dk

o

• dk: I’m honored to hear the voice of Europe speak, so are you Avalanche IX King of Europe?
  avalanche:ix: yes, actually.
  dk: then I must be da_ king of da United States.
  o
• dk: I believe strongly in religious liberty, but recognize my liberty ends where the reasonable freedom of others begins. I just don’t find hypocrisy to be a reasonable description of freedom or liberty.
  avalanche:ix: reasonable freedom? what would you consider to be reasonable freedom? to be able to wear full body covering which completely destroys any possibility of normal communication between teachers and students (and even students and students) in a classroom? if a non-religious kid can't wear a baseball cap in class, then a religious girl can't wear a chador in class, simple as that, we can't make exceptions for religion.
  dk: ?Normal communication? Normal communication requires reasonable accommodation, good will and persuasion, not totalitarian tactics. You seem to have gone off on an irrational secular jihad against traditional Moslem garments. What evidence do you have that modesty destroys communication, apart from your own personal bias?
  o
• dk: Truth be told, I don’t blame Germany, France or Russia for protesting a US unilateral war with Iraq. In fact I think they do the world a great service. This whole concept of preemptive strikes against evil dictators needs clarification. I think terrorism presents an eminent threat to the world, world peace and every person that lives in a free democratic republic.
  avalanche:ix: oh come on, terrorism has been with us since ages, but it's only *now* become a problem? terrorism is not a significant threat to the world, to world peace or every person in a democracy. you stand a higher chance of being run over by an old lady without her glasses on driving to get her monday groceries than you do being blown up by a suicide bomber. let's make a pre-emptive strike against old ladies with cars! yeah! that'll show 'em! come on, you can't possibly be more of a propaganda mesmorized bushie thinking terrorism to actually be relevant in countries other than say, israel. oh, so you've had a big terrorist attack huh? welcome to the human race, we've all had to deal with things like bombs dropping on our own country, terrorists blowing themselves up in shopping malls, etc etc. it doesn't justify pre-emptive strikes or the stripping of civil rights to promote a false sense of security. take a fucking chance, terrorism is exciting! the idea that walking into an airport can get you killed is an exciting idea and it gives an ambiance to life that it's sorely lacking! take a fucking chance man.
  dk: Blowing up the WTC sent financial markets into a tail spin around the world. So while I agree terrorism doesn’t directly threaten my safety, it certainly has had a degenerative affect on the entire world. I think you’ve lost your grip on reality, the scope and magnitude of the terrorist threat on 9-11 recorded a 10 on the Richter Scale. Let me spell it out, terrorism brought the world economy to stop for a few days, and modern technology makes weapons of mass destruction a viable terrorist tool. You suggest there is nothing new about terrorism, even that terrorist tactics have always been a normal part of political discourse. The fundamental error follows from an egalitarianism perspective, and demonstrates how; 1) diplomacy becomes terrorism 2) terrorism becomes due process and 3) due process becomes chaos. Thankfully the world is neither suited to egalitarianism or anarchy, the former leading to the latter. Anarchists and nihilists normalize terrorism by offering a false dichotomy. There is always political alternative to terrorism, so there has never been a justification. It follows from the concept of freedom that a rule of terror deposes truth i.e. the truth sets people free. Only in a world where ideology deposes truth with absolute conviction and/or certainty can terrorism be justified.

dk

I agree, peaceful protest and persuasion are normally the best remedy for the ills social inequalities produce. The exception being the institutional systematic deprivation, mutilation and/or genocide of people by some totalitarian regime.

dk

If you remember a few years ago the US faced a similar delema when 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez washed up on a Florida beach with his dead mother. The boy was return to Cuba and his father after being taken at gunpoint from relatives in Miami.

Ironically it was in the Islamic Ottoman Empire that last took young boys in raids on Christian villages for Eunuchs. The boys were castrated, converted and trained as elite troupes, harem guards, bureaucrats and personal guards by sultans. It’s hard to believe secular Europe contemplates taking children from Islamic parents.

avalanche:ix

modesty? do you even KNOW what we're discussing here? FULL body covering, leaving only the eyes open. this completely destroys the possiblity of body language and recognizability. if students can't wear baseball caps in class, then they can't wear chadors either. has nothing to do with religion, simply to do with functionality within a class room, you ridiculous uber political correct monkey.


only because people like you let it.


not really. i'm sure that for you it was, but the rest of the world was shocked for a few days, then went on with their lives.


no, it brought *your* economy to a practical stop for a few days.


really? then why has no terrorist in the history of the planet ever used them? either they're not using them for some really weird reason, or they don't have the ability to make or deploy them.
you really are paranoid. how cute.



you should look at some egatilarian societies which are quite a bit more succesful than yours.



nihilists just realize it's all irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, if there is such a thing.


nobody claimed there was you silly boy. stop taking terrorism so serious, if you took it any more seriously your head would explode. on it's own.

after reading your little rant, i can only confirm that indeed, you are paranoid. not to mention slightly off balance.

oooh the terrorists are coming! run!

dk

avalanche:ix: only because people like you let it.
dk: You have lost a grip on reality, the WTC cost NYC around $35billion, insurance for property/casualty around $300billion, the market costs rang up in the 10s of trillions, and the ripple affects inestimable. It might surprise you but we really do live in a world economy, so 9-11 affected every nation on the planet.

avalanche:ix

you're pretty gung-ho paranoid, aren't you?

Ovazor

The case with the traditionalist Somali sending their children perceived to have become too westernised to be re-educated is different from the Elian case. With the Somali, the parents living in Europe are sending their children away to relatives. Moreover, the children are often sent there against their will as a punishment when they rebel against the parental authority. Sometimes parents want to "protect" their daughter who wants to date a boy from the host country. Of course, in many cases it is simply about caring parents sending their children to schools they deen the best for their future.

This does present a dilemma: On the other hand, there is certainly nothing wrong in sending children to schools abroad. On the other hand, this should not happen as a punishment and especially not against the will of the child.

If the child has a refugee status things get even more complicated for then the host country has pledged to protect the person in question. What should the child-protection officals do if the parents are going to send the child to relatives in a country which is not considered safe?

dk

If the parents are refugees, then it's a contradiction for them to send their kids back, they should all go home. A refugee that sends their kids back to the homeland should loose their refugee status.

Child rights and child-protection laws often puts bureacrats between parents and children leaving the child in a state of limbo. Abuses occur when a child's development and future is literally held hostage to events beyond anyone's control.