Swimming pools in France free of Burkinis

[Dukasaur]

Currently the USA is banning immigrants from the country based on nationality, rather than behaviour or qualifications, France doesn't.

Har, maybe you should! You and betko are blabbing about giving up liberties for safety because of all the terrorist attacks. How about keeping people out coming from countries that you've been a party to demolishing in one way or another. Plenty of those people have a grudge (with good reason in some cases, not condoning terrorism, just trying to see things from another's POV) and are primed and ready to be recruited to get some payback.

See, usually I agree with things you say, but not on this.

To me, the thing with Muslim refugees is exactly analogous to my own history. When my parents and I came to Canada, the Cold War was at its peak, and the automatic assumption was that anyone escaping from a Communist country was given asylum. Not exactly "no questions asked" but "relatively few questions asked."

To me, that's the rational viewpoint. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. There are always exceptions, but that's the starting assumption until proven otherwise. If we are at war with the Taliban and you are fleeing the Taliban then my starting position is that you're on our side. You might turn out not to be, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. For now, you're in.

My parents and I turned out to be loyal and productive Canadian citizens. Of course, the government had no way of knowing we would be when they let us in. They made the only reasonable and humane assumption and gave us the benefit of the doubt. The dea that one is innocent unless and until proven guilty is, to me, one of the core ideas that separates Western democracies from more evil regimes.

It turned out, on the same plane as my mother there was a man who later did turn out to be a KGB spy. That does happen. That man got a good job with IBM and sold computer secrets to the Russians and probably did a significant amount of damage. But would it have been rational or reasonable to send back the whole planeload of 120 or 150 people or whatever it was, on the grounds that one of them might be a spy? My mother was also on the plane, and she worked hard all her life, and in both professional and volunteer capacities has contributed a lot to her community. I don't know the histories of most of those 120 or more people. Probably some of them turned out to be scumbags and criminals, but I'll gladly wager that most of them turned out to be loyal and productive citizens.

There are always enemy agents inserted into refugee flows. There were quite a few Nazi spies that slipped into the general flow of refugees from the Continent to England in 1940. Most were stopped by routine security checks right off the hop; others were rooted out later. Would you have denied all those people passage because of the chance that some were enemy agents?

The flow of refugees to Europe in this decade has been numerically greater than either the flow of refugees to England in 1940 or the flow of refugees from Warsaw Pact nations to Nato nations in 1960. If the percentages are similar and the absolute numbers of refugees are greater, then of course the absolute numbers of refugees among them is larger also. Still, the logic does not change. It is neither morally, nor economically, not legally, logical to shut out vast numbers of potential friends because hidden among them is a smaller number of potential enemies. It does make sense to get better at asking questions, but with facial recognition software and stuff we are miles ahead of where we were in 1940 or 1960 in terms of being able to find the bad apples in the basket.

I don't disagree with most of the rest of what you said, so I won't bother with point-by-point on the rest of the post. Islam is a dangerous and expansionist movement, but it does not make sense to assume that everyone who is a Muslim is bent on world domination. Again, it's a analogous with Communism in the '60s. Communism was a dangerous and expansionist movement, but the vast majority of ordinary rank-and-file Communists didn't want to run your life. They were just ordinary people trying to live their life and conforming to the norms of the place where they lived. Move them to a different place, and they would eventually conform to different norms.

[waauw]

Say whatever you want, but the only moment I will take media reports above personal experience is if they can show some statistics or an interview with respectable field authorities. Reported anecdotal evidence means nothing to me but media sensation.

But your personal anecdotal evidence is solid?

With my own experiences I have a better grip of probability and frequency. With anecdotal media reports less so. Besides it's human nature to value personal experience highly.

Being a tourist is a completely different experience to actually living somewhere.

True, but then again. If you've ever been to the provincial cities and towns of France you'd realise they don't act any different with tourists as they do with other locals. They just talk and go about as they do with everyone. They're very frank in attitude. Only Paris and the hugely popular tourism destinations are different.

[mrswdk]

It's still different. If you're a tourist your interactions with 99% of those people won't go beyond meeting cashiers, bartenders etc. or walking past people in the street. When you live somewhere you have sustained relationships with the same people day after day, and end up interacting with institutions (particularly government ones) that you'll only have cause to interact with if you're a resident.

Plus oppressive regimes generally tend to put the riot batons and torture chambers away whenever they have visitors, to project a friendly image to the outside world. If you go to North Korea for a tour you won't see any gulags or firing squads, but that doesn't mean they don't have them.

[waauw]

It's still different. If you're a tourist your interactions with 99% of those people won't go beyond meeting cashiers, bartenders etc. or walking past people in the street. When you live somewhere you have sustained relationships with the same people day after day, and end up interacting with institutions (particularly government ones) that you'll only have cause to interact with if you're a resident.

Plus oppressive regimes generally tend to put the riot batons and torture chambers away whenever they have visitors, to project a friendly image to the outside world. If you go to North Korea for a tour you won't see any gulags or firing squads, but that doesn't mean they don't have them.

I used to work as a door-to-door salesman for a while after attaining my degree, sales is always a plus on a CV. And believe me during my time as a salesman I walked through a lot of neighbourhoods and talked to a lot of people. Most racism I encountered never came from sustained relationships, nor from government institutions. It's usually an individual citizen venting himself against an innocent passersby. The cashiers, bartenders and casual pedestrians are the majority of all racism in my experience. Those short encounters are maybe 80% of all racism.

[mrswdk]

Exactly. In a more accepting country (e.g. China, UK) you have to scratch beneath the surface to find a racist. Whereas in France, it is bubbling away on the surface, ready to be thrown in the face of an innocent Muslim or Asian by strangers who just feel like attacking them.

[riskllama]

aasian people have no business going to bars, waauw.

[waauw]

aasian people have no business going to bars, waauw.

I'm so jealous of people who don't become red every time they drink

[mrswdk]

Only options are to find someone who goes even redder than you (so that you look pale in comparison) and/or embrace your metro side and start wearing foundation. If people question you just tell them Stromae does it, then they'll think you're way cool.

[mrswdk]

Maybe French people just hate beachgoers in general:

Corsica police link beach shooting with row over nudism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40904779

[patches70]

Duk, we don't have to agree, it's fine if we don't. I don't think that your situation you described is analogous as the tide of Islam rushing into Europe fleeing destruction and chaos that European countries have participated in sowing.

Imagine, when you came from wherever it was you came from (where was that exactly?) and went to Canada, I'm sure there was a bit of a culture shock. Things like, fully stocked grocery shelves. Canada seemed a veritable land of plenty. I even bet the Canadians looked a lot like you and your family looked.

Now, imagine if you'd come from a culture where alcohol is taboo, where women had to be covered head to toe. From a culture that told you since your birth that if you'd ever do or allow such things would endanger your soul to the pits of Hell. You enter Canada and you seem women in shorts, skirts. Swimming pools where men and women wearing nearly nothing cavorting together without chaperones. Bars on many streets. People drinking alcohol with dinner and God forbid seeing a drunken group of people meandering along the street on the way to the next bar.
Imagine going to the store with women working there. Imagine women telling you what you have to do, where to go. Imagine going to a job interview and it's a woman who is going to do the interviewing and will also be the one who determines if you get the job or not.
Imagine people openly saying they don't believe in God. People openly scorning churches, religion and no one reprimands them and others praising them.
Imagine all the people around you that look so different, believe so different than what you were taught (with the lash in some cases) would endanger your very immortal soul. None of these new people would appear anything close to "submitting" such as Islam teaches. You would see prideful people, immoral people, indecent people and all their institutions, customs, laws and culture all immoral, indecent and frankly evil from the POV you'd been taught all your life.

Sure, some might rejoice, Free at last, Free at last upon realizing such a thing. But many would be much harder pressed to assimilate, to understand, to comprehend because the cultures are so vastly different.
Wherever you came from, Duk, you had a lot more in common with the Canadians than Islamist would have in common with those same Canadians. This makes it immensely easier for you to adapt to your new environment.
I'm not saying no muslims can't adapt, I'm saying the success rate at such adaptation is vastly lower because of the culture differences.
That's why the Islamic populations upon coming to these western countries always seem to all congregate together with other followers of Islam to form large communities where they all share the same culture amid a sea of foreign views and ideas that are so vastly different than what they are used to. These Islamic blocs don't assimilate, they can't because they keep surrounding themselves with that they know, what they are familiar with.

It's a natural human reaction. It's not surprising.

The European countries cannot keep taking in the numbers of people they are and have any hope of those people assimilating to their new host country. They'll turn these European countries into what they've always been familiar with. When the Western countries try to force these people to assimilate (such as is the case with the Burkini stuff, like banning burkini's from the beach and such), then it only serves to illustrate and bring into being the "Us vs Them" aspect which further leads to less assimilation, more distance between the two cultures. When (not if) it goes too far violence is inevitable because ultimately the two cultures can't coexist within the same space.

They can coexist in the world, the world is plenty big enough.

And one last thing to consider. Imagine a country, doesn't have to be Islamic, just any country as a thought experiment. Now imagine this country with roughly a tiny percentage of just unspeakably evil pieces of shit who have zero problems with murdering, pillaging and just overall thuggery. These thugs who have a propensity towards violence just take control. The "good" people start fleeing instead of banding together to drive out and destroy these evil POS.
How long will it take of all these good people leaving said imaginary country until all that's left is just a brutal people?

We do no favors to any nation by taking in their best people who have zero intention of ever returning to their home countries. You end up with severe brain drain in these countries which just serves to further impoverish and increase the misery of the people left in that country who are unable to flee.
What would happen to any country in the world if all the smartest, most moral, most industrious and upstanding people just leave to never return? The country they go to benefits, but the country they left is just that much more poorer. The people are the real wealth of nations, and when all the best people leave, all you got left is the worst who are unable or incapable of even acting or performing even the most basic skills which are needed by the people to make a country successful.


There are no solutions to these problems, there are only tradeoffs. If the Europeans want to continue demolishing nations in the Islamic world and then just take in 10's and 100's of thousands of the resulting refugees created, then there will be increased violent acts. With the numbers of people entering these European countries don't even know if they are getting the best and brightest these countries have to offer, which negates the benefits of systemically draining other nations of their best peoples. France participated in the destruction of Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and in the future will willingly go along with the US' plans for destroying Iran and completely ignore all the blowback already received for helping to destroy all those other countries.
Now I'm not siding with the Islamists, I'm only reminding that we got plenty of blood on our hands in all of this. That blood is going to be paid back one way or another.

Such is the human condition.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Yes... and as i said... wearing speedos is a torture for 90% of men. Those who don t want to wear speedos, just don t go to the swimming pool. Or if you re like alergic to chlore, you don t go to the swimming pool. Or whatever reason that makes you uncomfortable to go to the pool. When you go to the pool you also have to pass through this little pond that washes your feet... it s an obligation for all.
You are in a society with rules and laws, everybody has to follow them. This is a complete none issue. If that woman wants to go to a swimming pool with a burkini, she goes to a swimming pool that accepts burkinis. I mean if this is a real society issue, there has to be swimming pools accepting burkinis right?
So either there are way too little french muslims swimming in burkinis, either the pro burkini swimming pools exist, either they don't and you have a business oportunity. My guess is that there are a few swimming pools that accept burkinis, and that there are even fewer women willing to swim in a burkini.

In other words, this is just another story from the media depicted as a social concern, while it s just there to troll the readers about a none issue.

Quoting this so next time some gays can't get a cake or nietzsche tries to sneak across the border, you'll remember you're pretty 'murica right here and can't give us shit.

-TG

Do mexicans wear burkini's? Or are they just that fat you want them to wear burkini's? This is nothing like USA.
The USA has something called the Patriot Act, France doesn't. Currently the USA is banning immigrants from the country based on nationality, rather than behaviour or qualifications, France doesn't.

No, but everytime someone complains about the mexis speaking Spanish, or when someone tries to push through making English the official language (i.e. no Spanish), some euro parochial makes us out to be racist shitheads. I just think it's funny that with the recent wave of immigration to Europe, there's a similar backlash where they want assimilation, speaking the language, etc. Europeans really are a bunch of hypocritical turds.

No offense to betty, he's one of fave posters, and i liked his post.

-TG

[mrswdk]

@TG Euros are happy to let as many people in as want to come to Europe, they just reserve the right to behave heinously towards those people once they've arrived. Is that really too much to ask?

[TA1LGUNN3R]

I guess not.

-TG

[mrswdk]

They don't get to go conquer other places and abuse people there any more, but they've got to get their share of brownie bashing somehow.

[Symmetry]

Islam is a dangerous and expansionist movement, but it does not make sense to assume that everyone who is a Muslim is bent on world domination. Again, it's a analogous with Communism in the '60s. Communism was a dangerous and expansionist movement, but the vast majority of ordinary rank-and-file Communists didn't want to run your life. They were just ordinary people trying to live their life and conforming to the norms of the place where they lived. Move them to a different place, and they would eventually conform to different norms.

Look, I disagree, but the obvious question is- do you know many Muslims? Or any on a personal level for that matter? Your terms are pretty loaded- any religion can be dangerous, especially when for practitioners when there are people who think that there religion is dangerous. A lot of religions are expansionist too, after all, if you think you have the truth, why wouldn't you try to persuade others? Much like your own position.