We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
LAST UPDATE | 20 Aug 2018
A POLICE OFFICER shot dead a man armed with a knife as he tried to attack a police station in Catalonia earlier today, just days after the one-year anniversary of a twin attack in the northern Spanish region that killed 16 people.
“We are treating it as a terrorist attack. The officer used her gun to save her own life,” Rafel Comes, a commissioner with the Catalan regional police, told a news conference in Cornella de Llobregat where the attack took place.
The man arrived at the police station in the town near Barcelona at 5.45am (3.45am Irish time) with a knife and “a clearly premeditated desire to kill an agent of our force”, he added, saying security was being reinforced at police stations across Catalonia.
Anti-terrorism police sources had earlier told AFP that the man was a 29-year-old Algerian who lived in the area, and had shouted “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) as he entered the station.
But Comes said the agent who shot the man dead can only recall hearing him invoking the name of “Allah” and the rest of what he said was incomprehensible.
The commissioner would not confirm the attacker was Algerian, saying police still needed to confirm that the Algerian identity papers he carried with him were in fact his.
The police station was cordoned off and funeral home employees removed the attacker’s body from the building, an AFP photographer at the scene said.
Officers searched the man’s home, which was located just a few hundred metres from the site of the attack.
The incident occurred just days after the first anniversary of a deadly jihadist rampage in Catalonia.
16 people were killed on 17 August 2017 when a van drove into crowds on Barcelona’s popular Las Ramblas boulevard and in a knife attack in the nearby resort of Cambrils.
The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the attacks, Spain’s worst since the Madrid train bombings in 2004 when 191 people died and more than 1,800 were injured.
IS targets police
Spain has kept its terrorist alert at the second-highest level since 2015.
Catalonia, which is home to a significant number of second-generation North African immigrants, has had a long history of Islamic militant activity.
Spain’s first Muslim extremist - a member of the Algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA) – was uncovered in Catalonia in 1995.
Mohammed Atta, the pilot who slammed a passenger plane into one of New York’s World Trade Center towers on 11 September 2001, spent time in Catalonia shortly before the attacks.
And in 2008, a plot targeting Barcelona’s underground trains was foiled when it was already in advanced stages.
One in four people detained in Spain in relation to extremist Muslim-linked terrorism come from the Catalan province of Barcelona, according to a study published last year by the Real Instituto Elcano, a Spanish think-tank, which called the province the country’s “main centre of jihadist activity”.
There have been a string of similar incidents in neighbouring France targeting police and soldiers, including one in January 2016 in which police shot dead a man wielding a cleaver and yelling “Allahu akbar” as he tried to attack a police station in northern Paris.
That incident came on the one-year anniversary of the terrorist attack on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo.
The Islamic State group has frequently called on their followers to attack soldiers and police in France, who they see as a legitimate target because they represent the French state.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I still didn’t get a bloody tan.
My grandfather said the same in the 1900′s
“The North and South Poles are not melting.” In that report, oceanographer Ted Maksym noted that polar ice “is much more stable than climate scientists once predicted and could even be much thicker than previously thought.”
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Al Gore , the Guru,said al the Arctic ice would be gone by 2014. He was wrong.
As a result of this global warming/climate change hysteria and it’s attendant scams every aspect of your life has been interfered with and has become more expensive. Old people have died in Ireland and the UK and on the Continent as a result of having to choose between food and heat. Further afield people are starving as food is turned into fuel. People like Al Gore make millions while having the ‘carbon footprints’ of small towns and all the time carbon is nothing more than plant food NOT the poison the alarmists make it out to be and yet we are force fed articles like this written by the useful idiots of the green religion. Wake up folks, you are being taken for a very expensive ride.
I fully agree with Uncle Mort, the biggest rip off in history, set to destroy western values and way of life and when the warmers do that they will walk off into the sunset leaving us with the mess
In before the anti-science brigade claiming that all this talk of global warming is just a conspiracy cooked up by a secret cabal of climate scientists which has been exposed by a plucky bunch of amateur oil billionaires and venture capitalists.
One of the main causes of global warming is the destruction of Rainforests …
One of the driving forces behind the economics that have driven this is none other than Peter Sutherland and his GATT arrangement…..
This is undeniable economic and historical fact .
Does Peter Sutherland want to kill trees – probably not. Are his policies destroying trees -definitely .
That will help you distinguish between fantastical theories and economic and historical facts Robin …
Or to put it simply fats buck in third world resources is destroying the planet and the beauty of it all is that no-one is to blame – “It’s just business !” …
*fast – but fats works just as well actually …
Re Robin
You mean cooked up by 2-3% of scientists. That 97% of scientists agree has been rubbished.
No one who is 18 years old or younger has experienced global warming.
As I said, in before the tinfoil hat brigade!
*sheesh*
Sorry, I forgot to provide link to backup my statement on the 97% of scientists agree rubbish.
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/03/16_not_97_agree.html
Here’s that 97% figure from a peer-reviewed scientific journal, rather than a crank website:
http://m.iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024
“Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.”
Re Robin
Well the fact you are referencing this site shows you believe in AGW as defined by the IPCC which is that it is solely caused by man made co2 emissions.
It’s hard to have debates with people devoid of reason and bought off scientists. All the factors that can contribute to climate change(natural anyway), hundreds of them, and you believe that man made co2 emissions is the sole cause. Good God.
Man made co2 emissions make up 2-3% of all co2 emissions with planet Earth providing the other 98-97%. And you believe man made co2 emissions are solely to blame…
As I said above, innit great that all these thousands of climate scientists, bought off by bearded, nasal hippies and voluptuous earth mother types, have been exposed by a tiny group of amateur oil billionaires and venture caps?
Makes me proud to be human, it does!
So libertarian bloggers are henceforward the sole determiner of Climate Change, got it.
Congratulations Robin. Straw Men, Ad Hominum, Appeals to authority – three fallacies in one sentence. That takes some doing. None of the fallacies of course actually mean anything.
Even if you don’t believe in climate change you cannot deny green energy is the best way to power a society. Cheap, clean and doesn’t run out
“The global surface temperature average (land and sea) for 2014 was nominally the warmest since the global instrumental record began in 1850; however, within the margin of error, it is tied with 2005 and 2010 and so we can’t be certain it set a new record.”
The only conclusion to be drawn from the addition of 2014 data is that the post-1997 standstill seen in global annual average surface temperature has continued for one more year making it now about 17 years in duration. This is the opposite of what is claimed in the Nasa press release.
It is clear beyond doubt by now that there is a growing discrepancy between computer climate projections and real-world data that questions their ability to produce meaningful projections about future climatic conditions.
@stephen lane, Hilliard and co are masters of the sneer and jeer and little else. The Climategate 2 emails showed the nastiness behind the climate fraud.
Not if you actually read the stolen emails, Mort.
Which I suspect you didn’t.
Robin,
What was the volcanic activity like in 2014 compared to other years ?
When you find that out then you can talk about Glowbull Warming.
“Even if you don’t believe in climate change you cannot deny green energy is the best way to power a society. Cheap, clean and doesn’t run out”
Absolute rubbish on all accounts. You cant design a grid around “green” energy – its all but useless without fossil fuel. And btw, it takes copious amounts of fossil fuel to build and install wind turbines.
So they are a complete waste of resources :
http://www.scotsman.com/news/comment-renewables-drain-our-resources-1-3659067
Let’s just have a bit of perspective here.
It’s hotter by four one-hundreths of a degree. This is within the margin of error that the reports provide, so basically we don’t know if it was a hot year as the temperature rise was too small.
Try read that bit again there young Horgay:
“For the year, the average temperature was 0.69 degree Celsius above the 20th century average, beating the previous record-holding years of 2005 and 2010 by 0.04 C.”
Don’t be too harsh, Horgay has reading difficulties.
It appears, that even in Ireland , we have some Bible thumping, ‘world is flat’ , in denial , GOP – Tea Party types, who just haven’t even noticed – the weather changes , the ice melts , the extremities of heat and cold weather !
Well in the REAL World, in my 63 years , there has been a remarkable change in our weather and environment .
Speak to anyone – who is prepared to be truly honest . But unfortunately honesty is somewhat sadly lacking – where there is conflict of interest , or a narrow minded outlook !
Differing daily measured values from the old and new sensors for temperature measurement spurred the author [Hager] to conduct a comparison spanning from January 1, 1999 to July 31, 2006 at Fliegerhorst Lechfeld (WMO 10856) 8-1/2 years long, daily without interruption, among other comparison tests of mercury maximum glass thermometers in a Stevenson screen and a Pt 100 resistance thermometer inside an aluminum enclosure, both unventilated. The 3144 days yielded a mean difference of +0.93°C; the Pt 100 was higher than the mercury thermometer. The maximum daily difference even reached 6.4°C! Klaus Hager
@An Ciarraioch, your anecdotal opinion on climate is not exactly scientific , climate always changes.
Remarkable change in you 63 years? Really?
So 1947, 1963,1976 & 1977 were not extreme years? If a slight increase in temprature is in fact global warming then I’m all for it. Anyway, as soon as it does warm up we won’t have to burn as much oil and gas to warm our homes so it is all good really!
@Jack Delaney, I can give better anecdotal evidence than our friend for 47, 63, etc and recall going up to Blessington in 63 where the snow reached the phone wires and the army Auster plane was dropping fodder to sheep :-)
BTW the records show that 1934 was the warmest decade in the last 100 but NASA/GISS seem to have misplaced the data when the ecoloon Hansen retired.
Uncle Mort, you just prompted my memory of 1963 because although I was a small boy I do recall that Christmas, on a vist to relatives in the countryside, getting stuck in snow. My uncle had just purchased a new MF 35 tractor the year before and came to rescue us by towing the car to his yard. I think that 1973 was also a funny year when we lost a 200 year old tree from wind in early January of that year.
Yes Jack – We won’t have to Worry ? – most of our homes will be under water ??????????
You’ll need more oil Jack, if the temperature goes up the Gulf Stream will slow down and our weather will be closer to Canada’s
Always worth familarising oneself with a new religion. The Church of Global Warming has its dogma (“97% of scientists yadadada”) , its Prophets (Michael Mann, Al Gore), its Priests (Climate (ahem) “scientists”), Its Holy Books (IPCC annual reports). It preaches that sinning will result in damnation. etc etc etc – you get the drift. Basically its all bollox.
As I said above hours ago, in before the tinfoil hat brigade.
Insult is the scraping of the bottom of the barrel
The tinfoil hat brigade are the ones who dont even understand the first thing about the 2nd law of Thermodynamics but lecture to others on “globull warming”.
Do us all a favour Robin – go and borrow a book on physics please.
Global warming is just another excuse for more carbon tax
Most sensible comment yet.
Man made climate change is a fact. Climate change deniers fall into the category of evolution deniers. Scientists overwhelmingly agree and the evidence comes from a multiplicity of sources, peer reviewed articles and so on. Thankfully intelligent people understand this.
However, reversing this and acting on it, of course, are 2 different things. However it doesn’t help having people who don’t understand the basics of how to determine reality from fiction. The usual reference to articles in bogus journals rather than esteemed journals subjected to peer reviews.
It is an arms race now between science backed by political will embarking on solutions to negate the warming amongst the depletion of biodiversity and the impact of long term climate change effecting a tipping point. Long odds in my view that correction will happen in time.
What is it exactly that the 97% of ‘climate scientists’ agree?
PS no warming for how many years now?
Currently standing at zero years there, Mort.
As the article title, and all the science, clearly indicates.
I wonder how did the British grow grapes in the 1400s?
Satellite measurement shows that September 2014 was a mere 0.195°C above normal, at least 7 or 8 other satellite-era years were warmer, such as 2003.
There are several so-called reliable measurements of global temperatures and all you see these people doing that are making, screaming and yelling of the hottest temperature ever, is using one of the least reliable datasets. Their very own NCEP reanalysis shows something very different. So, again, there’s a lot of controversy in this. And what happens is that they scream this stuff out, and then they walk it back.” When alarmist climate institutes roll out papers claiming global warming is going to cause severely cold winters, then you have to wonder if they know something is up and are acting preemptively to salvage their crumbling climate science, which not long ago predicted with high confidence balmy snowless winters.
In 2000 a leading UK climate change “scientist” said that the babies of the day will never see snow in their lives on UK soil. Yawn.
2014 was NOT the hottest year on record (in Ireland)
http://irishenergyblog.blogspot.ie/2015/02/2014-was-not-hottest-year-on-record-in.html
The hottest year in 218 years – on a planet that is 4,000,000,000 years old.
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say