule of attack the post, not the poster. If I'd known that they were posting on the thread I'd have compiled an augment. I'd be the same if Trump posted here (Like that would ever happen). I'd argue the points. But Trump doesn't post here so I have no problem summarising my feeling about him with a 4 letter word beginning with C.

Plus I'm a big fan of that word. I use it all the time in real life. And I've used it plenty of times here, this is the first time anyone has ever complained about it.

Grayson

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

The house is owned by a local family. Currently not lived in but kept quite well all the same. Question is how did he know to go to that house if he was only in Dundalk from the 01.01.2018 as the Gardai would like us to believe.

As for a diversion attack....I would think he was trying to spread Garda and emergency services resources. May have been his plan to keep attacking until they got to him and he was sure he would get to the town center.

So you still believe it's part of an elaborate planned attack on Dundalk?

At least you're consistent. You believe on Monday what you believed last Thursday, no matter what happened on the intervening three days.

Snake Plisken

Grayson wrote: »

I've never reported anyone except for the rereg's.

I also have no idea who he is.

And I'm not really a lefty. 10 years ago I'd be considered a bit left of central. However to people like you I'm suddenly a communist who wants to destroy western civilisation.

I was responding to the Good Doctor’s post above never said you were the one hitting the report button but I learned from the days of Nodin Mk1 that there is point posting abusive responses towards members as that’s what they want! At least you are still allowed to post in this thread and not thread banned as two members on my side of the house posts were carded and thread banned and they didn’t call anyone the C word,

Grayson

emo72 wrote: »

you did call him a "cnut". thats horrible behaviour in fairness. well below whats expected of boards users. and as much as id disagree with you id always treat you with respect.

To be fair I'm a bit of a cnut

Doctor Jimbob

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Why? you lefties as you call yourself pretty quick to hit the report button on other members Mark has contributed to a number of threads on here and should have the same rights applied as all other posters on here.

I'm not saying he shouldn't have the same rights as anyone else on boards, I'm just saying this is the same kind of rush to take offence over something relatively minor that elements of the left are ridiculed for - and rightly so, generally.

Grayson

Snake Plisken wrote: »

I was responding to the Good Doctor’s post above never said you were the one hitting the report button but I learned from the days of Nodin Mk1 that there is point posting abusive responses towards members as that’s what they want! At least you are still allowed to post in this thread and not thread banned as two members on my side of the house posts were carded and thread banned and they didn’t call anyone the C word,

You forgot the million rereg's.

Was the guy who said he'd attack anyone who looked middle eastern banned?

Irishmale0399

Grayson wrote: »

So you still believe it's part of an elaborate planned attack on Dundalk?

At least you're consistent. You believe on Monday what you believed last Thursday, no matter what happened on the intervening three days.

Dont believe that he set out to attack Dundalk, only he can say if that was his plan, however he knew what he was doing and did it for a reason.

And yes I do still believe it was an attack and until the Gardai deliver some hard facts against it, I will continue to believe it. Too many open questions and way too many half truths. First thing was he was Syrian, then he was definately Egyptian and only when they got infront of a judge did we hear the truth.....they dont know where he is from. That continues with his age, name....how long he was in the country......

Snake Plisken

Grayson wrote: »

You forgot the million rereg's.

Was the guy who said he'd attack anyone who looked middle eastern banned?

No of course not can’t remember the name he called someone an idiot

Will I Am Not

Can I just make it clear that I didn’t report anything. I was genuinely curious to know what way it worked if someone in the public eye also posted here.

Grayson

Snake Plisken wrote: »

No of course not can’t remember the name he called someone an idiot

Even though I'm always in these threads (and threads about abortion) I hate them (both).

In these sort of threads I always say wait and see. Because I want more evidence I get called an apologist for terrorists. I'm not. Terrorism is horrible. The whole point of it is to kill innocent people. Anyone who does that is scum. I'll also freely state that Saudi and places like it are hellholes.

However, If I point out that the vast majority of Muslims are law abiding people I get called names too. Point out that the vast majority of Muslims, especially in the west, are appalled by jihadists and I get abused too.

Yet I keep coming back. And it's because these things need to be said.

It's not crazy to say that terrorists are horrible, but people who haven't done anything wrong should not share the terrorists blame. This isn't a fringe idea.

Grayson

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

Can I just make it clear that I didn’t report anything. I was genuinely curious to know what way it worked if someone in the public eye also posted here.

It's a bit of a headfcuk. I think so long as they are clear who they are it should be fine. Then they can be approached as any other poster. If not, and if someone says something about them, they can't be upset if someone calls them a name.

Can you imagine if someone calls Leo a dick and then Aongus pulls back a mask shouting "I'M LEO!"

Will I Am Not

Grayson wrote: »

Even though I'm always in these threads (and threads about abortion) I hate them (both).

In these sort of threads I always say wait and see. Because I want more evidence I get called an apologist for terrorists. I'm not. Terrorism is horrible. The whole point of it is to kill innocent people. Anyone who does that is scum. I'll also freely state that Saudi and places like it are hellholes.

However, If I point out that the vast majority of Muslims are law abiding people I get called names too. Point out that the vast majority of Muslims, especially in the west, are appalled by jihadists and I get abused too.

Yet I keep coming back. And it's because these things need to be said.

It's not crazy to say that terrorists are horrible, but people who haven't done anything wrong should not share the terrorists blame. This isn't a fringe idea.

I don’t get why it’s such a problem if someone says ‘looks like Islamic terrorism’
It does. It might not be but it does.
I’m not talking about the ‘deport them all’ ‘religion of peace’ brigade.

You had people in the Manchester attack thread saying silly things like it was a blown speaker, pyrotechnics and even a friggin balloon popping without being told not to speculate. Speculate all you like except if you think it’s terrorism.

Grayson

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

I don’t get why it’s such a problem if someone says ‘looks like Islamic terrorism’
It does. It might not be but it does.
I’m not talking about the ‘deport them all’ ‘religion of peace’ brigade.

You had people in the Manchester attack thread saying silly things like it was a blown speaker, pyrotechnics and even a friggin balloon popping without being told not to speculate. Speculate all you like except if you think it’s terrorism.

I'd normally agree with you 100% but we've seen two mass panics in London recently too. So I'll have to say 95%.
Then again it all depends on what's being reported and what initial facts come through. If it's "Large explosion" it's one thing. Man run over by car might not be. Same thing with location. Man shot in Belfast might be terrorism but is probably not related to islam.

recedite

Grayson wrote: »

If it's "Large explosion" it's one thing. Man run over by car might not be. Same thing with location. Man shot in Belfast might be terrorism but is probably not related to islam.

The obsession with "terrorism or not" is a bit pointless.
Suppose somebody migrates from a society where life is cheap, maybe he has seen or even participated in multiple killings, 99% of people believe in the one true religion, and the assumption is that you go straight to paradise if you die a martyr. And suppose he believes that dying while killing infidels counts as the act of a martyr.
Then this same guy ends up in a society with a totally different system of values and beliefs. If he acts on his original beliefs, is that terrorism?

seachto7

recedite wrote: »

The obsession with "terrorism or not" is a bit pointless.
Suppose somebody migrates from a society where life is cheap, maybe he has seen or even participated in multiple killings, 99% of people believe in the one true religion, and the assumption is that you go straight to paradise if you die a martyr. And suppose he believes that dying while killing infidels counts as the act of a martyr.
Then this same guy ends up in a society with a totally different system of values and beliefs. If he acts on his original beliefs, is that terrorism?

Life is cheap in certain parts of Brazil. Lots of Brazilians here....

Odhinn

seachto7 wrote: »

Life is cheap in certain parts of Brazil. Lots of Brazilians here....

Soon we'll all be living in a favela if the multicultural left has its way.

Captain Obvious

seachto7 wrote: »

Life is cheap in certain parts of Brazil. Lots of Brazilians here....

Life is cheap in certain parts of Dublin and those feckers are everywhere.

10000maniacs

recedite wrote: »

The obsession with "terrorism or not" is a bit pointless.
Suppose somebody migrates from a society where life is cheap, maybe he has seen or even participated in multiple killings, 99% of people believe in the one true religion, and the assumption is that you go straight to paradise if you die a martyr. And suppose he believes that dying while killing infidels counts as the act of a martyr.
Then this same guy ends up in a society with a totally different system of values and beliefs. If he acts on his original beliefs, is that terrorism?

So what should we do? Bring them in, try to integrate them into our society, teach them our ways and hope to god that they don't wake up one morning with a divine revelation to go on a Westerner hunting expedition?

recedite

seachto7 wrote: »

Life is cheap in certain parts of Brazil. Lots of Brazilians here....

That does not answer the question...is it terrorism?

jmayo

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Why? you lefties as you call yourself pretty quick to hit the report button on other members Mark has contributed to a number of threads on here and should have the same rights applied as all other posters on here.

I can't recall anyone of a certain "liberal" opinion around here being called a cnt*.
Granted they have been labelled a good few things besides that.

And in this case it is a boards poster whose real name we actually know.

Actually I have faced infraction here for labeling anonymous users on this site quislings.

Snake Plisken wrote: »

I was responding to the Good Doctor’s post above never said you were the one hitting the report button but I learned from the days of Nodin Mk1 that there is point posting abusive responses towards members as that’s what they want! At least you are still allowed to post in this thread and not thread banned as two members on my side of the house posts were carded and thread banned and they didn’t call anyone the C word,

Ah the double standards.
If we discuss them we get a yellow card much like Grayson gets one for calling someone of the opposite opinion, whose real name we know, a cn*t.

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair I'm a bit of a cnut

The thing is we don't know you and only have your opinions on here to go by.

Then again I do have to say it wasn't a very nice thing to label an actual known individual that.

Grayson wrote: »

You forgot the million rereg's.

Was the guy who said he'd attack anyone who looked middle eastern banned?

Wasn't he told not to post here again.

kaymin

Grayson wrote: »

Even though I'm always in these threads (and threads about abortion) I hate them (both).

In these sort of threads I always say wait and see. Because I want more evidence I get called an apologist for terrorists. I'm not. Terrorism is horrible. The whole point of it is to kill innocent people. Anyone who does that is scum. I'll also freely state that Saudi and places like it are hellholes.

However, If I point out that the vast majority of Muslims are law abiding people I get called names too. Point out that the vast majority of Muslims, especially in the west, are appalled by jihadists and I get abused too.

Yet I keep coming back. And it's because these things need to be said.

It's not crazy to say that terrorists are horrible, but people who haven't done anything wrong should not share the terrorists blame. This isn't a fringe idea.

Actually you don't know what the vast majority of Muslims really think. My fear is that they secretly condone some of the actions of terrorists even if they wouldn't carry out such actions themselves - surveys in the past have indicated such sentiments are common. If that's the case it isn't such a huge leap to imagine a minority of future generations of Muslims taking the extremist path.

jmayo

recedite wrote: »

That does not answer the question...is it terrorism?

Even if it is not terrorism it is not something we want in our country.

We have enough problems and issues without adding young men with gripes who believe hacking strangers to death in unprovoked attacks is a way to go.

All one has to do is look to our continental neighbours and see how unprovoked violent incidents and sexual assaults have increased due to the introduction of the unverifiable migrants.

Even in Ireland over the last few years have had some sickening violent sexual attacks, even worse on vulnerable individuals, carried out by so called asylum seekers.

A 22-YEAR-old Nigerian asylum seeker who raped a woman in Waterford city has been jailed for five years.

A 19-year-old Eritrean national whose sentence for raping a 42 year old woman has been put back a number of times because he was too dangerous to be left in court has been jailed for seven years.

Ellahi, who is originally from Haripur in Pakistan, pleaded not guilty at the Central Criminal Court to rape, sexual assault and having sex with a mentally impaired person at his Dublin home on June 12th, 2013.

Are these the headlines we want ?

And if you do a search across Europe there is a sickening litany of violent gang rapes and assaults carried out by asylum seekers.

And before the usual excusitory muppets fire up, yes we all know that there are homegrown depraved individuals in our country already.

But why the fook are some in such a hurry to add to them ?

Grayson

kaymin wrote: »

Actually you don't know what the vast majority of Muslims really think. My fear is that they secretly condone some of the actions of terrorists even if they wouldn't carry out such actions themselves - surveys in the past have indicated as much. If that's the case it isn't such a huge leap to imagine a minority of future generations of Muslims taking the extremist path.

I'm not psychic but neither are you. I don't "know" what the vast majority of Irish people think either. I can tell you that surveys have shown that ISIS has feck all support amongst muslims.

But what you're suggesting in your post sounds like discriminating against people right now because there's some potential danger in future generations. You can't even say that there's danger, never mind quantify it.

kaymin

Grayson wrote: »

I'm not psychic but neither are you. I don't "know" what the vast majority of Irish people think either. I can tell you that surveys have shown that ISIS has feck all support amongst muslims.

But what you're suggesting in your post sounds like discriminating against people right now because there's some potential danger in future generations. You can't even say that there's danger, never mind quantify it.

I think you can say that there is a danger - there has been numerous examples around Europe of dis-enfranchised young Muslims pursuing the extremist path. Some Muslim representatives in Ireland have admitted extremist Imam's are radicalising some young Muslims here.

I may not be able to quantify it but I know it's a ticking time bomb given what has happened elsewhere. That's not discrimination.

jmayo

Grayson wrote: »

I'm not psychic but neither are you. I don't "know" what the vast majority of Irish people think either. I can tell you that surveys have shown that ISIS has feck all support amongst muslims.

But what you're suggesting in your post sounds like discriminating against people right now because there's some potential danger in future generations. You can't even say that there's danger, never mind quantify it.

So just ignore the track record of Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and laterally Sweden ?

Why do some people think that we are so different and that Ireland is immune from certain things.

That mindset was hugely at play during our property bubble and is now at play again when some believe that widespread muslim immigration will not result in ghettoisation, high unemployment, lack of integration, social problems and ultimately violent and terrorist offspring like it has in every other country in Europe and indeed laterally in the melting pot of the USA.

What makes us so much better at doings things than everyone else in Europe?

The_Kew_Tour

The people who have been most vocal about radical Islam have been Muslims themselves. Many are trying give us warning signs. But some like go down different path

Grayson

jmayo wrote: »

All one has to do is look to our continental neighbours and see how unprovoked violent incidents and sexual assaults have increased due to the introduction of the unverifiable migrants.

Even in Ireland over the last few years have had some sickening violent sexual attacks, even worse on vulnerable individuals, carried out by so called asylum seekers.

Are these the headlines we want ?

And if you do a search across Europe there is a sickening litany of violent gang rapes and assaults carried out by asylum seekers.

And before the usual excusitory muppets fire up, yes we all know that there are homegrown depraved individuals in our country already.

But why the fook are some in such a hurry to add to them ?

No-one wants to import criminals. However the only way to stop all potential criminals from entering this country is to stop absolutely everyone from entering the country.
Otherwise you have to accept that when we let someone in they may eventually turn out to be a criminal.
I'm all in favor of background checks on everyone emigrating here or applying for asylum but beyond that we can't block off entire ethnic or religious groups. There are over a billion muslims in the world and some people here would be quite happy banning every single one of them because of the actions of a few.

Get Real

weldoninhio wrote: »

Yeah, worked out great for Yosuke Sasaki. I'm sure his family will be delighted the Gardai did some pretty good locating and nothing else.

I agree with you. I deplore the actions of this man and my heart goes out to his family. What I was saying was they didn't do anything else because THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE.

I was saying there are no internal borders in the UK. He was free to travel to the north. Tens of thousands of people travel daily across the border. They located him within hours. They had no power to arrest him simply because he was a foreigner.

Again, I feel as you do for the family of Yosuke Sasaki. But my question was, what's your solution? Arrest all people of certain nationalities on sight?

I am upset it happened too. But feel you're not offering what you think should be done then to combat this.

Close the border with the North regardless of brexit? Lobby the UK to police their own internal borders? Arrest people for being of a certain nationality? (I don't believe any of these are feasible or moral)

It was you that blamed "paddy". I'm asking what your solution is to have prevented him from getting to the North, and walking over the border? An issue that's been discussed for over 70 years since the common travel area.

weldoninhio

Get Real wrote: »

I agree with you. I deplore the actions of this man and my heart goes out to his family. What I was saying was they didn't do anything else because THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE.

I was saying there are no internal borders in the UK. He was free to travel to the north. Tens of thousands of people travel daily across the border. They located him within hours. They had no power to arrest him simply because he was a foreigner.

Again, I agree with you. But my question was, what's your solution? Arrest all people of certain nationalities on sight?

I am upset it happened too. But feel you're not offering what you think should be done then to combat this. Close the border with the North regardless of brexit? Lobby the UK to police their own internal borders? It was you that blamed "paddy". I'm asking what your solution is to have prevented him from getting to the North, and walking over the border? An issue that's been discussed for over 70 years since the common travel area.

Hmmmmmmmmm, might want to ask the Brazilian woman that I linked earlier. Arrived with a tourist visa, suspected of coming to work, arrested, detained, then sent home.

My solution. Arrest anyone without the correct documentation and hold them until such a time as it can be ascertained why they are here, where they have come from and if they have any right to be here.

Get Real

weldoninhio wrote: »

Hmmmmmmmmm, might want to ask the Brazilian woman that I linked earlier. Arrived with a tourist visa, suspected of coming to work, arrested, detained, then sent home.

My solution. Arrest anyone without the correct documentation and hold them until such a time as it can be ascertained why they are here, where they have come from and if they have any right to be here.

In relation to the Brazilian. Yeah she was arrested for coming in a tourist visa and working here. There was a power of arrest there. And she was sent home.

And I respect your solution. I'm just curious of the actual realism attached to it. In law I mean. Define "correct documentation". Say a driver is stopped and produces a valid Brazilian driving licence. He claims he's a tourist. He's arrested because he's Brazilian and sure, he could be working here. Goes to court and it's found he is actually a tourist. How would that lawsuit against the state go?