Riot in France

[viocjit]

Riot erupts in French town as veiled woman claims police brutality
A riot erupted in a town near Paris on Friday night after police stopped and charged a woman wearing the Islamic face-covering veil. Residents accused police of using violence against the woman's family, while police unions say her husband attacked an officer.

Source to read more (RFI [Mainstream French Radio]) : //http://www.english.rfi.fr/france/20130720-riot-erupts-french-town-veiled-woman-claims-police-brutality

Others sources in English language :
1.The time of Israel (Jewish media) : //http://www.timesofisrael.com/5-injured-in-clashes-at-burka-riot-outside-paris/
2.Galliawatch (French nationalist blog) : //http://galliawatch.blogspot.fr/2013/07/muslim-arrested-hundreds-riot.html
3.If you have another source share this with us please.

Sources in French language :
1.RFI (Mainstream French Radio) : //http://www.rfi.fr/france/20130720-trappes-voile-islamique-incidents-valls
2.RTL (Mainstream French Radio) : //http://www.rtl.fr/actualites/info/article/trappes-une-nuit-emprunte-de-violences-7763284564
3.Yahoo France (You know what is it) : //http://fr.news.yahoo.com/trappes-tensions-devant-commissariat-partie-nuit-050759973.html
4.Al Kanz (Muslim media) : //http://www.al-kanz.org/2013/07/20/trappes-temoignage/
5.CCIF (Muslim media) : //http://www.islamophobie.net/articles/2013/07/20/femme-voilee-trappes-police-violence
6.Ajib (Muslim media) : //http://www.ajib.fr/2013/07/trappes-interpellation/
7.Islamisme.fr (Right wing) : //http://www.islamisme.fr/scenes-de-guerilla-urbaine-a-trappes-78-des-centaines-dindividus-hostiles-devant-le-commissariat/
8.Riposte Laïque (Right wing) : //http://ripostelaique.com/un-ramadan-guerrier-a-trappes-pendant-que-les-politiques-minimisent.html
9.Défrancisation (Right wing) : //http://www.defrancisation.com/trappes-plus-de-200-musulmans-armes-prets-a-attaquer-le-commissariat-de-police/
10.There are already many sources.

[stromboli]

And a fun time was had by all.........

[Colanth]

I'm not commenting on the rightness or wrongness of the law, but both the woman and her husband were probably fully aware that she was violating the law.  If they don't like the law in the country they emigrated to, why don't they emigrate to a country whose laws they agree with?  Violating the law isn't the answer.  (Or did they forget that they LOST the Battle of Tours?)

[Jack89]

At first glance, it seems that the rioting was bit of an overreaction.  Even so, I've always thought that this was an oppressive law. A clear violation of individual rights.

[Colanth]

There's a sign on the door of my bank that one must remove brimmed hats and sunglasses before entering.  Is that also a violation of civil rights?  Some things are obvious, some are just too stupid to write legal exceptions for.  Women in French society don't normally cover their faces in public.  If one doesn't want to live in French society, one shouldn't live in France.  (And that falls into both of the above classes.)  People who want the benefits of Western society while living in the Middle East sociologically just don't have that right.

[Jack89]

There's a sign on the door of my bank that one must remove brimmed hats and sunglasses before entering.  Is that also a violation of civil rights?  Some things are obvious, some are just too stupid to write legal exceptions for.  Women in French society don't normally cover their faces in public.  If one doesn't want to live in French society, one shouldn't live in France.  (And that falls into both of the above classes.)  People who want the benefits of Western society while living in the Middle East sociologically just don't have that right.

So if you don't conform to the current societal norms, get the hell out?  That's not really in the spirit of individual and civil rights.

[Youssuf Ramadan]

There's a sign on the door of my bank that one must remove brimmed hats and sunglasses before entering.  Is that also a violation of civil rights?  Some things are obvious, some are just too stupid to write legal exceptions for.  Women in French society don't normally cover their faces in public.  If one doesn't want to live in French society, one shouldn't live in France.  (And that falls into both of the above classes.)  People who want the benefits of Western society while living in the Middle East sociologically just don't have that right.

So if you don't conform to the current societal norms, get the hell out?  That's not really in the spirit of individual and civil rights.

Some societal norms have very good reasons for existing and are enshrined in laws, some lend themselves more to flexibility....

[Plu]

While on the one hand the law seems like (and is) a violation of both individual rights and specifically targeted against a religion, I'm not opposed to a rule that requires people to have their faces revealed when in public. It's both annoying and unsettling to see people walking around with their entire face covered. Makes you feel like they have something to hide.

I wonder how long it'd take before someone confronted you about always wearing a motorcycle helmet with a closed and blacked out visor in public.

[Colanth]

There's a sign on the door of my bank that one must remove brimmed hats and sunglasses before entering.  Is that also a violation of civil rights?  Some things are obvious, some are just too stupid to write legal exceptions for.  Women in French society don't normally cover their faces in public.  If one doesn't want to live in French society, one shouldn't live in France.  (And that falls into both of the above classes.)  People who want the benefits of Western society while living in the Middle East sociologically just don't have that right.

So if you don't conform to the current societal norms, get the hell out?  That's not really in the spirit of individual and civil rights.

The spirit of individual and civil rights is to CONFORM to social norms (which include protection of individual and civil rights).  The one right you DON'T have is depriving ME of MY rights - which is what Muslim extremists in a lot of Western countries are doing now.

It's really simple - making you pay for the product you want isn't depriving you of rights.  Making you conform to the norms of a society from which you want benefits isn't depriving you of rights.  If you don't want to pay, do without the product.  If you don't want to conform, do without the benefits.  Making you get out is a lot nicer than making a law that you're no longer protected by the law.

[Jack89]

There's a sign on the door of my bank that one must remove brimmed hats and sunglasses before entering.  Is that also a violation of civil rights?  Some things are obvious, some are just too stupid to write legal exceptions for.  Women in French society don't normally cover their faces in public.  If one doesn't want to live in French society, one shouldn't live in France.  (And that falls into both of the above classes.)  People who want the benefits of Western society while living in the Middle East sociologically just don't have that right.

So if you don't conform to the current societal norms, get the hell out?  That's not really in the spirit of individual and civil rights.

Some societal norms have very good reasons for existing and are enshrined in laws, some lend themselves more to flexibility....

Of course.  And others are oppressive.  Consider the laws in some countries that requires the wearing of veils.  In those countries, the same attitude exits.  If you don't like it, get out, or go to jail.

[Plu]

Actually in most of those countries, "get out" is not a supported option. They probably realise too many people would use it. Usually the options are "swallow it" and "rot in jail for life".

[Colanth]

And most of the people subject to those laws think they're a good thing.  If we somehow took over those countries and made it illegal to wear veils, most of the women in them would consider it an intrusion on their right to wear veils.

[Brian37]

I'm not commenting on the rightness or wrongness of the law, but both the woman and her husband were probably fully aware that she was violating the law.  If they don't like the law in the country they emigrated to, why don't they emigrate to a country whose laws they agree with?  Violating the law isn't the answer.  (Or did they forget that they LOST the Battle of Tours?)

No, that is bullshit, that would be like saying "If you don't like being a slave go back to Africa".

No, if they don't like the law, I agree work within the law, and compete in the political process to change it. Just like pot smoking, idiots who get arrested for it say "IT SHOULD BE LEGAL" , and I say, until then you are a stupid fuck for possessing it.

Now, where I do blame this man is his cultural superstition. I think safety over rides your religious rituals and ID is a very basic thing.

I blame them for living in the past and for any assault on law inforcement, but I don't say "If you don't like it leave". You do know that in America lots of Christians say that about atheists.

[viocjit]

Muslims made a video only available in French called "Trappes , police , nikab , émeute , les médias vous mentent , voici ce qui s'est réellement passé [Trappes , police , niqab , riot , the medias lie to you , here what's really happened] : youtube.com/watch?v=9Wb93wIZp7M

Resume (this resume is only about the arrestation) : They said that a woman with her husband and her child of four month had a control of identity (all the family had this control of identity) by police officers (when that happen you must show your "carte national d'identité" or national identity card [ID] in English language). They collaborated after the police said somethings like "ici t'est en France [Here you're in France]" , "tenue de chauve-souris ce n'est pas le carnaval" [Clothes of bat this is not the carnaval]. The mother explain that she're not OK about what they said , a police officer pushed her (the speaker don't know exactly what's happened because he said that he can't explain what's happened). The daughter take part in this conflict and said something like "vous ne touchez pas à ma mère" [Don't touch my mother]. After they tell others violence commited by police officers. They busted the couple (the speakers tell that the couple don't beat the police officers).

Personal think : They believe maybe really what they say or they practise the taqiyya (Arabic : ???? ).
What is it ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya
For me theirs version is probably untrue. I already saw muslims insult the police and fight with them (it was not in Trappes).
After the muslims accuse the police to beat them so then that they are those who started the battle , this is a classic.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Clearly the law is aimed at the religion.  Motorcyclists drive masked all the time with no harassment.