Funny, you didn't hear about this shooting in Marseilles, France, the place of gang shootings....

[2aguy]

France has a gang crime problem that we never hear about. Their immigrant gangs prefer to use fully automatic rifles for their activity.....they just don't kill each other as often as American thugs do.....

This is a shooting we didn't hear about over here....I wonder why...considering the gang members in Marseilles used completely illegal, fully automatic rifles....

Remember, there are no gun stores in France, there are no gun shows in France and no sales between individuals in France and military rifles are completely banned in France....

And their criminals get them easily...

Gun Control Works: 3 Shot in French City of Marseille

As this latest bloody shootout from the most multicultural city in France shows us.

They were 15 to 24 years and were shot with automatic weapons on the night from Saturday to Sunday in the northern districts of Marseille

"Drug trafficking-related murders is the likely hypothesis," said Bernard Cazeneuve.

It was 2:30 on Sunday in the 13th arrondissement of Marseille when the shooting erupted. The three victims were then in the stairwell of the building D. Several individuals aboard two vehicles opened fire with an automatic weapon.

Twenty 9mn cartridges from an automatic weapon, but not a Kalashnikov, were found on site. Shortly after the tragedy, 2 burned vehicles were recovered in Gardanne, about twenty kilometers north of Marseille.

One of the victims, the major of 24 years was known to the police. But the two minors, both aged 15 and a half, were "little known", according to a judicial source. However one of them was prosecuted for armed robbery.

Laurel is in fact known as a hub of drug trafficking in Marseilles.

 

[2aguy]

And another link....

If this sounds like Chicago, there's good reason for that. Marseilles's young male population is likely to be majority Muslim. And the city is worse than Chicago. It's worse than Detroit.


**********************

Gangs fire Kalashnikovs at police in Marseille ahead of French PM visit

Hooded gunmen today exchanged automatic rifle fire with police in Marseille as France’s Prime Minister visited the city to discuss crime-fighting.

Kalashnikov shots rang out across La Castellane, the troubled estate plagued by gangs fighting over the city’s drug trade.

They are thought to have been targeting Pierre-Marie Bourniquel, the local police chief who was due to meet Manuel Valls, the Prime Minister, today.

Mr Bourniquel, Marseille’s director of public safety, was accompanying officers who were attended the scene of suspected shoot-out between rival gangs.

Bullets narrowly missed their vehicles, while at least one policeman ‘lay on the floor of the car’ to insure he was not hit, said a local police source.

 

[Pogo]

What's your point here? Other than blind pig-ignorance of the fact that PARIS is the most multicultural city in France?

 

[2aguy]

What's your point here? Other than blind pig-ignorance of the fact that PARIS is the most multicultural city in France?

France has an absolute ban on fully automatic rifles, no gun shows, no private sales, no gun stores...and their criminals use them as their weapon of choice............

By multicultural you must mean their criminals like to use Russian...and....Chinese made AK-47s when they are shooting at each other........

Yes....very multicultural of them.....

 

[MisterBeale]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

 

[Pogo]

What's your point here? Other than blind pig-ignorance of the fact that PARIS is the most multicultural city in France?

France has an absolute ban on fully automatic rifles, no gun shows, no private sales, no gun stores...and their criminals use them as their weapon of choice............

By multicultural you must mean their criminals like to use Russian...and....Chinese made AK-47s when they are shooting at each other........

Yes....very multicultural of them.....

No, what I mean is you're so um, informed that you've never heard of freaking Paris. One of the most multicultural places on Earth, and at least triple the size of Marseilles.

 

[2aguy]

What's your point here? Other than blind pig-ignorance of the fact that PARIS is the most multicultural city in France?

France has an absolute ban on fully automatic rifles, no gun shows, no private sales, no gun stores...and their criminals use them as their weapon of choice............

By multicultural you must mean their criminals like to use Russian...and....Chinese made AK-47s when they are shooting at each other........

Yes....very multicultural of them.....

No, what I mean is you're so um, informed that you've never heard of freaking Paris. One of the most multicultural places on Earth, and at least triple the size of Marseilles.

Really? That is your response......wow....I am just amazed by your knowledge........

 

[Pogo]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

That's rather a bit tinfoilish. Let's define "hear about". We "hear about" an event most of all because it's relevant. A shooting five thousand miles across an ocean just isn't that relevant here. It's far more relevant in France or in Marseilles. Just as a resident of Marseilles isn't going to "hear about" flooding in Appalachia. It isn't relevant - to them.

Local news / international news. Which of these is not like the other?

As for news that pushes an agenda, look where the OP gets his first link.

 

[irosie91]

most crime---even murders----do not make news

 

[eagle1462010]

Couldn't be..............Liberals have told us that if guns are banned that the criminals will no longer get weapons and we'd be safer for it..............

Liberals like Pogo stick will save us all.

 

[2aguy]

And here we have more on the gang violence in France...

One killed, five injured in Marseille shooting

Two men opened fire with a 9 mm automatic weapon outside of a 24-hour restaurant in the city’s Opera district.

"It would seem that following a dispute, a vehicle facing the street opened fire with a Kalashnikov on people who were at the entrance to the bar," Marseille’s deputy prosecutor André Ribes told news agency AFP.

"For now, we cannot call this a settling of scores," he said.

A security guard was killed and three of the five injured are seriously wounded, according to Ribes.

Some of the victims were "collateral damage" while others worked as security for the restaurant, including the slain guard, he said. There were 15 to 20 people present during the shooting.

The city in southern France and its surroundings areas are the scene of turf wars between multiple rival gangs battling for control of the drugs trade in the city's poorest neighbourhoods.

"There is always too much violence in this city," Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve told French television news show Le Grand Rendez-vous on Sunday.

He said 6,000 weapons a year were being seized from criminal groups, of which 1,200 were combat rifles and other weapons of war.

"The disarmament of all criminal groups should be stepped up, and I propose that in the next five to six weeks ... there is a comprehensive plan to fight against arms trafficking and possession of weapons in our country," he said.

You guys do realize that we are constantly flogged with the idea that guns are completely non existant in Europe...right? That is the impression given by our wonderful, left wing, anti gun politicians as soon as there is a big shooting here.......

And that these guns in France....completely banned.....that means you can't get them there they are illegal to own, let alone carry....let alone shoot people on the streets of Marseilles with........

 

[MisterBeale]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

That's rather a bit tinfoilish. Let's define "hear about". We "hear about" an event most of all because it's relevant. A shooting five thousand miles across an ocean just isn't that relevant here. It's far more relevant in France or in Marseilles. Just as a resident of Marseilles isn't going to "hear about" flooding in Appalachia. It isn't relevant - to them.

Local news / international news. Which of these is not like the other?

As for news that pushes an agenda, look where the OP gets his first link.

Wow.

You are seriously going to riddle your posts with fallacies now to defend your POV?

Ad hominem.

Poisoning the Well. . .

Did I forget any?


Why is one shooting "relevant" and another shooting not be "relevant?" Seriously? Because some supposed authority tells you so?


Oh well, we might as well throw in Appeal to Authority now. . . .


When did you stop thinking for yourself?




. . . I never thought I would here words like, "tinfoilish" come from you. I am supremely disappointed.

 

[Pogo]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

That's rather a bit tinfoilish. Let's define "hear about". We "hear about" an event most of all because it's relevant. A shooting five thousand miles across an ocean just isn't that relevant here. It's far more relevant in France or in Marseilles. Just as a resident of Marseilles isn't going to "hear about" flooding in Appalachia. It isn't relevant - to them.

Local news / international news. Which of these is not like the other?

As for news that pushes an agenda, look where the OP gets his first link.

Wow.

You are seriously going to riddle your posts with fallacies now to defend your POV?

Ad hominem.

Poisoning the Well. . .

Did I forget any?


Why is one shooting "relevant" and another shooting not be "relevant?" Seriously? Because some supposed authority tells you so?


Oh well, we might as well throw in Appeal to Authority now. . . .


When did you stop thinking for yourself?




. . . I never thought I would here words like, "tinfoilish" come from you. I am supremely disappointed.

Ummmmmmmmmmm.... because if you live in Dubuque Iowa, what happens six thousand miles away is by definition in a place you're not likely to be stopping by for a baguette on the way home from work. Not rocket surgery.

There are no fallacies above. It's simple geography.

 

[Pogo]

Couldn't be..............Liberals have told us that if guns are banned that the criminals will no longer get weapons and we'd be safer for it..............

Liberals like Pogo stick will save us all.

I've never made a post remotely like that in any way, anywhere.

 

[MisterBeale]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

That's rather a bit tinfoilish. Let's define "hear about". We "hear about" an event most of all because it's relevant. A shooting five thousand miles across an ocean just isn't that relevant here. It's far more relevant in France or in Marseilles. Just as a resident of Marseilles isn't going to "hear about" flooding in Appalachia. It isn't relevant - to them.

Local news / international news. Which of these is not like the other?

As for news that pushes an agenda, look where the OP gets his first link.

Wow.

You are seriously going to riddle your posts with fallacies now to defend your POV?

Ad hominem.

Poisoning the Well. . .

Did I forget any?


Why is one shooting "relevant" and another shooting not be "relevant?" Seriously? Because some supposed authority tells you so?


Oh well, we might as well throw in Appeal to Authority now. . . .


When did you stop thinking for yourself?




. . . I never thought I would here words like, "tinfoilish" come from you. I am supremely disappointed.

Ummmmmmmmmmm.... because if you live in Dubuque Iowa, what happens six thousand miles away is by definition in a place you're not likely to be stopping by for a baguette on the way home from work. Not rocket surgery.

There are no fallacies above. It's simple geography.

So what makes something "News worthy" is simply the numbers of causalities then?

For me, one event is real, the other involved that hand of geopolitical forces the pushed the paradigm.

Why should we pay any attention to what happened in Paris? Or San Bernardino? Both were controlled and pushed by the establishment. To say that western governments didn't know what these people were up to that perpetrated these events is the height of naivete. The have funded them, tracked them, and manipulated them from the beginning.

What goes on in Chicago and Marseilles is far more important to a Democracy. These other stories are there to manipulate the populace.

9 Reasons to Question the Paris Terror Attacks

If you enjoy civil rights, civil liberties, then letting the State control and manipulate the population is a danger to all folks, on both the left and the right.

Only when progressives and libertarians come together to see through the bullshit will our freedom and liberty be secure.

As it is, propaganda and false flags are totally legal and US policy now. It is considered by the elites the best way to mobilize the low information democracy to vote for more war, or voluntarily surrender their rights. Americans don't do their own critical thinking. That is stripped away in government school, then they are lied to with corporate/government controlled media.

Can you believe some Americans actually WANT to surrender their right to own a fire arm? Seriously. That is how bad the propaganda has gotten.

'Anti-Propaganda' Ban Repealed, Freeing State Dept. To Direct Its Broadcasting Arm At American Citizens | Techdirt

 

[Pogo]

So what makes something "News worthy" is simply the numbers of causalities then?

Not at all. It's the relative relevance of it. When a quarter of a million people died around this date a dozen years ago in a tsunami in Asia, that was big news because of the number --- but not nearly as big (relevant) as it would have been had we been living in Sumatra. When Katrina flooded New Orleans it may have been a relevant human interest story to you; to me it was even more relevant because I was rendered homeless.

What happens on the streets of Marseilles is just not anywhere near as relevant to a resident of Casper Wyoming as what happens in Gillette Wyoming. Because the latter is FAR more likely to impact that person. If that Casperian were on his way TO Marseilles that day, then it becomes more relevant. But most people aren't on their way to Marseilles.

For me, one event is real, the other involved that hand of geopolitical forces the pushed the paradigm.

Why should we pay any attention to what happened in Paris? Or San Bernardino? Both were controlled and pushed by the establishment. To say that western governments didn't know what these people were up to that perpetrated these events is the height of naivete. The have funded them, tracked them, and manipulated them from the beginning.

You seem to be using as a point of departure the premise that every event is orchestrated by some man behind a curtain. That premise is not substantiated. All we have here is a troll poster desperate to push his agenda -- which is always guns guns guns --- in any way he can think of, no matter how specious the connection. See it for what it is.

 

[Pogo]

Couldn't be..............Liberals have told us that if guns are banned that the criminals will no longer get weapons and we'd be safer for it..............

Liberals like Pogo stick will save us all.

I've never made a post remotely like that in any way, anywhere.

You ticked "funny" on that post. It's not a joke; it's a straightforward fact.

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Find me such a post, from any time, anywhere.

 

[2aguy]

What's your point here? Other than blind pig-ignorance of the fact that PARIS is the most multicultural city in France?

yeah...you can tell...they like to use Russian, fully automatic rifles compared to French fully automatic rifles.....very cosmopolitan.......don't you think?

 

[2aguy]

So what makes something "News worthy" is simply the numbers of causalities then?

Not at all. It's the relative relevance of it. When a quarter of a million people died around this date a dozen years ago in a tsunami in Asia, that was big news because of the number --- but not nearly as big (relevant) as it would have been had we been living in Sumatra. When Katrina flooded New Orleans it may have been a relevant human interest story to you; to me it was even more relevant because I was rendered homeless.

What happens on the streets of Marseilles is just not anywhere near as relevant to a resident of Casper Wyoming as what happens in Gillette Wyoming. Because the latter is FAR more likely to impact that person. If that Casperian were on his way TO Marseilles that day, then it becomes more relevant. But most people aren't on their way to Marseilles.

For me, one event is real, the other involved that hand of geopolitical forces the pushed the paradigm.

Why should we pay any attention to what happened in Paris? Or San Bernardino? Both were controlled and pushed by the establishment. To say that western governments didn't know what these people were up to that perpetrated these events is the height of naivete. The have funded them, tracked them, and manipulated them from the beginning.

You seem to be using as a point of departure the premise that every event is orchestrated by some man behind a curtain. That premise is not substantiated. All we have here is a troll poster desperate to push his agenda -- which is always guns guns guns --- in any way he can think of, no matter how specious the connection. See it for what it is.

It is relevant when anti gun nuts want to push an "assault" rifle ban.....which obviously does not work in France or the rest of Europe.....and we only use the semi auto civilian models.....the Europeans prefer the fully automatic versions...and grenades.........

When the anti gunners push more gun laws they site other countries and their gun laws....this shows that their gun laws are no more effective at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals than ours are......

 

[MisterBeale]

No Pogo, he has a really good point.

The only shootings that make international news are those that PUSH an agenda.

The agenda the global elites have are two fold.

First, they want to push the agenda of radical terrorism to mobilize the democratic electorate in the west. The want them reactionary so they will elect more right leaning politicians to go to war in the mid-east.

The second goal is to make local populations fear terrorism and the terrorists ability to gain possession of small arms. It's about gun control.

News pieces about violent gun incidents that will not help that agenda will not be largely circulated.

We have to remember, the corporate media is there to influence how people think about issues. It is not really there to inform folks. It's about making money and controlling and making the electorate conform to the elite controlled world outlook.

That's rather a bit tinfoilish. Let's define "hear about". We "hear about" an event most of all because it's relevant. A shooting five thousand miles across an ocean just isn't that relevant here. It's far more relevant in France or in Marseilles. Just as a resident of Marseilles isn't going to "hear about" flooding in Appalachia. It isn't relevant - to them.

Local news / international news. Which of these is not like the other?

As for news that pushes an agenda, look where the OP gets his first link.