Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday May 29 2018, @12:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the again dept.

A man has shot dead two police officers and a civilian in the eastern Belgian city of Liège.

The gunman took a female cleaner hostage at a school before being killed by police. Two other police officers were also injured.

The man's motive is not yet clear but the incident is being treated as terrorism.

Police sources quoted in local media said the man was heard shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is greatest" in Arabic).

Belgian broadcaster RTBF said the gunman was let out from prison on temporary release on Monday where he had been serving time on drug offenses. It said that he may have been radicalised while in jail.

The shooting unfolded late morning on Tuesday near a cafe in the city centre.

Update: 16:56 UTC

More recent reporting states:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/29/europe/liege-shooting-intl/index.html

The incident occurred at around 10:30 a.m. when an assailant stabbed two policewomen from behind, before stealing their service weapons and using them on the officers, Liege Prosecutor Philippe Dulieu said at a news conference on Tuesday.

After killing the two officers, the attacker continued walking through the street and opened fire on a parked vehicle, fatally wounding the driver inside, Dulieu added.

https://news.sky.com/story/belgian-police-launch-terror-probe-after-shooting-of-police-and-bystander-11388883

The gunman also killed a 22-year-old male car passenger on the Boulevard d'Avory, before taking a female cleaner hostage at a nearby high school.

She was released when police shot dead the attacker, who has been named by local media as Belgian national Benjamin Herman.

See also, thanks to C0lo:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29 2018, @03:40PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29 2018, @03:40PM (#685665)

    I've read a lot of anthropological and history books and papers (by non-religious people) that say that religion may be necessary for civilization. Also note a lot of of the modern anti-religion movement, starting in the 1600's, is anti-current dominant religions. Note how much new belief systems are beginning to enter into popular culture like ufo-ism, flat earth, hollow earth, lizardoids from planet whatever. Even science is turning into a religion for some with leaders, priests, meetings, dogma, rituals, followings.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Interesting=3, Informative=2, Total=5
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Tuesday May 29 2018, @05:47PM (2 children)

    by Nerdfest (80) on Tuesday May 29 2018, @05:47PM (#685750)

    Yeah, but you can actually explain to the "science followers" that they're wrong about something. All you need to do is use facts and logic. Calling it a "religion" just because people are beginning to understand why it's so important is disingenuous.

    • (Score: 2, Disagree) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday May 29 2018, @08:28PM

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday May 29 2018, @08:28PM (#685852) Journal

      Oh my goodness would historians of science beg to differ with you on that! Do a little reading on the theory of ether, then come back and tell us again how willing scientists are to accept ideas that are contrary to their beliefs.

      It's OK that you come back chastened. Many have a notion of science such as you have expressed, but these are human beings we're talking about, not Vulcans.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 30 2018, @02:32AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 30 2018, @02:32AM (#686048) Journal
      Depends on the stakes. There's a fair bit of economics and climatology, for example, where the uncertainty of the science is completely ignored merely because billions of dollars or equivalent depend on the answer being so.