Breaking News - Major Terrorist Attack In Oslo, Norway

[Martinus]

I did count Danes and Norwegians, because the Nazi occupation was relatively brief... I guess if I'm counting Norway with its puppet government, it might not be fair to discount Switzerland.

The Norwegians kept a government in exile during the German occupation, so should count.  Likewise, the Danish government continued to exist during the war, though Parliament didn't meet between Aug '43 and May 1945 (a period of German martial law, though no replacement government).

By that token, both Polish and French government existed through the WW2.

[grumbler]

By that token, both Polish and French government existed through the WW2.

The Polish government, yes.  The French government, no.

[Drakken]

The Polish government, yes.  The French government, no.

The French Vichy government was the legitimate government. Petain got called in before the capitulation.

[Tamas]

But the United States, with the possible exception of the United Kingdom, does have a longer history of democracy, and a more "sacred" approach to rights than any European country, specifically freedom of speech and freedom of (and from) religion.

You are quite wrong especially about the inviolable rights - in fact the UK is unique in that it does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined (and unlike the US, our constitutions are quite long and have many more rights enshrined in them than the US one for example). We do see freedom of speech and freedom of religion somewhat differently than you, but that's ignorant to believe this is because we do not have the concept of "sacred" rights.

We may have the concept, but the actual acceptance of those in society as a whole? Surely not. I know Hungary doesn't and by that account I am fairly certain about Poland as well.

Do you know where you can measure this? The right wing nutcases. Our right wingers often not only want a firm hand authocratic, state capitalist (or downright communist) state, but a return to some golden age of kingdoms or similar ezoretic bullshit.
The American whackos, -almost all I think- translate their bigotry and racism into a stalwart defense of their Constitution, or at least their interpretation of it.

[grumbler]

The French Vichy government was the legitimate government. Petain got called in before the capitulation.

The French Vichy government didn't last out the war.  It was replaced before war's end (unlike Poland's, which was replaced after the end of the war).

Not that France was in the running anyway - they have had five republics, two empires, and two monarchies in power since the establishment of the US, and at least five of those changes in government were discontinuous.

[Martinus]

The American whackos, -almost all I think- translate their bigotry and racism into a stalwart defense of their Constitution, or at least their interpretation of it.

Not really. They pick and choose the parts of their Constitution they like, but are pretty happy to ignore the ones they don't. DOMA, anti-abortion movement, Christianization of public institutions, opposition to mosque building, attempts to criminalize flag burning etc. all show they do not regard other people's "sacred rights" highly.

And conversely, our own right wingers are perfectly happy to cry foul and complain when their constitutional rights are being violated when they are told they can't spout bullshit about killing Jews, gypsies and gays.

Everything looks nice from the distance. Everything looks ugly when magnified.

Edit: The only difference is that American conservatives do not have the kings and knights of old to harken back to, so they mythologise the founding fathers and the minutemen, the Tea Party and the "Constitution" (however one that seems to have preciously little to do with the written document that forms the basis of the US government, if you actually hear what these people are saying, e.g. about the US being a "Christian nation under God as written in the Constitution" ).

[Viking]

BTW, just to make it official,

I am not Fjordman.

[Slargos]

BTW, just to make it official,

I am not Fjordman.

Me neither.

[Viking]

BTW, just to make it official,

I am not Fjordman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fjordman

he is a anti-islamist blogger and writer that is my age, went to my university and lives in my town and has been associated with ABB by ABB's idiotic unabomber - cut and paste manifesto.

His name is not being released by the media (fortunately for him).

[The Brain]

There was a military coup in Sweden in 1809 that removed Gustav IV Adolf and resulted in a new constitution.

[Solmyr]

So what happens when you expect to wear a hat in your passport photograph, demand that every restaurant carry shellfish to satisfy your needs, demand service in your particular language, and marry someone half your age when you are 20?

What's the big deal about wearing a hat in a passport photo? If the face is still visible and the person wears a hat every day as part of their religious conviction, wearing the hat in the photo seems potentially more accurate for identification purposes. So I don't see any reason to make an issue of it. Go ahead and wear the hat.

You can eat whatever you want, but you don't get to tell people what to sell in their restaurants. They might want to carry shellfish to court your business, but that's up to them. On the other hand, if you're dealing with a large institution of some sort that is responsible for feeding you (prison, the army, at a remote mining camp etc) then it's reasonable to demand that your dietary restrictions are taken into account (as I believe they are).

As for service in your language, it's not about you demanding it, it's about society respecting it. If there are significant groups of people who are better served in another language it makes sense to try to do so. This isn't controversial in Canada at all - at least not in implementation - when you go to a service canada office you can be served in French or English (as per the law). In addtion, there are signs advicing you if service is available in any other language (though you may have to wait longer until the relevant person is freed up). If your ability with the official languages are so limited that you can't be served in them, there are telephone translators available. So really, it's the inverse of how you posit the question: it's not about demanding anything, it's about the government serving the population to the best of it's ability, including in other languages where necessary. For private institutions, it's the same thing - it's often good customer service (though subject to customer service analysis). It's not uncommon at all, for example, to see banks with signs saying "service available in [Mandarin/ Tagalog/ Hindi/ Spanish/ whatever]" in their windows. Again, it's not about people demanding anything - it's about how best to service your customers.

Marrying someone who's 10 years old is not allowable, because children cannot give consent to that sort of thing. But if you want to marry an 18 year old when you're 70 because that's your culture, that's alright as long everybody involved consents.

... none of those questions were tricky at all 

See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.

[Viking]

BTW, just to make it official,

I am not Fjordman.

Me neither.

Well do'h, you don't know norwegian.

[Slargos]

BTW, just to make it official,

I am not Fjordman.

Me neither.

Well do'h, you don't know norwegian.

No. That's right.

I don't.

[DGuller]

See, that's where we disagree. IMO, if you move to live in a culturally different society, you are expected to adapt to it, not the other way around. Thus, you are expected to learn the official language of the country you live in, and if there are laws mandating wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing in a certain situation, you are expected to follow them instead of getting special treatment.

I agree with Solmyr.  There is nothing wrong with keeping some parts of your culture, but where the two cultures clash and require special accomodation, the host culture wins.  It's simple, and it's fair.  The host didn't beg you to come, typically you beg the hosts to let you come.

[Slargos]

Is that a smug smile on his face?

I wonder what goes through the minds of the guys who's driving this fucker. They don't look particularly happy.