People are entitled to get upset, no matter what country they have chosen to move to.
Now, it would be ridiculous if those people who were upset had actually taken extreme actions to change whatever it was they weren't happy with this, but you don't state that that is the case and I'm failing to see how anyone was 'imposing their ideals'.

Because, the Muslims are living there, and they have to see them! And also be around them!!

While I don't doubt that radical Islamic groups have a field day recruiting unemployed French Muslims living in poverty, you'd have to look at the unemployment and poverty as being part of the causes of civil unrest.

Also, most of France's Muslim population emigrated from France's colonies in North Africa, so it's not like France is simply the victim of evil Muslims showing up looking to impose a fundamentalist form of Sharia law. There is a bit of "you reap what you sow" going on as well.

+1

I wrote something a while back about Islamic schools in Bradford looking to combat extremism by teaching kids community values.

Not to like, um, bump my own thread shamelessly or anything.

Um... isn't this thread about a european response to a muslim murdering a european man for making a movie they didn't agree with? I feel like we are all referring to that. The difference is people in Holland are open and into diversity, whereas Muslim extremists believe that if you are not Muslim you are an infidel and it is ok to kill infidels.
Listen, I'm from SF, the PC capital of America, but it bothers me when people defend someone that would fucking kill them because of their bullshit religious beliefs, just because they don't want to harshly judge another culture and seem un-PC.
I'm not siding with the French Police or anything, it just seems easy for liberals to confuse their dislike for our current administration (ie Bush or whomever) with misguided empathy for religious extremists.
Maybe I should have said, if you can't move somewhere without wanting to murder the people there you shouldn't.

I really hope this program works. Government sponsored education ideas have flopped in the past, but this is one I think we sorely need.

It is scary sometimes walking around here to see people openly exhibiting extremist behavior. And it's not the Islamic population that worries me. It's the native Dutch. Political figures like
Geert Wilders and others are really galvanizing the right wing members of Dutch society. They prey on peoples paranoia and insecurity, creating a climate of fear that neo-nazi's and other extremists thrive on. People I consider much more dangerous, and a bigger threat to our society, than any Islamic group (even the ones with evil intentions).

Dutch culture is, on the whole, still very open and tolerant. It is the greatest strength this society posses. More and more however I see people here trying to set limits on how open we should be a how the level of tolerance suffers for it. I really hope this program teaches kids from a young age how important it is that they not give in to the fear and paranoia the extremist members of society want them to feel. I hope people on both sides of this cultural conflict learn that hate is an easy way out. It takes greater strength of character to embrace those who are different and accept them, than it takes to slam the door in their face.

What everyone here was saying, and what seems to have TOTALLY escaped you, is that not every Muslim is an extremist and that you can not judge an entire population due to the actions of a minority of it's members.

Is this is the same Holland where the government is considering a ban on wearing Muslim head scarves and burqas in public and the leader of the anti-immigration conservative political party the PVV wants to ban the Koran?

I did say extremists and not all muslims. did that TOTALLY escape you. I'm not anti muslim, I'm against people imposing their religious beliefs onto others.

OK. Geert Wilders (head of the PVV) is a dick. See my previous post.

But to take a quote from the article you linked to:

I was actually under the impression that this was already law in Holland. They're just adding a few items to the list. Tainted car glass will be on it as well.

The idea is that people faces have to be visible. You know, in case they commit a crime and the police want more information than "It was a person in a mask". Yes it sucks that this will infringe on Islamic traditions (that most Islamic women in this country don't hold to any way), but it is NOT an anti-religious proposal.

That statement by Verdonk "able to see and identify each other clearly to promote integration and tolerance" is a load off bullshit. But Verdonk is a bit of a bitch.

So are the Dutch. That's the whole point of this program they're setting up. To curtail extremism.

From my understanding, the murderer had dual citizenship (Morrocan-Dutch) and was born and raised in Holland.
I think the best descrpition would be that he was an Islamic extremist who killed a fellow Dutch citizen.

Setting aside the focus on the extremists within a religion, and focusing on the issues of differences and hate, a few of my dearest friends founded an organization called Pii (Peace Initiatives Institute.)

Pii uses media to reach young children with messages designed to increase dialogue by teaching respect for differences, which shapes children's future attitudes and behavior toward others. The program focus to date has been on teaching respect for physical, racial/ethnic, and religious/cultural differences. The first pilots were completed in Northern Ireland.

I personally think education is the only way to bring about long lasting change.
Pii

It will take decades, perhaps centuries but
the dutch or whoever will inhabit their parts
may become first to escape middle age thinking and to enjoy civilization.
I mean a culture that teaches that reason and individual freedom should rule.
That faith in any form is suspect and usually harmful.

Totalitarian ideologies, and foremost, organized religions are control mafias who get established or perpetuated by criminal activities, terror, inquisitions, witch burnings, Fatwas and similar horrors. Yes, some religions may have somewhat relented on inquisitions but still yearn for social control.

They may enjoy a government that protect against abuse by others but let individuals choose. Left alone, natural evolution should progressively eliminate self-destructive habits. That is its function.

Prosecution of drugs, prostitution or gambling is unjust, oppressive, costly and counter productive not to mention socially and financially devastating. It fosters huge criminal empires and compound their mayhem with the "legal" crime of harassing and incarcerating harmless citizens. It deprives the community from enormous tax revenues and forces the same to support a flurry of law-related parasitic professions.
Prostitution should be a respected and protected profession . To enters it willfully into it is no different from other choices individuals should be free to make.
Drug prohibition clearly repeats the errors of the past. Besides being a clear violation of freedom, its social costs almost certainly overshadow the collateral damage even if all drugs came on vending machines.
Finally, for government to insist on curtailing gambling is like trying to outlaw stupidity. A futile goal but one that deprieve us of much tax relief. A real shame.

right on, galahad.

I think this, perhaps the greatest of political failures, stems from the simple maxim, that people tend to be more liberal when monitoring their own behaviors and more conservative when monitoring others behaviors. This is why parents become more conservative and why politicians are too.

People and politicians start catering to ideas like "well I don't want my kids to be around drugs..." even after they went through the same thing themselves when they were kids. Politicians think that "allowing" drug use to happen is sending the wrong message, which is utterly useless and ineffectual.