Beachwear bull

There is international commentary on the dress of Muslims after a Muslim woman was forced to remove clothes at a beach in France.

Guardian: French police make woman remove clothing on Nice beach following burkini ban

Photographs have emerged of armed French police confronting a woman on a beach and making her remove some of her clothing as part of a controversial ban on the burkini.

NiceBurkini

The photographs emerged as a mother of two also told on Tuesday how she had been fined on the beach in nearby Cannes wearing leggings, a tunic and a headscarf.

Her ticket, seen by French news agency AFP, read that she was not wearing “an outfit respecting good morals and secularism”.

What is more oppressive, a person wearing clothes due to religious beliefs, or laws forcing dress standards on one religion?

Do they also ban Sikh turbans?  It is highly ironic that people are being forced by law to wear less on beaches in France “respecting good morals”

The Daily Beast asks Where’s the Outrage Over Nun Beachwear?

Go to any public beach in Italy and chances are you’ll eventually see a woman wearing a veil and long skirt. But she likely won’t be a Muslim in a version of the controversial burqini. She will almost certainly be a Catholic nun in her summer habit either watching children in her care or, God forbid, just enjoying some sun, which is considered a human right here in Italy, where the sea defines the majority of the borders.  

NunsBeach

Some Nuns are required by their religion to wear certain clothing. As far as I’m aware in most modern countries Muslim women wear what they want to wear.

How immoral is this:

president_reagan_and_queen_elizabeth_ii_1982

The French intolerance is being challenged and causing divisions up to Government level.

Guardian: France’s burkini ban row divides government as court mulls legality

France’s prime minister, Manuel Valls, has clashed with his education minister amid growing divisions in the government over the controversial burkini bans on some beaches.

The education minister, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, one of the Socialist government’s leading feminist voices, was highly critical of the growing number of burkini bans.

France’s highest court – the state council – began hearing arguments on Thursday from the Human Rights League and an anti-Islamophobia group, which are seeking to reverse a decision by the southern town of Villeneuve-Loubet, near Nice, to ban the full-body swimsuits.

Vallaud-Belkacem, who was born into a Muslim family in rural Morocco before moving to France aged four, told Europe 1 radio the proliferation of burkini bans was not welcome.

She said: “I think it’s a problem because it raises the question of our individual freedoms: how far will we go to check that an outfit is conforming to ‘good manners’?”

She warned that the bans had “let loose” verbal racism.

But moments after Vallaud-Belkacem spoke, her comments were flatly contradicted by Valls, who reiterated his support for mayors who have banned the garments.

Asked if the decrees amounted to racism, Valls said: “No, that’s a bad interpretation.” He said the full-body swimwear represented “the enslavement of women”.

Are Muslim women complaining of ‘enslavement’ in France due to what they wear? It is particularly ironic that authorities and politicians are trying to dictate what they can and can’t wear.

The various mayoral decrees do not explicitly use the word burkini; instead they ban “beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation”, citing reasons such as the need to protect public order, hygiene or French laws on secularism.

Laws on secularism that single out one religion?

beach-beanie-beautiful-beauty-boy-colors-favim-com-714571

I don’t know if he or she is Muslim or French. Should it matter?

xxofml9

Authorities in France claim that some beachwear is provocative, but their narrow intolerance is what is provocative.

And two things it has provoked is ridicule and protest. Deservedly.

197 Comments

  1. Nelly Smickers

     /  26th August 2016

    • Lol. The Pope would have ya guts for garters for that one Nellers XD
      [audio src="http://www.edwards.eclipse.co.uk/Dustbin.mp3" /]

      • Nelly Smickers

         /  26th August 2016

        Wayne reckins it’s the *perceived* modesty that’s the biggest problem. He reckins the *Burkini* doesn’t make her modest……it makes women not wearing one unmodest. This then amplifies the the view of radicalized moozies that any women not wearing one are whores or sluts just asking for it…..and therefore fair game 😡

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          Wayne is very perceptive.Muslims are disgusted by the blatant sexuality in the West.Especially the sexualizing of young children ,widespread in the U.S where they have all sorts of pageants for young girls usually mimicing adult behaviour including skimpy clothing ,make up and provocative displays

          • “Muslims are disgusted by the blatant sexuality in the West.” Quite right, but I’ve seen no Islamic commentary on “the [West’s] sexualizing of young children” (references sought) and this may be because Mohammed, that paragon of Muslim behaviour, married a child of six years of age. This set the standard, child marriage is not uncommon in the Islamic world, and it is now a problem for the Western world. The contestation of modesty Wayne refers to is a minor issue in the West, until Islam imposes its 7th century will on a modern world. Personally, I’d take the modern world over ANYTHING the Islamic world has to offer.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              My understanding is that Mohammed married her at 6 years of age,and consummated the marriage when she was 9.I also understand that Christians believe Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary.As an atheist I give neither fable any credence.Religious belief is usually determined by where you are born and what is imprinted on you from your environment and upbringing.It is the biggest cause of destruction in the world ,modern or historical.Settling for the lesser of two evils is hardly a compelling argument.

            • How can Blazer reconcile his/her statements:
              1. “Religious belief is usually determined by where you are born and what is imprinted on you from your environment and upbringing.”

              and

              2. “… I … realise that people are the SAME all over the world.”?

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              @Kit…you are getting desperate now…mankinds priorities,survival,food,water,shelter…..security…If I cut you ,you bleed,if you cut a muslim they do too.Simple enough for you.Context my man.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  26th August 2016

      Old wayne is a prat, as usual. He’s repeating things like a parrot with no idea of what he’s saying. I don’t believe that those are his own words, as they have more than one syllable and the grammar is correct-and I don’t believe that he has any idea of what they mean. He can’t even spell Muslim or know that it’s a proper name that takes a capital.

      If Muslims felt that way about revealing swimwear, they wouldn’t go on beaches. The burkini is a recent invention that allows modest Muslims to swim like anyone else.

      One must assume that wetsuits are permitted on French beaches. It’s insane that people are being forced to wear LESS at the beach. What would happen if a child who needed (as some do for medical reasons) to wear swimwear that covers their entire body went to the beach ? Would they be forced at gunpoint to strip ? What about divers in wetsuits ? Or people in lycra biking outfits ?

      Budgie smugglers, swimsuits that leave the bum bare, toplessness and nudity are all right but being covered up isn’t. France is making itself look ridiculous. Nowhere else in the world, surely, would people be forced by armed police to take clothing OFF on a beach..

      The French slogan about liberty, fraternity, equality is ringing very hollow.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        No, Wayne is right. One burkini is a statement. A hundred is a threat. The French have declared war and did not attack first.

      • Nelly Smickers

         /  26th August 2016

        Wayne reckins you sound like a bit of a *middle aged trend-setter*, Kitzy XD

        He was wondering if you’d ever consider wearing a *Full-body Burkini* yourself?

      • Missy

         /  26th August 2016

        “The French slogan about liberty, fraternity, equality is ringing very hollow.”

        It is the national motto Kitty, not a slogan. I would have thought you would know the difference between the two.

  2. Gezza

     /  26th August 2016

    Re PG’s post

    1. She’s a Muslim. She should be living in the Middle East, where they belong.
    2. They’re French. So of course they’re totally stupid about this & have no idea what idiots they are.

    • Aren’t you aware that most Muslims don’t live in the Middle East?

    • About 20% of Muslims live in the Middle East and northern Africa:

      South Asia 25%
      Middle east and North Africa 20%
      Sub Saharan Africa 15%
      Rest of South East Asia 4%
      Central Asia 2%
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim

      • Gezza said “… where they belong.” That’s where they belong. All else is violent conquest.

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          Can’ you read?Most muslims are not from the Middle East,so they do not belong there!Most french muslims are from former french colonies in Africa.

          • Gezza

             /  26th August 2016

            You obviously can’t read or before you spouted out your ignorant bollocks you’d know more about the history of Islam.

            Here, have a good read, then, then run through the Sira, and the Bukhari & Muslim Hadit, then get back to us.
            http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              *Hadith (afore yon FrillyKnickers picks up on it)

      • Gezza

         /  26th August 2016

        I know Pete. It’s outrageous isn’t it? They should all only be living in Saudi Arabia really. But I don’t mind if they return to some other Middle Eastern & North African countries where the blighters took over after Muhammad, the murdering, torturing, autocratic, bigotted prick, karked it.

        I mean, what’s the problem for them going back to their roots? If she wanted to sunbathe in her burka on a beach in Tunisia she’s got nothing to worry about. The mad Islamic fundamentalist murderer who ran amok over there only shot and killed non-Muslims.

      • I think Pete that the figure of Muslims in SE Asia is wrong. Indonesia, is the most populous Islamic country with over 85% of the some 250 million people professing Islam as their religion. One should also look at the size of the Islamic communities in Malaysia and Singapore and Thailand as well.

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          he says Sth Asia =25%SEA and Central another 6%.

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  26th August 2016

      @gezza, dear Lord you’re channeling Kiwiguy and it ain’t a good look!

      • Gezza

         /  26th August 2016

        @ Joe Bloggs, by Muhammad, Allah’s lying, murdering, torturing, conquering, dictatorial, autocratic Prophet (pbuh), you’re channelling Baldrick, and it fits you perfectly!

  3. Jeeves

     /  26th August 2016

    Go back to Africa Gezza.

    • Gezza

       /  26th August 2016

      What on earth for Jeeves? I don’t come from there, even if you did?
      And about half of it is plagued with feckin Islamic terrorists now, you sausage.

  4. The burkini is symbolic of Islamic fetishism, supremacism and supersessionism in Europe. Comparing this to nuns, wetsuits and the Queen wearing a headscarf indicates the appallingly shallow comprehension many commentators and newspapers have of the factors at stake. Laws against the burkini may appear inept, but the step-by-step loss of European identity to this awful religious ideology is new ground to regulators.

    Still, could be worse . . . see what things are like in a decade!

    • Blazer

       /  26th August 2016

      First sentence is perjorative opinion,and goes downhill from…there.

      • If Blazer had studied and observed Islam and its goals, history, and progress particularly in Europe over the last forty years, and had an understanding of the incompatible world views of the Judeo-Christian and Islamic worlds, s/he would not have made that comment.

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          Quite clearly you believe absorbing MSM propaganda constitutes ‘studying and observing Islam’.Tell me why it has only become a major concern/threat since the neutering of communism?

      • Gezza

         /  26th August 2016

        First sentence is a total waste of space.

    • Klik Bate

       /  26th August 2016

      I see clothes……

    • Brilliant analysis – summed up by “the step-by-step loss of European identity to this awful religious ideology’

      Indigenous Europeans are fed up with having their tolerance and generosity thrown back in their face by ignorant religious supremacists.

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  26th August 2016

      @KitSlater/ChrisSlater

      The burkini is symbolic of Islamic fetishism, supremacism and supersessionism in Europe.

      I call bullshit on that. There is no place for a beach-loving, burkini-clad woman in Islamic State’s perverted vision of female segregation where women are completely hidden and trapped.

      Instead it’s just the opposite of what you claim it to be. The burkini is cross-over clothing – a blend of Islamic values and Western lifestyle. It’s a sign of adapting reasonable faith requirements to daily living in western nations.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        Wearing a Nazi uniform would also be a reasonable faith requirement then? If you just want to cover up there are things like long dresses and beach towels. The Burkini is a uniform of a religious army, nothing less.

      • Requiring a woman to cover up for modesty and to stop testosterone fuelled men succumbing to temptation is not a “reasonable faith requirement”. It’s infinitely more misogynist, repressive, insane and fanatical than anything we should tolerate. It’s time this madness was stopped in our secular society. While I don’t mind the burkini myself, what it represents is an anthema to everything I believe in, and have fought for.

      • But it’s more and it’s deeper than a mere “blend of Islamic values and Western lifestyle.” Firstly, Muslim women who dress like this are setting themselves up as a group apart, and given Islam’s capricious sense of moral superiority, they are promoting themselves as a group apart by the way they dress. Then they complain about being discriminated against in order to generate grievances upon which Islam thrives.

        Secondly, the ‘reasonable’ in “faith requirements” is an issue since this mode of dress, amongst other demands Islam places on Western culture, is an example of what Muslims call ‘yaqeen’, a religious certainty and intensity bordering on the obsessive-compulsive. The only parallels in Western society are the likes of Gloriavale or the Amish, and they keep well away from normal civilisation and make no contribution to it.

        It’s a matter of record that secular nations lead the world in civilisation progress and that religious ones lag, particularly Islamic states. That Islam seeks hegemonic control of the West (and has triumphed in Europe IMHO) will bring an end to civilisational progress. Burkinis might seem of minimal importance, but they’re highly emblematic of Islam’s developing control of Europe’s mores.

        Joe Bloggs severely underestimates the risk Islam presents to the West. He needs to know that Islamic State’s vision is extreme but it is not perverted. The agencies driving Islam’s victory in Europe are simply more moderate fundamentalists than IS and will not rest until the West submits to the will of Allah..

  5. Missy

     /  26th August 2016

    Pete, it is interesting that you talk of the French authorities intolerance, for those on the other side of the world, not living in the same situation as the French, your outrage and deliberate – or ignorant – refusal to even try and understand why the French may fell this way is also a form of intolerance.

    Look at it from the point of view of the French who have suffered islamic terrorist attacks over the last year, including a horrific one in a church on a priest and nuns. This is a country where they are looking to those that are committing these crimes, and they are being committed by members of only one religion – when was the last time a nun committed a terrorist attack in France?

    For someone sitting in lovely NZ where this is a world away and something seen on TV how can you even possibly begin to understand their state of mind, or views on this? it is all well and good for people like you to lecture them on freedom of expression, and how not all muslims are terrorists, but for a country that has been attacked from within by those that put their religion above the basic values of the country they live in, they certainly will be acting on a very human fear of that religion and those that practice it.

    I am not saying that what they are doing is right or wrong, what I am saying is that what right does anyone not living there have to talk about the authorities lack of tolerance, when they themselves are showing a complete lack of understanding towards the experiences of these people, and a complete lack of tolerance towards their completely natural feelings?

    You say that the French authorities lack of tolerance is provocative, well surely so is the self-imposed segregation of muslim communities in Europe.

    This is extreme, but it is also understandable, but there are many in the world that should understand that it is when people show a lack of tolerance towards this understandable fear by labelling them islamaphobic, intolerant, and racist that provocation arises, those that would wish us harm are emboldened, and those that would speak out against it are quietened. Perhaps if you want to talk about tolerance and understanding you should also try to show tolerance and understanding to those that fear what the Muslim dress represents to many, tolerance should not be only one way.

    • Missy

       /  26th August 2016

      oops, in the last line of para 1 it should read feel not fell.

      • Gezza

         /  26th August 2016

        These things happen when writing in the height of passion.

        • Missy

           /  26th August 2016

          or after a wine or two… 😉

          • Gezza

             /  26th August 2016

            Yep. That too. And sometimes with me it’s after a whine or two.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              go to a ‘duck’ thread,you are making a fool of yourself here,with your poorly thought through contributions that reek of prejudice.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              I don’t know why you seem to lose no opportunity to just bitch at me Blaise. It’s not my fault I’m a generally nice, straight guy with a GSOH. We can’t all be like you. The world would be utterly miserable. It would just be full of yous, snarking at all the other yous. And they’d probably all be totally humourless, deprived of affection, & be slowly starving to death.

              I don’t think you ever give me credit for how often, when you manage to reluctantly crank out a decent argument, I support you. I’m sure if you look back far enough you’ll even find a post where someone said your comment wasn’t worth printing off on toilet paper & wiping his arse with, but I stuck up for you & told him it was.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              I react to every topic where I think I can present a valid argument.I believe I have an open mind and look at all points of view.This ‘misery”’screams for attention….you probably figure its a popular proposition,but as you now know its emotion based and bereft of fact.

              ‘1. She’s a Muslim. She should be living in the Middle East, where they belong.
              2. They’re French. So of course they’re totally stupid about this & have no idea what idiots they are.’

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              See above re GSOH. See also last sentence. I have loaded my printer & hit the “print” icon.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              And check this out as a typical example of you presenting one of your valid arguments:
              https://yournz.org/2016/08/24/matt-vickers-to-euthanasia-inquiry/#comment-126952

            • Iceberg

               /  26th August 2016

              “I have an open mind”

              Laugh of the day from Blaze. Someone needs a beating with the self-awareness stick.

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        ‘ well surely so is the self-imposed segregation of muslim communities in Europe.’This is the default behaviour of ALL immigrant ethnicities all around the world.

        • Gezza

           /  26th August 2016

          Missing the point about the god-awful repressive intolerant religion aspect in this case, again.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            next you will be telling me that christians follow the …10 commandments!Away with you ….and your wanton blindness.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              Of course I won’t be telling you that you moron. Why on earth do you keep on advertising your ignorance and pettiness here?

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            I checked it out…’and check this out as a typical example of you ‘….and Pat confirmed what I raised was relevant….as for pettiness..your contribution in the same thread…’Why? Do you want to?’….so try again.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              o_O
              :/

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              Whatever it was that you raised was incomprehensible. All you’ve done is realised and grasped at the straw that he supplied one explanation when you probably meant something else all together. I have no more time for ya nonsense here today Blaise.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              @Gezza,the facts are telling are they not….this is feeble…’ he supplied one explanation when you probably meant something else all together. ‘….don’t waste my time with nonsense.

        • Missy

           /  26th August 2016

          No it isn’t Blazer, I know a lot of ethnic communities where they have integrated into their local communities within their country of choice, they may still socialise within their own communities, which is natural, but they still integrate well, whereas many Muslim immigrant communities make a conscious choice – or have it forced on them – not to integrate and become a part of the communities of the countries they have adopted. I have seen evidence of it, where they will not even look at – let alone talk to – anyone who is not from their community, for some it is a case of the men now allowing the women to learn the language or make friends, for some it is because they see themselves as superior to non-muslims and don’t wish to find out about other cultures and ways of living.

          Live a bit Blazer, and travel a bit, and maybe you won’t sound so ignorant.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            Name those ethnic communities that do not congregate with others of their own ilk.Not just an uncommon anecdote.

            • Missy

               /  26th August 2016

              WTF? Did you not read anything I wrote Blazer, or can you just not comprehend basic English? Of course ethnic communities will socialise and ‘congregate with others of their own ilk’, and I said as much, but they also integrate into the country they have adopted as their own. You are an idiot, come back with something a bit more sensible, and less stupid and I might respond.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            you said this….’ the self-imposed segregation of muslim communities in Europe.’….you now present an argument about ‘integration’….how do you define it?Working,going to school,voting,shopping at the supermarket,using public facilities???Back yourself, instead of calling me names.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              o_O

            • Missy

               /  26th August 2016

              Blazer you mentioned nothing about my comment regarding Muslim communities in Europe you said this: “Name those ethnic communities that do not congregate with others of their own ilk.Not just an uncommon anecdote.”

              Since I had said this: “I know a lot of ethnic communities where they have integrated into their local communities within their country of choice, they may still socialise within their own communities, which is natural, but they still integrate well, ”

              It was quite obvious that I stated there are communities that whilst still socialising with their own migrant communities they are also able to integrate. Since you don’t seem to understand, these are migrant communities that accept and (generally) adhere to the laws of the country they have emigrated to, they accept and conform to the values of the society, they socialise outside – as well as within – their own ethnic communities. Many of the Muslim communities in Britain and Europe do not accept the laws of the countries they have moved to, many surveys and studies show that over half of Muslims in the UK believe in and accept Sharia Law, they do not all accept or adhere to the basic values of the countries they have moved to, and very few will socialise or mix outside their communities – often not even for something as basic as shopping. Oh, and many Muslim women do not vote in the UK, because they are not allowed to – their men do it for them, they cannot instigate criminal or civil proceedings without the approval of the men, and the imam, and they are unable to control their male children but instead do as their sons will tell them (I have witnessed that on more than one occasion).

              Name me one other ethnic community that puts their religious laws above the laws of the land, that refuses to socialise outside their own ethnic group, and does not accept the laws and values of the country they have CHOSEN to emigrate to.

              And Blazer, I am not sure what you think is an uncommon anecdote about what I have said – it is well documented within Europe that Muslim communities are insular, like I said get out a bit and travel and you will find the world is nothing like NZ.

              And that’s it from me, time for bed.

            • Missy

               /  26th August 2016

              Oh, and before I go, if you want examples, just from the area I live in the following migrant communities have integrated into the local community:

              Polish
              Ukrainian
              Russian
              Romanian
              Nepalese
              Chinese
              West Indian
              Kenyan
              Indian
              Sri Lankan
              NZ/Aus
              Canadian
              American
              German
              Spanish
              Korean
              Malaysian
              Italian

              The African and Middle Eastern Muslims, not so much, they stick together, don’t interact, and only shop at the places owned by other Muslims.

              My experience is that it is not “…the default behaviour of ALL immigrant ethnicities all around the world.” to be insular and isolated from the local communities.

  6. Blazer

     /  26th August 2016

    Good answer Missy.P.s I have travelled and the more I do ,the more I realise that people are the SAME all over the world.They have the same emotions and are all trying to survive the trials and tribulations of life.The differences are just window dressing’…clothing,beliefs,habits,etc.The core topic here is actually about clothing.Clothes are for comfort,modesty and display.An expert on human behaviour ,I can recommend is Desmond Morris,who wrote the Naked Ape and Manwatching.Both fascinating insights into how humans evolve and interract and more importantly …what makes them behave in certain ways!

    • “… people are the SAME all over the world.” Odd how one person sees no differences (beyond unalloyed human nature) and another sees major ones. It may take sensitivity, or perhaps a lack of ideology driving observations. One thing I find universal is that people have a tendency to separate ‘ingroup’ from ‘outgroup’, us and them. Religion is a major locus of demarcation, since all religions believe they have the ‘truth’. Only one of these sees fit to impose itself on others. “The core topic here is actually clothing” betrays a failure to understand the intense role religion plays in the lives of its acolytes.

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        Yes human nature is human nature.”all religions believe they have the ‘truth’…agree..Bishop Tamaki is viewed with dismay by many,as an example.’Only one of these sees fit to impose itself on others. ‘Disagree with this….what is the role of preachers,evangelists,Mormons on bikes,and so on,if not to convert people to their own ‘brand’.All sorts of threats are made ,fear and bribery are the things human nature reacts to.Do you want to burn in hell Kit?

        • One needs a level of knowledge not just of religious differences, but of the will to power these religions have, and the force used to impose that will. Christianity submitted to secular humanism and has been in effective decline since the Enlightenment, possibly the greatest impetus for civilisational progress ever. On the other hand Islam obliges its votaries to bring the world into submission to the will of Allah and its 7th century standards. They’re doing a good job, including, between driving trucks into crowds, of telling the West how to dress at the beach. Big differences, but perhaps not everyone is aware of them.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            ‘but of the will to power these religions have, and the force used to impose that will. ‘….At this point in time we all know who has that power.It is not Islam.If the ‘enlightenment’ was enlightening we would not have had all the wars and conflicts we have had,even since the War to end all Wars.It is hard to put yourself in the place of an individual who has seen his life,family and country destroyed .Such individuals have ‘nothing to lose’.The West reap what they sow,that is the reality.As for…’of telling the West how to dress at the beach.’….can you not see it is the Muslim woman being made to remove her clothing because apparantly,she is over dressed for the beach!Quite ludicrous when you talk about…enlightenment.

            • You’re confusing Islam’s ‘will to power’ with the West’s maintenance of power. Islam is spreading like a cancer, not yet affecting the body politic but invading its cells and organs. Its progress will steadily replace all that the West has fought for to bring it to the acme of global civilisation.

              “If the ‘enlightenment’ was enlightening we would not have had all the wars and conflicts we have had,even since the War to end all Wars.” As Stephen Pinker says in The Better Angels of our Nature, all aspects of violence have decreased in both time and magnitude. THIS is the Enlightenment’s legacy.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            maintenance of power as an imposition!If Pinkers quote is accurate he is clearly mistaken.’aspects of violence have decreased in both time and magnitude. ‘….please tell me how the H-Bomb is a lesser magnitude of violence.

  7. Alan Wilkinson

     /  26th August 2016

    You cannot deal tolerantly with intolerance. The problem is not with women who want to cover themselves, it is with those who hate and attack everyone who doesn’t.

    The French are fighting fire with fire.

    • Blazer

       /  26th August 2016

      why are those Police demanding that woman take clothing off then Al.Is that an example of…tolerance?

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        You appear to have missed the point completely and ended up with your head embedded in the sand. Suggest you back out and reread.

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          Not missed the point at all.You invert the burden of tolerance,which makes it meaningless.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th August 2016

            The French are saying if you don’t want to dress like us, piss off back to where you don’t have to.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              So you agree with clothing codes at the beach then?The woman is not even swimming.Should the Police be allowed to wander around the beach with all those clothes on?I think the sand might be in …your ..ears..Al.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              The Muslims who make a hard-line thing about extremist clothing have created a target the French are attacking. If this is the only way to stamp out Muslim intolerance and fanaticism, so be it. There are much worse. You might check out how the Russians do it – a lot of bullets are involved.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              Sacre bleu !do you think blue and white T-shirts,berets and pencil thin moustaches should be made compulsory for men in…France?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Whatever works, Blazer. I think the Burkina ban stands the best chance of pissing the right people off and out of France.

          • Please blazer. Tolerance implies magnanimity not bias. One cannot call for tolerance while exhibiting a most uneven hand.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              what/who specifically are you referring to trav?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th August 2016

              I find the idea that people can be ordered at gunpoint to take their clothes off at a beach grotesque. Do the police force wetsuit wearers to strip off ? There was a time-not that long ago-when people were obliged to do the opposite and NOT be dressed in tiny swimwear. Topless togs for men were banned on some beaches when they came in. Naked people can be obliged to put something ON. If a woman went onto a French beach wearing a long beach dress, would the police force her to remove it ? If a man wore a long sleeved shirt and jeans, would he be forced to strip down to his undies ? Will people wearing hats and bathing caps be made to take these off ? I seldom go to beaches, but would cover up as I burn so easily. I’d probably be forced off a French beach for being too covered up.

              The burkini is no different to a wetsuit.

              I would say that France is skating on very thin ice legally if they say that people on beaches have to be all but naked. What about people who, for personal reasons, don’t want to display almost everything ? I have an ugly scar on my left arm that I don’t want to show the world. Someone with burns might not to make these public. Don’t go to a French beach unless you want to let it all hang out. The only country in the world where the government can order you at gunpoint to wear LESS on a beach.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Was she given the option of leaving the beach or changing? Was the Burkini made illegal anywhere or just on those beaches?

              In France, it is illegal to display Nazi flags, uniforms and insignia in public, unless for the purpose of a historical film, show or spectacle.

              Do you think that is grotesque? I think the French have similar reasons for banning both.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2%80%93World_War_II_legality_of_Nazi_flags

            • Kevin

               /  26th August 2016

              “The burkini is no different to a wetsuit.”

              Do you really believe that nonsense?

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  26th August 2016

      Nicolas Sarcozy can put that where the sergeant put the pudding.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        Except more than two thirds of French voters agree with Sarkozy on this.

  8. Zedd

     /  26th August 2016

    I just wonder if they had a sign on the beach ‘Western approved swimming costumes ONLY’ ? :/

    what a disgraceful example of intolerant islamophobia ! 😦

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  26th August 2016

      It’s reaped what it sowed, Zedd. Personally, I think killing people is worse but that’s just me.

      • Zedd

         /  26th August 2016

        @AW

        SO.. what are you saying ?

        all muslims (inc. at the beach) are murderers or terrorists ??
        what about christian nuns (as above) & queenie (in a scarf/hijab) ??? :/

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        I don’t believe you are really that thick, Zedd. I am saying that Muslims who can’t tolerate Western dress are intolerable. It’s that simple.

        • Blazer

           /  26th August 2016

          its not simple though is it?Defining western dress is a mammoth task in itself.Have a go.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th August 2016

            Freedom to wear what you like. The Burkini is not a demonstration of it, but an attack on it.

            • Zedd

               /  26th August 2016

              @AW

              now whoz sounding ‘ thick as a brick’ (a song by Jethro Tull) 😀

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Sadly it’s you, Zedd. From my link above:

              France’s highest administrative court, the State Council, began deliberating an appeal by the Human Rights League (LDH), to overturn the ban. A decision is expected on Friday. France banned the burka in 2010 but authorities in 26 towns in the south have gone further by forbidding burkinis.

              Those wearing the suits in public can be fined for breaching rules on secularism. A recent poll suggests that more than two thirds of France supports the ban.

            • Zedd

               /  26th August 2016

              @AW

              then I shall wear it, as a ‘badge of honor’….. alongside the other labels you gave me 😀 😀

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Actually I said I didn’t believe you were that thick, Zedd, even if you sound like it.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  26th August 2016

              So wearing a long-sleeved dress is a religious statement rather than a fashion one ?

              What about wetsuits ? Nobody seems to have a problem with them. If Muslim women wore those, would it be all right ?

              I find the idea that someone cannot legally wear anything they damned well like abhorrent. How about priests and nuns or Buddhists ? How about people wearing kippahs, crosses or stars of David ? Sikhs ? People like the Gloriavale women ? Amish ? Vicars ?

              The burkini ban is the beginning of religious persecution of anyone who publicly demonstrates their beliefs-again. It’s a great leap backwards.

              To be consistent, all these should be banned in the country of Liberty, Fraternity, Equality.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Of course it is a religious statement rather than a fashion statement.

              As this court judgement makes explicit: Nevertheless, the ban was upheld in a court in Nice last week: “The wearing of distinctive clothing, other than that usually worn for swimming, can indeed only be interpreted in this context as a straightforward symbol of religiosity,” the court stated, arguing that such displays of religion are counter to the country’s secular code.

  9. Joe Bloggs

     /  26th August 2016

    In Iran women get arrested for not having their hair covered. In France women get fined for covering their bodies. Both acts are political projects that are hostile to diversity and women’s emancipation. End. Of. Story.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  26th August 2016

      Saudi beach:

      • Kevin

         /  26th August 2016

        Just out of camera shot: Religious police ready to arrest the women for showing their ankles. And for not having any men accompanying them.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  26th August 2016

          French police seem willing to pull a gun on anyone who doesn’t show theirs-and their arses, most of their tits and who knows what else.

          The woman in the photo wasn’t bothering anyone else, as far as we know. She wasn’t shouting at the other women to cover up and abusing them for not doing so. If she had been, they might have a point.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th August 2016

            You realise this is exactly where a mad Muslim truckie killed 85 people and injured 307 last month?

            Do you think Nice citizens now might have exactly the same attitude to Muslim fanatics and their sympathisers that you have to anti-Jewish sentiments?

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              ‘Various scientific surveys of Iraqi deaths resulting from the first four years of the Iraq War estimated that between 151,000 and over one million Iraqis died as a result of conflict during this time.’…France has been a major player in destabilising Syria as well for decades, and has blood on its hands from its African colonial pedigree.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              So France should invite its enemies into its heart? And because it was never a member of the “Coalition of the Willing” and opposed the invasion of Iraq?

              Honestly, what nonsense you spout, Blazer.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              Some nonsense…’https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjCrs7Pp97OAhUMjpQKHcwICm8QFgg9MAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.france24.com%2Fen%2F20150503-arms-sales-becoming-france-new-el-dorado-but-what-cost-francois-hollande-saudi-arabia-rafale&usg=AFQjCNG8nuqR8ULPCTUENWbslFv8ftssNQ

            • Corky

               /  26th August 2016

              That make more sense than your regular posts, Blazer.

              In repy : ff0v, v;vlrpvllrpvlrplrvfg,cv,,v,vd,d,d,,dvcd,vv, that’s my opinion, anyway.

          • Gezza

             /  26th August 2016

            I love it when you talk dirty Kitty.

          • Kevin

             /  26th August 2016

            Same can be said for western women who wear bikinis on Muslim beaches where Sharia law is applied and end up being stoned to death.

          • Corky

             /  26th August 2016

            No, she was just breaking the law. Sometimes the synapses don’t quite fire , do they Kitty….the exception being grammar.

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              For Christ’s sake don’t start bringing her family into it Corky.

  10. Corky

     /  26th August 2016

    There’s really no argument here. Its France. Muslims are a problem. They are intolerant. France has had a gutsful. Muslims can lump it, or fugg off back to where they came from ,for a third rate life. Muslims are being treated no different from a western women in a Muslim country with unsuitable attire. In Egypt an unaccompanied western women wearing shorts would be finger raped….if she’s lucky.

    • Corky

       /  26th August 2016

      Compare this to supposed problems Muslim women face in France. Incidently this list seems to have been put together by a limp wristed liberal. Its far worse than stated.

      http://www.lonelyplanet.com/egypt/women-travellers

      Excerpt:

      “Street harassment is a major problem for Egyptian women. In a recent survey carried out by Egyptian NGO HarassMap, a staggering 99.3% of Egyptian women stated that they had been subjected to some form of harassment.”

      I wonder who the lucky .7 % are?

    • Blazer

       /  26th August 2016

      Millions of muslims are born in …France.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  26th August 2016

        Yes, and one of them just killed a woman in Oz.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  26th August 2016

          The first murder that’s ever happened there, I suppose.

          The 99/3% figure sounds a bit dodgy.Someone’s overdoing it.

          I can’t believe that Zedd, Blazer and I are all fighting on the same side-for freedom in dress.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th August 2016

            So am I, Kitty, because Muslim nations do not allow freedom in dress.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              so you either believe in it or …you don’t!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              The debate is about how to defend it from its enemies, Blazer, not whether you believe in it. The Left are full of great objectives but their delusions about how to achieve them are catastrophic.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              ‘Go to any public beach in Italy and chances are you’ll eventually see a woman wearing a veil and long skirt. But she likely won’t be a Muslim in a version of the controversial burqini. She will almost certainly be a Catholic nun in her summer habit either watching children in her care or, God forbid, just enjoying some sun, which is considered a human right here in Italy, where the sea defines the majority of the borders. …….’defending’ the beach from burkinis is ludicrous and a sop to public fears,inflamed by political agendas.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              Totally irrelevant to defending freedom, Blazer.

          • Kevin

             /  26th August 2016

            If you really think these women are freely choosing to dress the way they do then I have a pair of gold handcuffs to sell you.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              so you believe the muslim women want to wear bikinis,but the Catholic nuns at the beach in Italy want to cover up.Very good Kevin.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              @AL..’Totally irrelevant to defending freedom, Blazer.’…freedom of what?Choice?…you sound like dubbya…you are either with us or against us!Freedom ….to be spied on!

  11. Blazer

     /  26th August 2016

    ‘As this court judgement makes explicit: Nevertheless, the ban was upheld in a court in Nice last week: “The wearing of distinctive clothing, other than that usually worn for swimming, can indeed only be interpreted in this context as a straightforward symbol of religiosity,” the court stated, arguing that such displays of religion are counter to the country’s secular code.’….very shaky ground this judgement.

    ‘other than that usually worn for swimming’….swim wear is subject to fashion,just like hairstyles and numerous other things .Will they make Buddhist monks ..grow their hair!!

    • Corky

       /  26th August 2016

      Are Buddhists arrogant, or non integrating, while harbouring factions that like killing?

      France can make whatever laws they like. I say good on them. Thank god ( and Mother Mary) our Muslim population is below 5%. That’s the only factor making Pete’s and your
      argument sound half reasonable.

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        ‘Are Christians arrogant, or non integrating, while harbouring factions that like killing?

        • Corky

           /  26th August 2016

          Give some modern day examples on par with Muslim atrocities. I’m not talking about some obscure supposed African Christian outfit. I want Christians killing and bombing the innocent….and to repeat, relative to Islam.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            George W Bush is an avowed Christian and a good ole….example!

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            Are you disputing the fact that George Bush is a Christian or are you just…stumped …as usual?

            • Corky

               /  26th August 2016

              A Sunday Christian at best. Christianity had nothing to do with Bushes actions… what troll you are. Devoid of any sensible argument.

              Sling your hook, son.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              listen the Incredible Cork…I’m not your son and you asked…
              -‘Give some modern day examples on par with Muslim atrocities. I’m not talking about some obscure supposed African Christian outfit. I want Christians killing and bombing the innocent….and to repeat, relative to Islam.’
              -so I did Blair and Bush invaded a muslim country and slaughtered thousands and thousands….so your criteria was met…you do not like these facts…too bad…you sling your hook…..dad!

            • Corky

               /  26th August 2016

              Bush and Blair, modern day Christian Crusaders. LOL
              To repeat, Bush and Blair’s actions had nothing to do with Christianity.
              Look up the meaning of Prime Minister and President.

              Stop reaching, take your lumps like a decent troll.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            How about Tony Blair then!Ex Anglican,now Roman Catholic!Christian enough for you?

            • Corky

               /  26th August 2016

              Ditto above.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              @Corky….’ I want Christians killing and bombing the innocent’…..well you asked for it….those flying the bombers and controlling the drones are…Christians….suck it up!

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              No they’re not. They’re atheists.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  26th August 2016

          No.

    • Gezza

       /  26th August 2016

      I’m having Teryaki Chicken on rice, B. What about you? Roast?
      6:15 pm

  12. lurcher1948

     /  26th August 2016

    At least a 40 ton truck cannot be driven down that beach over all those pretty french bikini wearers by some muslim,just saying that is where the intolerance comes from

  13. Banning beachwear to combat terrorist attacks is a distraction from the real issues.

    French people have every right to have grave concerns about Muslim terrorism, but knee jerk blanket bans of a limited type of beachwear involving people who are no risk just doesn’t make sense, except for pandering to prejudice against many for the sins of a very small number.

    If security is such an issue it must be one of the stupidest uses of police resources they could come up with.

    It is really stupid and really unfair on innocent people.

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        that doesn’t mean it is the correct ruling or has any moral basis…surely you know how laws are made and by whom.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  26th August 2016

          Certainly not by you, Blazer.

          It would be hard to find a more liberal jurisdiction than the European Court of Human Rights. But I’m sure you and PG can try.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            one ordinary citizen speaks…
            ‘m not Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist or anything else.
            I’m blonde and very pale-skinned.
            I burn extremely easily.
            I love swimming.
            I don’t want to end up red, sore and peeling. (Been there, done that, never again)
            When I go swimming in the sea I wear a swimsuit that covers my skin from neck to knees, a long-sleeved rash guard and leggings that cover my skin from waist to toes.
            That allows me to stay in the open all day, without fear of needing medical attention and hopefully reducing the risk of skin cancer at some point in the future.
            And I would not be allowed on a French beach?
            I think they’re taking things to ridiculous extremes. So long as a person’s face is exposed and you can see who they are, what else they wear is their own d@mn business.
            Teeny-weeny bikinis, thongs, going topless, huge middle-aged bellies hanging over too-small Speedos are all ‘respectful of good morality’, and covering up is not? Geddouddahere.

          • Blazer

             /  26th August 2016

            I will bet money the ruling will be overturned ,it is ludicrous and indefensible.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  26th August 2016

            Excellent. How much and when is the payment date?

            • Blazer

               /  27th August 2016

              keep it friendly ,say $5000 and payment is due…TODAY!

              ‘Burkini bans in French resorts are illegal, France’s highest administrative court ruled on Friday in a landmark judgement that comes amid heated debate about the place of Islam.’

              BOL!

    • Gezza

       /  26th August 2016

      There’s some truth in that PG.

      The terrorist who keep murdering their innocent people. What’s their religion? Do you know?

      And who killed all those cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo. What did those guys do that they deserved to be murdered?

      And their murderers. What was their religion? Do you know?

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        the U.S has invaded 37 countries since WW2 and millions have died…do you know why?

        • Gezza

           /  26th August 2016

          Yup. Money.

          • Gezza

             /  26th August 2016

            But I’m waiting for PG to answer my questions. I don’t want to be debating this issue with you. You’re so ignorant about Islam it’s just downright embarrassing to engage with you on it.

            • Should all Maori be made to remove their hoodies in public because a small number of Maori gang members are murderers?

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              In Kenepuru and Wellington Central’s hospital all gang insignia are banned. A few other places as well PG. They’re not all murderers PG. It’s just that they’re mostly threatening & anti-social.

              You’re not allowed to wear hoodies & crash helmets in banks here either. What happens when a burkarie wants to have a jamboree in the bankary?

      • What’s your point?

        Does it justify getting the police to force all women who might have some sort of similar religious (not terrorist) connection to strip in public? Does anything justify it, let alone make any sense?

        • Gezza

           /  26th August 2016

          It’s a horrible supremacist religion, PG. They shouldn’t be in our societies – they belong where it originated.

          As long as you choose to remain ignorant about Islam by not even reading their manuals you’ll be forever wilfully failing to get my point.

          Still love ya like a brother though.

          • I’m not wilfully failing to get your point.

            I don’t agree with Islam at all as a religion. Neither Catholicism for that matter.

            But followers of those and other religions have a right to their beliefs. There’s a wide variety and depth of those beliefs.

            And I don’t believe persecuting a billion people because a few thousand are dangerous arseholes is in itself dangerous. It is likely to create more trouble.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              The French are not persecuting a billion people. The court judgement I linked stated that only around 1000 of five million Muslims in France would be affected. Chances are that slim minority are exactly those families most likely to be involved in terrorism.

            • “Chances are that slim minority are exactly those families most likely to be involved in terrorism.”

              How do you work that out?

              Should groups of people that some people think could be more of a problem be targeted generally?

            • Gezza

               /  26th August 2016

              Tell that to the Muslims PG. That’s what their religion’s all about.

            • Blazer

               /  26th August 2016

              @AL…so 4,999000 are exempt from the ban.Very unusual law.And you have hit the jackpot re indentifying terrorists….surveillence on only 1000 required!Amazing,just amazing Al.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  26th August 2016

              No, 4,999,000 are willing to abide by the laws and adopt the values of their adopted country.

      • Gezza

         /  27th August 2016

        I notice you studiously avoided answering my questions above PG.

        • I answered the questions from you I saw and thought warranted an answer.

          What do you think is the solution to the Islam problem? Force everyone not to have their religious beliefs?

          • Gezza

             /  27th August 2016

            And you’re still studiously avoiding answering them. What are you frightened of?

            Just answer me one, then. What did the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists do that warranted them being murdered?

            • Blazer

               /  27th August 2016

              they mocked what millions believe to be the supreme deity.Dictators have killed for less.

            • Gezza

               /  27th August 2016

              Muhammad was a dictator you muppet.

            • Gezza

               /  27th August 2016

              And the real problem is, he still is.

    • Corky

       /  26th August 2016

      While a point could be made this particular case was overkill, the fact is its now the law as I understand it. I think the French are more interested in sending a message to Islam rather than being overly concerned with security. Of course the French have left it too late, like Sweden, they are finished in my opinion.

      Unfortunately for the West there’s an increasing gap between the likes of you and me. You believe there’s only a small faction of Muslim trouble makers with the majority being unjustly targeted. I believe the institution of Islam is the problem, and from that all trouble flows in various forms. Don’t forget its not only terrorism, what about all the demanding?

      People of your sentiments are in the majority. I believe that will be our downfall.

      This smug Muslim is at least honest. She’s not a terrorist in the accept sense, but a terrorist all the same. (At 033). It cannot be any clearer.

      • Blazer

         /  26th August 2016

        what you and many others do not understand is that the ruling elite ,couldn’t care less.They are removed from any danger and have resources and boltholes that completely negate any threat to them.NZ is a safe haven.atm.

  14. Missy

     /  26th August 2016

    Wow, I have read some real BS in this thread, so one post to cover off on some of the points rather than individually responding.

    1. This is NOT just about clothes, and those that think so are naïve, ignorant, stupid, or just deliberately misrepresenting. In a part of the world where Muslims have attacked in the name of religion for religious and political purposes the outward signs of this religion are considered political to the majority of the population for what it represents. Now, this is most likely (for the most part) an irrational emotional response, and sitting in safe little NZ it is easy to think that and criticise the French Authorities on their laws, but in doing that without showing any level of understanding or empathy to how the French people may be feeling is showing a level of intolerance to the French that you are criticising them for. Tolerance should not be one way.

    2. To even think of comparing a Burkini to a wetsuit or the Queen wearing a headscarf is just ridiculous, neither of those items have the same political connotations of a burkini – especially in a police that has suffered attacks from the same group that promote that form of dress. And to the person who called the Queen’s headscarf a hijab – don’t be ridiculous, a hijab is not just a headscarf, and it is worn in a certain way, and by making that comparison that you are trivialising the issue somewhat.

    3. Back to the point I made in 2 – Muslim dress has political connotations, especially in Europe, and if you consider it no different to a wetsuit or the Queen’s headscarf, then I guess you are also okay with Nazi Uniforms or KKK robes being worn in public as well, and won’t find any issue with them. I would be interested also on your opinion of the banning of gang patches in public buildings in NZ – for or against? Not too dissimilar when considering how the dress is perceived by the general public.

    4. As for this incident, there has been conflicting information coming out that is in contrast to the media narrative and agenda. The media account claims that a gun was pointed at the woman, but apart from it being written as an alleged quote from a witness there is no evidence to back that up, to my knowledge not one of the images shows the police actually pointing a gun at the woman’s head. The media account also alleges that she was forced to undress on the beach, yet some others who were there have allegedly said on social media that the woman refused to go anywhere private to remove the burkini despite being offered that opportunity, and the opportunity to do it in the presence of a female officer, instead she apparently chose to do it on the beach. If that is true, then this is as much about opportunism in making a public statement on an agenda, as opposed to the media narrative of bullying police making a woman strip on the beach at gunpoint. Those that believe the narrative put forward by media without question are contributing to the problem and rising intolerance, they are helping no-one. Once upon a time the media pushing a one-sided view in order to promote an ideology was called propaganda, these days most call it journalism.

    There are always two sides in these issues, but the problem we have in society is that there can never be a sensible discussion because the useful idiots roll out racism and islamaphobia to put down anyone who does not immediately jump on the pro-muslim bandwagon. As long as that intolerance and deliberate lack of understanding is shown, there can never be rational discussion, and the rise of anti-muslim sentiment will continue, and Islamists will continue to use those useful idiots in order to continue their reign of terror. Many that have preached hate, joined ISIS, or been arrested in Europe for plotting terror attacks have also managed to have all discussion around their beliefs shut down by crying racism and islamaphobia – backed up by the liberal left who are all to happy to indulge in anti-Semitism.

    No doubt someone will come along and try to twist what I have said to claim I am racist, or islamaphobic (great way to shut down the debate so you don’t have to think about the issues), but the reality is that it things are much more complicated than many here are making it. I am torn as I do understand where the French are coming from on this issue, and where many who are anti burkha’s, or burkini’s, or other forms of muslim dress are coming from, but I also have a belief in the freedom’s we have in the west – including the freedom to wear what you want, and practice whatever religion you might like, unlike many Muslims in Europe who do not believe in these freedoms at all, and label all women who aren’t covered head to toe as whores.

    There is intolerance on both sides, and putting forward a view that only Muslims are targeted, or only white Europeans are intolerant it misleading and does not help at all.

    Living in NZ the wider complicated issues are not as present in society, but as the Muslim population increases, and some become emboldened to try and implement Sharia Law the issues will increase, and like Europe they will not be able to be discusses because those that criticise or question will be labelled, and eventually it will get to the point that Europe is at where draconian laws are introduced.

    • Blazer

       /  26th August 2016

      so after all that are you in favour of the burkini restriction at beaches ..or not?

    • Douglas Murray effectively says that this is all smallness from the media, and that in concentrating on this Burqini nothingness, they’re failing to talk about the bigger problem.

      “We shall see whether the next terrorist attack in France or Germany comes from a lady on the beach wearing a burkini. Or whether the next terrorist attack does not, more likely come from allowing millions of people from Islamic cultures to enter your society unchecked and un-vetted and allow foreign (often allied) governments to pump money into these countries to teach the worst versions of an already not very peaceable religion.

  15. There was a time when bikies were widely seen as evil.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  26th August 2016

      There wasn’t a time when bikies murdered and injured thousands of people.

    • Gezza

       /  26th August 2016

      Bikie gangs are. Have a natter to the local cop shop PG.

      But these are just ordinary people who ride motor bikes & wear leathers for protection. They don’t follow the bikie gang manual.

      You seem to be infected with Blaise disease – you’re diverting all over the show.

    • Missy

       /  27th August 2016

      For those wondering about the different avatar – a slight typo in my email address. 😳

  1. On French beach French police forces woman to undress in public | Marcus Ampe's Space