This is how you do it right

This is how you do it right.

France is also doing it ""right"". ;-DDDD

nice

Good.
It's better to do it early, because even with only a couple of thousand, you'll probably hear massive whining and see corresponding cuckery of your politicians as they decide not to pass the law.

Thats in France.

That's a good time to pass the ban. Nip that shit in the bud.

Good work Latvia, keep it up.

>author trying this hard to make it sound like a bad thing
Stopping the cancer before it even starts

Keep it up Edgars

Nipping it in the bud is literally the only way.

Acting like this is wrong is acting like the results of muh diversity isn't shitting in our face every day.

good job gundars

...

Banning the veil or not has nothing to do with islamization, or containing cancer, Turkey had a secular elite that brutally suppressed Muslims until 80s and continued to suppressed the extreme bunch until mid 2000s. Check the map posted here, veil is still half banned but islamist take over the country, moreover islamist take over the country DURING the full time ban. If latvia ever comes to 1st world level in propserity and demand cheap labor force, no muslim will refuse to step in "because they can't weir weil", look how the radical gladly live in the land of kuffar and drugs and sex and alcohol. They don't give a fuck

It is a demographical problem, Latvia has no muslim minority, it is basically a circlejerk move, and if they ever get one, banning veil will not be a "counter measure" as you think of it.

The real issue would be to how to re educate the muslims to give up on their radical views, no amount of islamic bans in france for example will prevent radicalization. Banning stuff tends to not work, ironic many muh freedom americans itt seem to forgot about that.

Regardless, latvia has no problems about radicalization, its just a circlejerk to keep right wing merry.

Roach, how do you even have internet right now? Or are you part of the new paid propaganda team?

When you attack the argument and not the man, you get free internet here

its actually a pretty good countermeasure, as it puts our country as xenophobic and anti-islamic, which, in turn, can affect the type of people who come here.

In reality, our population is very welcoming to refugees. For example, if there were sizable Ukrainians coming here, we would see as good thing for they hate russians too and are hardworking peope.

Okay, I'll play ball. You mention that it would be better to "educate the muslims to give up on their radical values", but to me, that seems like even more of a circlejerk. When has that ever worked? I'm not even being facetious, I'm actually asking. When has a country with a radicalized muslim population ever successfully educated them out of existence, and created a well integrated population?

They need to ban the Hijab as well.

Best solution is to round them up into camps, starting with you roaches.

this mudslimes are immune to education.

I really doubt it, xenophobia and anti islam can work if you put anti immigration quotas, if you put tariffs, if you remove welfare from refugees-immigrants etc. If you have relaxed labor-immigration laws, if you have a demand for cheap labor, no amount of islamaphobia will work.

For example take a look at the Somalians in Denmark, they migrated out ONLY when the goverment removed their welfare. Again I'll repeat myself, average muslims is a hypocrate who acts according to his economical interest, most wouldn't leave the land of the infidel kuffar and live in their pious precious muslimistans even if say the french goverment forced them to drink wine.

For the case of latvia I doubt banning or allowing wile will have any negative or positive effect

It worked for Turkey, partially, I'm a second generation atheist, we went from praising allah to open atheism. Now while atheist are a minority majority of the muslims here do not take their religion seriously, there was a recent survey that majority of AKP voters did not wanted sharia themselves.I think the problem is fucked up, I highly suspect anyone in the mid 60s expected such a radicalization but muslims can assimilate, either to a level where they don't take religion seriously, or to a level where they are openly atheist.

I'm not saying it will be efficient completly, but it will be far more efficient than bannig it, again muslims from the most extreme to the one who takes it lightly, have absolutely no problem of living under such bans If anything the bans in turkey only made them more radical and hostile towards seculars

Not a muslim myself, you are preaching to the choir

I g2g sorry for not repsonding back but please
Take a look at the picture related, 12% is still very high for me, maybe due to the recent akp goverment but I wonder how many of the 12% drink&whore at the side.

Regardless, I would make a bold prediction and state that %12 is a far lower number than if one did the same survey in molembek or suburbs of paris. If Turkey can be down to %12, if ex soviet countries can go even lower, than I think you can do the same to other muslims.

I doubt average turk is far more intelligent than average berber or average arab.

Partially, yes. I've been to Turkey a few times (a few years ago, granted), and I saw that most people went about their day during the call to prayer, women were unveiled, etc. However, a partial solution to the problem just produces delayed violence instead of immediate, as we are currently seeing. Furthermore, why do Muslim migrants have any right to accommodation in Europe? Education to stamp out radicalism in traditionally Islamic countries/regions is one thing. For better or for worse, they are tied to the land and that might be a good option. But why in Europe? This is not an indigenous European issue, and I would sooner see a Europe free of Islam than a "partial solution" that would only lead to more violence. Look at France. Years of living with an unassimilated diaspora outside their cities is starting to have consequences.

...