Rucksackfranzose

Please tell me you wrote this without thinking it trough. You surely can't be serious?

Has a lot to do with the manufacturer, including Oxford-AstraZenica, not providing enough vaccine at the agreed time. Has much more to do with empty promises towards European governments and the EU from pharmaceutical industry than with the NHS being so efficient.

Don't know whether this belongs here or in the Schland-thread, still decided to post it as it's amusing,. When Rummenigge was asked , what he considers his biggest failure during an interview with German paper Münchner Merkur, he responded: "Signing Klinsmann as a manager!"

More surprised that vaccine skepticism in France is higher than in Germany to be honest. Expected it to be the highest in Germany since anti-vaxxers have a longstanding tradition here and even somewhat of a lobby, with a certain part of inhabitants very skeptical towards what they call school-medicine, which is a derogative expression for the scientific verifiable medicine.

Ironic, considering how many UK workers were celebrating Brexit and the "sovereignty" that came with it. http://www.independant.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-consumer-worker-protections-brexit-b1783331.html

So you want a British example? How about the children working under catastrophic conditions in factories during Manchester capitalism? Worded my response poorly, what I meant is: We as humans, of all nationalities by the way, tend to overrate the difficulties we face ourselves and to underrate difiiculties those before our time lived through. As unconvinient as the current situation for children ever might be it's a joke compared with the problems former generations had, so stay realistic and do not exaggerate that enormously.

Yes, there has. In 1944 pupils in Germany left school earlier, to join the army, so they didn't not only sacrifice their future but also potentially their lifes. Also a lot of children in developing countries have to sacrifice their childhood to help their families to survive, the world doesn't consist of Britain only.

To be fair, Matondo hardly set the league on fire whenever he played for Schalke. He's going to Stoke, second tier is more suited to his lack of talent.

Give him mine, since I got issues to take screenshots me taking part is dispensable.

Well, Charlie Hebdo is a private company so I'm not sure if and to which degree they share the anti-religious stance that the government and waste parts of the society hold. Also Jews are a very tricky topic as their discrimination and marginalisation almost culminated in their extinction in a holocaust.

Where is the blasphemy in falsely accusing someone? The cartoonist insinuated falsely said person a crime, which actually is against the law in contrast to blasphemy. What is the significance of his religion in this context?

Hope that will taste as good as it sounds. Laß es Dir schmecken.

Nobody said or thought something that stupid, though. We discussed the French occurrence, where discussingthese cartoons clearly wasn't a sign of this mind set, though. On a side note murder is murder, whether the victim is islamophobic or not. And if you don't like the right of free speech to include blasphemous utterances your out of place in Europe, regardless of your ethnicity. Murder is against the law here, islamophobia and blasphemy aren't, rightfully so by the way.

I don't subscribe to the point of view I'm talking about now. Still could imagine that there's or the government suppose there is a "now more than ever"-mentality over this beheading. In the sense of them wanting to send the message they won't back down from this integral part of their society whatever costs it may take. As said don't subscribe to that but can see a logic attitude behind this behavior.

Secularism isn't neutrality, to be secular in a French sense means to be anti-religious. From this point of view banning religious garment is absolutely fine, and again it doesn't affect Muslims only.

Again France is a secular country, where wearing religious garment isn't expected. If you are in Saudi Arabia and decide to drink alcohol in the public, you face consequences and everybody expect you not to whine about, if you live in France and decide to wear religious garment the same applies surely..

Hijabs are only forbidden in schools and hospitals in France, where nuns aren't allowed to wear their habits and Jews are banned from wearing the kippah. So that's absolutely not islamophobic, if anything it's religiophobic. They're is no possible reason for allowing Muslims something(to wear religious clothes) when Christians and Jews aren't allowed to do the same.

Than scrap not welcome and substitute it with undesirable, if that's the better way to put it.

It isn't racist at all. I'm fully aware that being French and Muslim is as possible as being of European origin and Muslim. Where in hell is written you can't be citizen of a country and still don't be welcome? I wouldn't say for example Neo-Nazis are welcome, whether they're German or of any other nationality doesn't matter. The existence of preventive detention is a good example for the existence of persons that aren't welcome in the respective society regardless of their nationality.

Nobody tried to provoke them. European countries are secular, if some Muslims can't accept this, they've no business here and aren't welcome.

How has Fuchs proven the board wrong? It was him who wanted to leave, while the board tried their best to convince him to stay. Not like they didn't want him anymore, get over the fact that Leicester got more money to spent than Schalke.

@Tommy out of curiosity: Why did you delete this Hunt/Bond status?

Not as bad as I originally feared.

Currently he's permanently employed. That never prevented Schalke, or any other club, from sacking their managers, though. Can absolutely imagine Schalke employing a third manager this year, if they don't improve massively the next month.