 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Especially Europe has become a spineless coward which shits its pants on
> the slightest of threats
Don't be so hard on yourselves. We were so scared, we elected W. for a
second term :(
Fortunately, things are starting to get a little better.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers <Ben### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Especially Europe has become a spineless coward which shits its pants on
> > the slightest of threats
> Don't be so hard on yourselves. We were so scared, we elected W. for a
> second term :(
If I'm honest, I have to say that I admire the US for at least *trying*
to do something about the problem, rather than just sitting on their asses
hoping that the problem will solve itself. I really hope Europe had even
half the guts needed for that.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4aab81b3@news.povray.org...
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Especially Europe has become a spineless coward which shits its pants on
> the slightest of threats, who apologizes for every tiny event which might
> offend the people who the terrorists claim they are fighting for, who is
> completely ready to compromise its own freedom solely because it's so
> scared
> of terrorist retribution. Rather than stand against this threat against
> freedom and human rights, Europe chooses to submit to the fear. It's like
> the battered wife syndrome on a multinational level.
>
Which (part of) Europe are you talking about?
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
m_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> Which (part of) Europe are you talking about?
Are you thinking of some part of Europe in particular which does not fit
my description?
I'd say the entire western and northern European countries at least.
Just one prominent example is Denmark, which apologized to muslim countries
because an independent (ie. in no way state-owned) newspaper dared to
exercise its (completely legal) freedom of expression. I'm not exactly
sure what Denmark's goverment's message was when they issued the apology,
but I assume it would be something like "we are sorry that our freedom of
expression laws are too lenient, we are going to make them stricter now
in order to avoid insulting islam in the future". (I don't know if they
actually went ahead and did exactly that.)
Or how about Finland? Here you can get a jail sentence if you insult
the muslim prophet. Yes, it has actually happened. And no, you don't get
a jail sentence if you insult Jesus in the same way (or even worse).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12 Sep 2009 16:51:54 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>m_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
>> Which (part of) Europe are you talking about?
>
> Are you thinking of some part of Europe in particular which does not fit
>my description?
>
> I'd say the entire western and northern European countries at least.
You are talking through a hole in your head, Warp.
Here in the UK, although there is trouble with hot heads on both sides. We
basically have a tolerant attitude but draw the line at Sharia Law, forced
marriages, honour killings etc. There is a bit of a media panic over a MP who
walked out of a Muslim wedding because his wife would have been segregated to
the women's area. But it is a small thing. When some orthodox Jews tried to
erect an Eruv in London they were told in no uncertain terms, no.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aoldotcom> wrote:
> Here in the UK, although there is trouble with hot heads on both sides. We
> basically have a tolerant attitude but draw the line at Sharia Law
Really? I thought there are Sharia courts in the UK right now. Check for
example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055764/Islamic-sharia-courts-Britain-legally-binding.html
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Really? I thought there are Sharia courts in the UK right now. Check for
It sounds like it's arbitration, which means everyone has to agree in
advance to accept the decisions. I wouldn't be bothered by it if I thought
everyone involved voluntarily accepted the rulings, but I strongly suspect
(for example) that many of the women involved are threatened if they don't
agree to sharia law.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4aac09ea@news.povray.org...
> m_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
>> Which (part of) Europe are you talking about?
>
> Are you thinking of some part of Europe in particular which does not fit
> my description?
Yes the "part" where I live :-)
I don't pretend to know the situation in every european country (remember
europe is NOT a whole country but an association of countries)
What I know is in France law doesn't allow ostentatious signs of religion at
school, in public administration, including muslim veil.
There is an public debate about forbidding burqa outdoors
Our newspapers are still allowed to criticise prophets and religions which
some did indeed after the dannish affair...
If we did not want war in Iraq (which had no connection with terrorism at
this time BTW) we have soldiers and airforce in Afghanistan (some were
killed on ambush or bombing)
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
m_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> Our newspapers are still allowed to criticise prophets and religions which
> some did indeed after the dannish affair...
Then it's better than here. While technically newspapers are allowed to,
for example, make caricatures and satires of anybody (including any prophets
or head figures of any religion), in practice it's a no-no when we are
talking about islam. After the Dannish controversy some Finnish newspapers
did re-publish the caricatures in question, and the Finnish government went
ahead and reproached these newspapers publicly. Maybe I'm being a cynic,
but I'm pretty sure that it was because the Finnish government was afraid
of islamic retribution.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12 Sep 2009 17:53:50 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aoldotcom> wrote:
>> Here in the UK, although there is trouble with hot heads on both sides. We
>> basically have a tolerant attitude but draw the line at Sharia Law
>
> Really? I thought there are Sharia courts in the UK right now. Check for
>example:
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055764/Islamic-sharia-courts-Britain-legally-binding.html
So the Daily Mail would have us believe. (Can you guess the demography of their
readers?)
As Darren says, it is arbitration with probably a lot of pressure from the local
community. I don't think that we will see different communities having separate
laws in England and Wales, in my lifetime. I make the distinction because
Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own legal systems.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
