Should give them armbands as well to make them easier to identify.

We have deradicalization centres over here too, targetting those caught liaising with ISIS agents or spouting ISIS propaganda. The content of these centres are completely different though, mainly religious courses that show these guys just how superficial their understanding of the religion is, and reality checks that show how they're basically getting duped by their ISIS counterparts. The core thing is that we don't suddenly go nationalistic on their arses.

In the other thread you're saying we shouldn't judge that Nazi pig for his Fatherland tattoo in Fraktur and here you're calling for the ban of "dangerous books".

Savz wrote:

It's so dangerous. These books shouldn't be allowed, it's quite scary that they are allowed to be sold.

Almost as if the incredibly powerful strategic alliance of national powers that has deliberately supported the global dissemination of salafist Islamic propaganda through a network of radical madrassas closely tied to the proliferation of violence … should be dissolved, and the madrassas de-funded … now bear with me here …

Eh, nah—just lock up all the kids together and force them to sing La Marseillaise, that'll work.

And also with this gross, smug and authoritarian secularism …

Did you read the article mate?

They've hand-picked a bunch of young men who haven't necessarily committed any criminal offence, and they're interning them in the equivalent of a military facility, where they will be dressed in uniform and expected to sing the French national anthem whether they like it or not … what else can you call it?

Savz wrote:

banduan wrote:

We have deradicalization centres over here too, targetting those caught liaising with ISIS agents or spouting ISIS propaganda. The content of these centres are completely different though, mainly religious courses that show these guys just how superficial their understanding of the religion is.

How do you go about turning jihadists into half decent humans when their book, which they believe to be the literal word of their god, tells them to do just that?

I'm not sure you even read what was quoted? Unless what you mean is "does it actually work"? To which the answer is yes.

These deradicalisation centres are a nonsense. If you have guys who are conspiring to commit atrocities then charge them. I don't want them back out in the world because they gave you the right answers to some questions. And if you don't have enough to charge them with something then how on earth can you put them in a detention centre and claim to be a secular democracy?

Dear France,

Fuck you!

Regards

New York

They do look shit though.

EU workplace headscarf ban 'can be legal', says ECJ
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39264845

Headlines a bit misleading, basically its saying you can ban employees who deal with the public from wearing religious symbols without being sued. They say the employer needs to show that a neutral image needs to be presented to the public/client to allow such a ban.

I can't really come up with an instance where I think a ban on people wearing a headscarf is necessary. I could see a full face veil causing issues when dealing with the public but unless you're a model for Loreal what difference does a headscarf make?

The summaries are not always clear, but essentially the ruling says that as long as you have a policy that bans religious or political symbols generally, then that's fine, if such policy exists to present a neutral image.

However, what you can't do is ask an employee to remove their headscarf (or presumably another religious or political symbol) simply because a customer asks for it, which is what happened in one of the cases, without such a policy.

The existence of a general policy is the key.

FEBravo wrote:

The summaries are not always clear, but essentially the ruling says that as long as you have a policy that bans religious or political symbols generally, then that's fine, if such policy exists to present a neutral image.  

Isn't that a little contradictory? The policy itself is anything but neutral. 

The worst part is it's a ruling to panders to companies that feel like they need to pander to bigots. If you're worried about your bigoted customers then simply create a general policy and you can do what you like to keep them happy.

Honestly burqas should be banned altogether. Scarfs should bother no one, however. That's just silly.

That's like saying bras should be banned, or gloves, or that women shouldn't wear pants. Clothes shouldn't be banned, ffs!